HUNTINGTON NATL. BANK v. LIMBACH

No. 93-1501.

71 Ohio St.3d 261 (1994)

HUNTINGTON NATIONAL BANK ET AL., APPELLANTS, v. LIMBACH, TAX COMMR., APPELLEE.

Supreme Court of Ohio.

Decided December 20, 1994.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Porter, Wright, Morris & Arthur, Ronald W. Gabriel and Joseph R. Ervine, for appellants.

Lee Fisher, Attorney General, and Richard C. Farrin, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.


Per Curiam.

Huntington argues that it and foreign banks are in the same class and that taxing it at a higher rate than foreign banks denies it equal protection. The commissioner contends that Huntington's ability to accept deposits in Ohio forms a rational basis to distinguish between it and foreign banks.

According to Nordlinger v. Hahn (1992), 505 U.S. ___, ___, 112 S.Ct. 2326, 2331-2332, 120 L.Ed.2d 1, 12:

"The Equal Protection Clause...

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