Legal Opinion

Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Lindley

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided August 24, 1988No. 86-315PublishedCited by 28 opinions

1Per curiam

Youngstown argues that the coke ovens are fuel-making equipment that is exempt under the Tax Commissioner’s Rule TX-15-08(9) (now Ohio Adm. Code 5703-9-21[J]) and R.C. 5739.16(B). Youngstown admits that the rule improperly interpreted the statute then in effect, but argues that R.C. 5739.16(B) requires that the rule be given the effect of statutory law to exempt the equipment.

R.C. 5739.16(B), during the audit period, provided:

“No assessment shall be made or issued against a vendor or consumer for any tax imposed by or pursuant to section 5739.02, 5739.021, 5739.023, or 5739.10 of the Revised…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Light v. Ohio UniversityOhio Supreme Court · 1986
  2. Kroger Grocery & Baking Co. v. GranderOhio Supreme Court · 1948
  3. Interlake, Inc. v. KosydarOhio Supreme Court · 1975
  4. J.C. Penney Co. v. LimbachOhio Supreme Court · 1986

3Cited by28 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Celebrezze v. National Lime & Stone Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1994
  2. HealthSouth Corp. v. LevinOhio Supreme Court · 2009
  3. Ohio Council 8 v. City of CincinnatiOhio Supreme Court · 1994
  4. Chambers v. St. Mary's SchoolOhio Supreme Court · 1998
  5. Cosby v. Franklin Cty. Dept. of Job Family Servs., 07ap-41 (12-13-2007)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2007

23 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