Legal Opinion
Friedlandbr v. Gorman
Ohio Supreme Court
Decided February 7, 1933No. 23861PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtStephenson, J.
This action was instituted by Robert N. Gorman, prosecuting attorney of Hamilton county, Ohio, on behalf of the state of Ohio and for the use and benefit of Hamilton.county and its taxpayers, to test the constitutionality of Sections 6, 7 and 8 of the Intangible Tax Act, found in 114 Ohio Laws, pages 779, 780, 781, 782 and 783. The sections will not be set out in this opinion, as they are quite lengthy.
After the action was filed, Joseph T. Tracy, as auditor of state of the state of Ohio, and the board of trustees of the public library of the city of Cincinnati were made parties defendant.…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Amos v. MathewsSupreme Court of Florida · 1930
- Gorman, Pros. Atty. v. Friedlander, Treas.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1932
3Cited by9 opinions
- City of Cleveland v. ZangerleOhio Supreme Court · 1933
- State, Ex Rel. v. Youngs'nOhio Supreme Court · 1942
- State Ex Rel. DeWoody v. BixlerOhio Supreme Court · 1940
- Toledo City School Dist. Bd. of Edn. v. State Bd. of Edn.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2014
- County of Cuyahoga v. Budget CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1949
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.