Legal Opinion

Kings Entertainment Co. v. Limbach

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided April 15, 1992No. 91-504PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Per curiam

The Tax Commissioner contends that Teaff v. Hewitt (1853), 1 Ohio St. 511; Zangerle v. Standard Oil Co. (1945), 144 Ohio St. 506, 30 O.O. 151, 60 N.E.2d 52; and subsequent cases are determinative of the issue of whether the disputed purchases are purchases of personal property or real property for tax purposes. These cases require that an improvement benefit the real property rather than the business on the property in order for the improvement to become a part of the realty and thus not be subject to tax. We have, however, consistently rejected this test. Under former R.C. 5701.02, *371now…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Zangerle v. Republic Steel Corp.Ohio Supreme Court · 1945
  2. Jennings & Churella Construction Co. v. LindleyOhio Supreme Court · 1984
  3. Thomas Steel Strip Corp. v. LimbachOhio Supreme Court · 1991

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Funtime, Inc. v. WilkinsOhio Supreme Court · 2004
  2. General Motors Corp. v. TracyOhio Supreme Court · 1995
  3. Litton Systems, Inc. v. TracyOhio Supreme Court · 2000
  4. Litton Sys., Inc. v. TracyOhio Supreme Court · 2000
  5. BND Rentals, Inc. v. Dayton Power & Light Co.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2020

2 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