Legal Opinion

Terteling Bros. v. Glander

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided March 30, 1949No. 31609PublishedCited by 44 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHart, J.

The sole question presented is whether, under the facts above stated, machinery, equipment and supplies, purchased by the appellant for the performance of its contract with the power company and upon which purchases the taxes in question were assessed, were used or consumed directly in the production for sale.of coal by mining, as the word, “sale,” is used and defined in Section 5546-1, General Code.

If appellant produced coal for sale by mining, within the meaning of the Sales and Use Tax Acts, then there is no sales or use tax assessable on the purchase of the machinery, equipment and…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Blauner's, Inc. v. PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1938
  2. Bradley Supply Co. v. AmesIllinois Supreme Court · 1934
  3. France Co. v. EvattOhio Supreme Court · 1944
  4. Bailey v. EvattOhio Supreme Court · 1944
  5. W. J. Sandberg Co. v. Iowa State Board of Assessment & ReviewSupreme Court of Iowa · 1938

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

3Cited by44 opinions

  1. State v. Morgan (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2017
  2. Stewart v. Vivian (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2017
  3. Woman's International Bowling Congress, Inc. v. PorterfieldOhio Supreme Court · 1971
  4. Thomasson v. Thomasson (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2018
  5. Good Samaritan Hospital of Dayton v. PorterfieldOhio Supreme Court · 1972

39 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