Legal Opinion

Huron Fish Co. v. Glander

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided June 5, 1946No. 30627PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWeygandt, C. J.

Section 5546-1, General Code, reads in part as follows:

“ ‘Retail sale’ and ‘sales at retail’ include all sales excepting those in which the pux-pose of the consumer is * * * to use or consume the thing transferred directly in the production of tangible personal property for sale by * * * processing * *

Section 5546-25, General Code, contains the following provisions:

“ ‘Use’ means and includes the exercise of any right or power incidental to the ownership of the thing used, excepting as hereinafter provided.
“When the purpose of the consumer is * * * to use or consume the thing transferred…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Cochrane v. DeenerSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
  2. France Co. v. EvattOhio Supreme Court · 1944
  3. Moore v. Farmers Mutual Manufacturing & Ginning Co.Arizona Supreme Court · 1938
  4. Kennedy v. State Board of Assessment & ReviewSupreme Court of Iowa · 1937
  5. Georgia Warehouse Co. v. JolleySupreme Court of Georgia · 1931

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Kroger Grocery & Baking Co. v. GranderOhio Supreme Court · 1948
  2. Canton Malleable Iron Co. v. PorterfieldOhio Supreme Court · 1972
  3. Fischer Artificial Ice & Cold Storage Co. v. Iowa State Tax CommissionSupreme Court of Iowa · 1957
  4. State, Department of Revenue v. Alaska Pulp America, Inc.Alaska Supreme Court · 1983
  5. Bay Bottled Gas Co. v. Department of RevenueMichigan Supreme Court · 1955

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