Lang, Fisher & Stashower Advertising, Inc. v. Collins

Ohio Supreme Court

Lang, Fisher & Stashower Advertising, Inc. v. Collins

347 N.E.2d 538, 46 Ohio St. 2d 285, 75 Ohio Op. 2d 330, 1976 Ohio LEXIS 633

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedMay 26, 1976

DocketNo. 75-1167

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 347 N.E.2d 538 (Lang, Fisher & Stashower Advertising, Inc. v. Collins) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Lang, Fisher & Stashower Advertising, Inc. v. Collins, 347 N.E.2d 538, 46 Ohio St. 2d 285, 75 Ohio Op. 2d 330, 1976 Ohio LEXIS 633 (Ohio 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The “60-day letter” or notice of intent to levy an assessment is not a final determination that Lang, Fisher & Stashower Advertising, Inc., is a vendor. Of course, the notice reflects the view held by the Tax Commissioner at that time that appellant was a vendor. However, the' notice is not a final determination by the commissioner. Until such time as the commissioner makes a. final determination, the initial determination expressed in the notice is subject to modification or review by him.

Since the notice is .not a final determination by the Tax Commissioner, the Board of Tax Appeals correctly found that it was without jurisdiction to consider the appeal. R. C. 5717.02'; Michelin Tire Corp. v. Kosydar (1974), 38 Ohio St. 2d 254, 313 N. E. 2d 394.

For the foregoing .reason, the' decision of the Board of Tax Appeals is affirmed. . .

Decision affirmed...

. O’Neinl, C. J., Herbert, Córrigán,'Stern, Celebrezze, W. Brown and P. Brown, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI