Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

19 Ohio App. 2d 211

250 N.E.2d 764

Olt v. Porterfield

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided June 16, 1969

Ohio Court of Appeals · decided 1969-06-16

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1969-06-16

How this case has been cited

Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently January 1992

7 state decisions

401969197019801990decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Hildebkant, J.

¶1 This is an appeal on questions of law from a decision of the Board of Tax Appeals affirming an assessment of sales tax against appellant, doing business as Charlie Olt Water Hauling Service, 435 North Washington Boulevard, Hamilton, Ohio, for a period from June 1, 1963, to June 30, 1967.

¶2 This court is bound by the record before the Board of Tax Appeals and may not substitute its judgment for that of the board even if inclined to be more liberal in finding exceptions from sales tax, but is limited to decision of the question: was the decision of the Board of Tax Appeals, which is the subject of this appeal, unreasonable and unlawful.

¶3 Appellant made no separation in the price of a load into a charge for water and a charge for delivery, so that, under the statutes, the transaction amounted to a sale.

¶4*212 This court, in Strosnider v. Donahue, Case No. 312, Clermont County, affirmed, per curiam, an assessment in an identical water hauling case.

¶5 We are, therefore, unable to find from the record before us that the decision of the Board of Tax Appeals is unreasonable or unlawful.

¶6 The decision of the Board of Tax Appeals is, therefore, affirmed.

¶7 Decision affirmed.

SHANNON, P. J,, and Hess, J., concur.
/19/ohioapp2d/211 · .json · Public domain