Lindner Bros. v. Kosydar
Lindner Brothers, Inc., d. b. a. United Dairy Farmers v. Kosydar, Tax Commr., Appellee American Financial Leasing & Services Co. v. Kosydar, Tax Commr.
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
Per Curiam.
These cases are appeals from decisions of the Board of Tax Appeals affirming a sales and use tax assessment levied against Lindner Brothers, Inc,, d. b. a. United Dairy Farmers, and a sales tax assessment levied against American Financial Leasing & Services Co.
A thorough review of the records herein reveals that the activities involved here (primarily integrated data processing services and programming) are substantially identical to the activities considered by this court in Citizens Financial Corp. v. Kosydar (1975), 43 Ohio St. 2d 148 , 331 N. E. 2d 435 .
As such, the decisions of the Board of Tax Appeals in these cases are affirmed. Citizens Financial Corp. v. Kosydar, supra; Federated Department Stores v. Kosydar (1976), 45 Ohio St. 2d 1 , 340 N. E. 2d 840 ; Accountant’s Computer Services v. Kosydar (1973), 35 Ohio St. 2d 120 , 298 N. E. 2d 519 .
Decisions affirmed.
O’Neill, C. J., Herbert, Corrigan, Stern and Celebrezze, JJ., concur. William B. Brown, J., dissents for the reasons stated by Justice Paul W. Brown, in his dissenting opinion in Citizens Financial Corp. v. Kosydar (1975), 43 Ohio St. 2d 148 at 151 . Paul W. Brown, J., dissents for the reasons stated in his dissenting opinions in United States Shoe Corp. v. Kosydar (1975), 41 Ohio St. 2d 68 at 77 , and Citizens Financial Corp. v. Kosydar (1975), 43 Ohio. St. 2d 148 at 151.
How later courts describe this case
Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 1 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.
-
(court described the tax appeal as involving “a sales and use tax assessment levied against [an entity] and a sales tax assessment levied against [another entity]”)
Cited by 8 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.