Acme Engineering Co. v. Jones

Two questions are presented in this case. The first is, was Acme, within the meaning of' the statute, a “successor in interest” to Buckeye, and the second is, did Acme make its claims for refund of •alleged excess contributions within the time limited by law.

Under Section 1345-4 (c) (1), General Code, it is provided in part:

“If an employer shall transfer his business or shall -otherwise reorganize such business, the successor in interest is hereby required to assume the resources and liabilities of such employer’s account, and to continue the payment of all contributions * *

It is conceded in…