Legal Opinion

Cunningham v. Testa

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided July 8, 2015No. 2014-0532PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtPfeifer, J.

{¶ 1} The issue in this case is whether a taxpayer’s explicit claim under R.C. 5747.24(B)(1) to be domiciled outside Ohio binds the tax commissioner without regard to other statements and actions by the taxpayer that indicate a domicile inside Ohio. We conclude that a taxpayer’s statement does not bind the tax commissioner and reverse the decision of the Board of Tax Appeals.

Background

{¶ 2} Appellee Kent Cunningham filed an “Affidavit of Non-Ohio Domicile” for tax year 2008 in March 2009, using the form prescribed by the tax commissioner. Cunningham filled in his name, social security number,…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Williamson v. OsentonSupreme Court of the United States · 1914
  2. Carrel v. Allied Products Corp.Ohio Supreme Court · 1997
  3. Mandelbaum v. MandelbaumOhio Supreme Court · 2009
  4. Ohio Bell Telephone Co. v. AntonelliOhio Supreme Court · 1987
  5. City of Cleveland v. SurellaOhio Court of Appeals · 1989

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Corrigan v. Testa (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2016
  2. Krehnbrink v. Testa (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2016
  3. State v. AndersOhio Court of Appeals · 2018
  4. Giddens v. Testa (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2016
  5. Hugh Q. Riley v. FCA US LLCDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 2026

1 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