The caption
The parties exactly as the court lists them—not a claim about the merits.
State court of last resort · ST-VA-SC
Charles E. Smith Mgmt. v. Dept. of Taxation
No. 950266Supreme Court of Virginia
950266 Charles E. Smith Mgmt. v. Dept. of Taxation 03/01/1996 Since the Commonwealth's licensure of aircraft based at National Airport is a valid exercise of the police power retroceded to it in the Metropolit…
The clerk's words are shown exactly as filed.The activity
Orders, motions, and filings in the clerk's own words and sequence.
The source
The official docket and available court documents attached to every update.
950266 Charles E. Smith Mgmt. v. Dept. of Taxation 03/01/1996 Since the Commonwealth's licensure of aircraft based at National Ai…
- Court
- Supreme Court of Virginia
- First added here
- October 4, 2026
- Last entry
- March 1, 1996
No bill or executive-order citation is attached to this file.
Official docket
Case timeline
The clerk's wording is shown verbatim and linked to the court's own document page where available.
Docket entry
950266 Charles E. Smith Mgmt. v. Dept. of Taxation 03/01/1996 Since the Commonwealth's licensure of aircraft based at National Airport is a valid exercise of the police power retroceded to it in the Metropolitan Washington Airports Act of 1986, such aircraft are taxable pursuant to Code § 58.1-1502, and the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
Open court document ↗Rulings in this case over time
Courts at different levels and stages can reach different results in the same case. Each entry is the court's own record; read it before drawing a conclusion.
1 entry, oldest first.
· Supreme Court of Virginia
Affirmed
The court's record, as written
950266 Charles E. Smith Mgmt. v. Dept. of Taxation 03/01/1996 Since the Commonwealth's licensure of aircraft based at National Airport is a valid exercise of the police power retroceded to it in the Metropolitan Washington Airports Act of 1986, such aircraft are taxable pursuant to Code § 58.1-1502, and the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
Outcome words in this text: affirmed.
Method: an entry is marked with an outcome only when its own text contains the outcome word, and the word is shown beside it. Orders, opinions and judgments whose text does not say are marked Other. Party filings, notices and routine procedural orders (appearances, extra pages, time extensions, scheduling) are not listed. No link between this case and any other case is recorded in our data, so only this case's own record is shown. Open the court's docket
Documents and links