Legal Opinion

Gressel Produce Co. v. Kosydar

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided June 6, 1973No. 72-917PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Stebít, J.

The issue before us is whether the operation performed by appellees constitutes “processing,” as that term is used in R. C. 5739.01(E) (2).2 We hold that it does not.

*208At the outset, it must be noted that at the time of this court’s decision in Northwestern Ohio Poultry Assn. v. Schneider (1965), 2 Ohio St. 2d 34, R. C. Chapter 5739 did not provide a definition of the word “processing” as used in R. C. 5739.01(E)(2). Accordingly, this court upon authority of Kroger Grocery & Baking Co. v. Glander (1948), 149 Ohio St. 120,3 and France Co. v. Evatt (1944), 143 Ohio St. 455, held that…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Kroger Grocery & Baking Co. v. GranderOhio Supreme Court · 1948
  2. France Co. v. EvattOhio Supreme Court · 1944
  3. Northwestern Ohio Poultry Ass'n v. SchneiderOhio Supreme Court · 1965

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Beare Co. v. Tennessee Department of RevenueTennessee Supreme Court · 1993
  2. In Re Tax Appeal of Collingwood Grain, Inc.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1995
  3. Van Dyne Crotty Co. v. LimbachOhio Supreme Court · 1990
  4. General Mills, Inc. v. LimbachOhio Supreme Court · 1988
  5. Madison Seed Co. v. Tax CommissionerOhio Court of Appeals · 1985

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API