Legal Opinion

OAMCO v. Lindley

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided June 25, 1986No. 85-1114PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Per curiam

At issue in this case is whether the various parts of the manufacturing process are directly related to, or used in, the manufacture of appellant’s product. For the reasons which follow, we affirm in part and reverse in part the decision of the Board of Tax Appeals.

Initially, appellant would have this court adopt the integrated plant theory. This theory views all the components of the manufacturing process as a single unit for tax purposes, and would allow no inquiry beyond whether the whole plant was purchased at the same time. It further implies that every component of the plant is directly…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Hawthorn Mellody, Inc. v. LindleyOhio Supreme Court · 1981
  2. Southwestern Portland Cement Co. v. LindleyOhio Supreme Court · 1981
  3. Tri-State Asphalt Corp. v. GlanderOhio Supreme Court · 1950
  4. Ohio Ferro-Alloys Corp. v. KosydarOhio Supreme Court · 1973
  5. Pittsburgh Plate Glass Co. v. BowersOhio Court of Appeals · 1956

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Sharp v. Tyler Pipe Industries, Inc., Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin)1996
  2. Am. Natl. Can Co. v. TracyOhio Supreme Court · 1995
  3. Roxane Laboratories, Inc. v. TracyOhio Supreme Court · 1996
  4. American National Can Co. v. TracyOhio Supreme Court · 1995
  5. City of Rocky River v. State Employment Relations BoardOhio Supreme Court · 1989

6 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