YALE v. LINDLEY

No. 83-1168.

10 Ohio St. 3d 5 (1984)

YALE, D.B.A. YALE PHOTOGRAPHY, APPELLANT, v. LINDLEY, TAX COMMR., APPELLEE.

Supreme Court of Ohio.

Decided March 7, 1984.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

King, Hermon & Berry Co., L.P.A., Mr. Ronald B. Croissant and Mr. Benjamin F. Yale, for appellant.

Mr. Anthony J. Celebrezze, Jr., attorney general, and Ms. Christine T. Mesirow, for appellee.


Per Curiam.

In his sole proposition of law before this court, appellant argues that an order of the Tax Commissioner changing the frequency of filing sales and use tax returns is an adjudication order subject to the notice and hearing requirements of R.C. 119.01 through 119.13.

This argument is without merit. R.C. 119.06 provides in relevant part:

"No adjudication order shall be valid unless an opportunity for a hearing is afforded in accordance...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases