Legal Opinion

Hoover Universal, Inc. v. Limbach

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided August 28, 1991No. 90-1008PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Per curiam

We hold that Hoover may claim an investment tax credit for paying personal property tax on qualifying personal property purchased by Mansfield and Rogate, transferred to Hoover in the corporate merger, and first listed for personal property tax purposes by Hoover. We also hold that Hoover may claim an investment tax credit for paying personal property tax on qualifying personal property in a short-period taxable year.

I

Investment Tax Credits of Merged Subsidiaries

A

Facts

Between January 1, 1978, the earliest qualifying date for the investment tax credit provided in former R.C. 5733.061, and…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Kroger Grocery & Baking Co. v. GranderOhio Supreme Court · 1948
  2. White Motor Corp. v. KosydarOhio Supreme Court · 1977
  3. Litton Industrial Products, Inc. v. LimbachOhio Supreme Court · 1991

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Huntington Insurance Agency, Inc. v. DuryeeOhio Supreme Court · 1995
  2. State ex rel. Huntington Ins. Agency, Inc. v. DuryeeOhio Supreme Court · 1995
  3. Kelly v. Accountancy Bd. of OhioOhio Court of Appeals · 1993
  4. Mutual Holding Co. v. LimbachOhio Supreme Court · 1994
  5. Taber v. Ohio Department of Human ServicesOhio Court of Appeals · 1998

8 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