Legal Opinion

Norandex, Inc. v. Limbach

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided April 20, 1994No. 92-2456PublishedCited by 32 opinions

1Per curiam

Since the court decides constitutional questions only when absolutely necessary, State ex rel. Hofstetter v. Kronk (1969), 20 Ohio St.2d 117, 119, 49 O.O.2d 440, 441, 254 N.E.2d 15, 17, we will first decide whether these purchases qualify for the retail-sales exception. We will address the interstate commerce clause question for any purchases not qualifying for the retail-sales exception.

R.C. 5739.01(E)(2) and 5741.02(C)(2) except purchases which will be used “directly in making retail sales” from the use tax. R.C. 5739.01(0) defines “making retail sales” as:

“[T]he effecting of transactions…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Complete Auto Transit, Inc. v. BradySupreme Court of the United States · 1977
  2. D. H. Holmes Co., Ltd. v. McNamaraSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
  3. State ex rel. Hofstetter v. KronkOhio Supreme Court · 1969
  4. SFZ Transportation, Inc. v. LimbachOhio Supreme Court · 1993
  5. Woman's International Bowling Congress, Inc. v. PorterfieldOhio Supreme Court · 1971

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

3Cited by32 opinions

  1. Gladon v. Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Auth.Ohio Supreme Court · 1996
  2. State ex rel. BSW Development Group v. City of DaytonOhio Supreme Court · 1998
  3. Northwestern Ohio Building & Construction Trades Council v. ConradOhio Supreme Court · 2001
  4. State v. Moore (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2018
  5. Newman v. LevinOhio Supreme Court · 2008

27 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