Legal Opinion

Mut. Holding Co. v. Limbach

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided November 29, 1994No. 1993-1167PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

[This opinion has been published in Ohio Official Reports at 71 Ohio St.3d 59.] MUTUAL HOLDING COMPANY, APPELLEE, v. LIMBACH, TAX COMMR., APPELLANT. [Cite as Mut. Holding Co. v. Limbach,

1994-Ohio-30.] Taxation—Franchise tax—Noninsurance corporation that is a subsidiary of a domestic insurance company is not exempt under R.C. 5725.25 from franchise tax imposed by R.C. 5725.18. (No. 93-1167—Submitted September 20, 1994—Decided November 30, 1994.) APPEAL from the Board of Tax Appeals, Nos. 90-H-1058, 91-B-155, 91-F-156 and 91-D-157. __________________ {¶ 1} Appellee, Mutual Holding Company…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Celina Mutual Ins. v. BowersOhio Supreme Court · 1965
  2. Mutual Holding Co. v. LimbachOhio Supreme Court · 1994
  3. Bank One Dayton, N.A. v. LimbachOhio Supreme Court · 1990
  4. Hoover Universal, Inc. v. LimbachOhio Supreme Court · 1991
  5. International Harvester Co. v. EvattOhio Supreme Court · 1945

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Ohio Grocers Assn. v. LevinOhio Supreme Court · 2009
  2. Fifth Third Bank v. SenviskyOhio Court of Appeals · 2014
  3. Ohio Grocers Assn. v. LevinOhio Supreme Court · 2009
  4. SFA Folio Collections, Inc. v. TracyOhio Supreme Court · 1995
  5. Yonkov v. Maximus Holding Group LLCDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 2024

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API