Legal Opinion

Koch v. Kosydar

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided December 6, 1972No. 72-333PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtStern, J.

The Board of Tax Appeals, in reversing the assessment order of the Tax Commissioner, relied upon its interpretation of the syllabus in Machinery Moving v. Porterfield (1971), 26 Ohio St. 2d 99, which provides:

“The transfer of possession of bins and containers under refuse removal contracts is a personal service trans*77action, and involves only the transfer of tangible personal property as an inconsequential element, for which no charge is made, and such transfer is exempt from the sales tax under R. C. 5739.01(B).” Machinery Moving v. Porterfield, supra, is not controlling in the instant case.

It…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Columbus Coated Fabrics Division v. PorterfieldOhio Supreme Court · 1972
  2. Machinery Moving, Inc. v. PorterfieldOhio Supreme Court · 1971
  3. American District Telegraph Co. v. PorterfieldOhio Supreme Court · 1968
  4. Recording Devices Co. v. PorterfieldOhio Supreme Court · 1972
  5. Bunker-Ramo Corp. v. PorterfieldOhio Supreme Court · 1970

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Accountant's Computer Services, Inc. v. KosydarOhio Supreme Court · 1973
  2. Emery Industries, Inc. v. LimbachOhio Supreme Court · 1989
  3. White Motor Corp. v. KosydarOhio Supreme Court · 1977
  4. Federated Department Stores, Inc. v. KosydarOhio Supreme Court · 1976
  5. Citizens Financial Corp. v. KosydarOhio Supreme Court · 1975

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