Herrick v. Lindley
Ohio Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtHolmes, J.
The most significant issue presented by these appeals is whether those participants in either PEES or STRS who retired prior to October 16, 1972, have a vested right to receive their retirement benefits exempt from the state income tax. If they have such a vested right, then the levy of the state income tax upon their retirement bene-' *24fits would constitute a retroactive tax, violative of Section 28, Article H of the Ohio Constitution. ;
• Prior to October 16, 1972, PERS and-STRS retirement benefits were by statute exempted from all state taxes. On that date, the General Assembly amended R. C.…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- West Wisconsin R. Co. v. Board of Supervisors of Trempealeau Cty.Supreme Court of the United States · 1876
- Lakengren, Inc. v. KosydarOhio Supreme Court · 1975
- Chope v. CollinsOhio Supreme Court · 1976
- Hospital Service Ass'n v. EvattOhio Supreme Court · 1944
3Cited by18 opinions
- State ex rel. Matz v. BrownOhio Supreme Court · 1988
- In Re Request for Advisory Opinion Regarding Constitutionality of 2011 PA 38Michigan Supreme Court · 2011
- State v. ThrowerOhio Court of Appeals · 1989
- State ex rel. Chevalier v. BrownOhio Supreme Court · 1985
- Pierce v. State Ex Rel. New Mexico Taxation & Revenue DepartmentNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1995
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.