Board of County Commissioners v. Supanick
Ohio Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtStern, J.
The question herein is whether the subject property has properly been denied an exemption under R. C. 5709.08 as “public property used exclusively for a public purpose” because the actual physical use has not yet commenced. To so hold would be to deny a proper entity relief from a tax burden on property purchased with the sole intention of developing it for a purpose which would allow its tax exemption under R. C. 5709.08.
There is nothing in the record to indicate that the subject property is intended, or is being used, for other than public purposes, and the legislative purpose* of R. C.…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Christian Benevolent Ass'n of Greater Cincinnati, Inc. v. LimbachOhio Supreme Court · 1994
- Episcopal School v. LevinOhio Supreme Court · 2008
- Ohio Operating Engineers Apprenticeship Fund v. KinneyOhio Supreme Court · 1980
- West Side Deutscher Frauen Verein v. TracyOhio Supreme Court · 1997
- Christian Benevolent Ass'n of Greater Cincinnati, Inc. v. LimbachOhio Supreme Court · 1994
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.