Legal Opinion

R.W. Sidley, Inc. v. Limbach

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided May 19, 1993No. 92-174PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Per curiam

For the reasons which follow, we affirm the decision of the Board of Tax Appeals (“BTA”).

Before the BTA, in its notice of appeal and briefs before this court, and in oral argument, Sidley has consistently contested three general categories of items which the commissioner held taxable: items at its precast plant, its silica plant, and its block plant.

I

At the precast plant, Sidley casts and prestresses concrete construction components (e.g., beams and columns) for buildings, parking garages, and bridges. Sidley then assembles or erects the components under construction contracts to furnish…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Wheeling Steel Corp. v. PorterfieldOhio Supreme Court · 1970
  2. Pittsburgh Plate Glass Co. v. BowersOhio Court of Appeals · 1956
  3. Thomas Steel Strip Corp. v. LimbachOhio Supreme Court · 1991

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Vought Industries, Inc. v. TracyOhio Supreme Court · 1995
  2. Spartan Chemical Co. v. TracyOhio Supreme Court · 1995
  3. Spartan Chem. Co. v. TracyOhio Supreme Court · 1995
  4. In re D.K.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2012
  5. Vought Industries, Inc. v. TracyOhio Supreme Court · 1995

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

Powered by the Exa API