From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

H.R. Options, Inc. v. Wilkins

Supreme Court of Ohio
May 12, 2004
2004 Ohio 2085 (Ohio 2004)

Opinion

No. 2002-1477.

Submitted March 30, 2004.

Decided May 12, 2004.

Bricker Eckler, L.L.P., and Mark A. Engel, for appellee.

Jim Petro, Attorney General, and Robert C. Maier, Assistant Attorney General, for appellant.


ON MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION OR CLARIFICATION.

{¶ 1} The motion for clarification of ¶ 17 of the opinion of January 7, 2004, found at 100 Ohio St.3d 373, 2004-Ohio-1, 800 N.E.2d 740, is granted.

{¶ 2} Paragraph 17 of the opinion currently reads: "Because R.C. 5739.01(JJ)(3) represents an exclusion from taxation, it must be construed most favorably to the taxpayer." In granting the Tax Commissioner's motion, this court directs that the sentence will read: "Because R.C. 5739.01(JJ)(3) represents an exclusion from taxation, it must be construed strictly against the taxpayer. In re Estate of Roberts (2002), 94 Ohio St.3d 311, 316, 762 N.E.2d 1001."

Moyer, C.J., Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Stratton, O'Connor and O'Donnell, JJ., concur.

Pfeifer, J., dissents.


Summaries of

H.R. Options, Inc. v. Wilkins

Supreme Court of Ohio
May 12, 2004
2004 Ohio 2085 (Ohio 2004)
Case details for

H.R. Options, Inc. v. Wilkins

Case Details

Full title:H.R. Options, Inc., appellee, v. Wilkins, Tax Commr., appellant

Court:Supreme Court of Ohio

Date published: May 12, 2004

Citations

2004 Ohio 2085 (Ohio 2004)
2004 Ohio 2085
807 N.E.2d 363

Citing Cases

Newman v. Levin

Moreover, we have held that statutes governing tax exemptions should be strictly construed against the claim…

Nestle R&D Center, Inc. v. Levin

Quite simply, the jobs credit constitutes a partial tax exemption, with the result that the statutes granting…