Legal Opinion
Ohio Edison Co. v. Porterfield
Ohio Supreme Court
Decided December 22, 1971No. 71-17PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Per curiam
The Board of Tax Appeals, in modifying the order of the Tax Commissioner and finding that the above items were excepted from the Ohio sales and use taxes, used the following language in its decision:
“From the testimony and evidence in the record now before us it is clear that appellant could not operate its electric and steam plants without using the items here in issue. We therefore find that the items in dispute were essential in keeping the actual service in operation and therefore the purchased items here in dispute are excepted from sales and use taxation.”
The appellant argues that the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Hoffmann-LaRoche, Inc. v. PorterfieldOhio Supreme Court · 1968
- Jewel Companies v. PorterfieldOhio Supreme Court · 1970
3Cited by7 opinions
- Duval Sierrita Corp. v. Arizona Department of RevenueCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1977
- Cincinnati Gas & Electric Co. v. KosydarOhio Supreme Court · 1974
- R. R. Donnelley & Sons Co. v. PorterfieldOhio Supreme Court · 1972
- Jacksonville Electric Authority v. Department of RevenueDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1986
- International Paper Co. v. HalperinSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1981
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.