Ball Corp. v. Limbach
Ohio Supreme Court
1Per curiam
For the reasons which follow, the decision of the BTA is affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded for further consideration consistent with this opinion.
I
Despite the complexities and improvements in sophisticated manufacturing processes, the issue for resolution in this case is as it was over thirty years *477ago when we decided Youngstown Bldg. Material & Fuel Co. v. Bowers (1958), 167 Ohio St. 363, 5 O.O.2d 3, 149 N.E.2d 1. Here, as there, the challenge is to identify the beginning and the end of the manufacturing process and to determine whether items in dispute were used or consumed…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Hawthorn Mellody, Inc. v. LindleyOhio Supreme Court · 1981
- Canton Malleable Iron Co. v. PorterfieldOhio Supreme Court · 1972
- Pittsburgh Plate Glass Co. v. BowersOhio Court of Appeals · 1956
- Interlake, Inc. v. KosydarOhio Supreme Court · 1975
- Bird & Son, Inc. v. LimbachOhio Supreme Court · 1989
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- American National Can Co. v. TracyOhio Supreme Court · 1995
- Newfield Publications, Inc. v. TracyOhio Supreme Court · 1999
- Am. Natl. Can Co. v. TracyOhio Supreme Court · 1995
- AT&T Technologies, Inc. v. LimbachOhio Supreme Court · 1994
- Defender Sec. Co. v. TestaOhio Court of Appeals · 2019
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.