Shafer v. Glander

Ohio Supreme Court

Shafer v. Glander

160 Ohio St. (N.S.) 503

Ohio Supreme Court·Decided January 27, 1954·No. No. 33309·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Appellant has produced no evidence of the present actual true value in money of the [504]*504asphalt plants in question, but attacks the formula used by the commissioner. Considering the dates of acquisition of the plants, expenditures made thereon since acquisition, the number of years they have been in use and the expected remaining life of the plants as disclosed by the evidence, this court is of the opinion that the evidence fails to show that the result reached by the Board of Tax Appeals is unreasonable or unlawful.

The decision is affirmed.

Decision affirmed.

Weygandt, C. J., Middleton, Hart, Zimmerman and Lamneck, JJ., concur.

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

Per Curiam.

Appellant has produced no evidence of the present actual true value in money of the [504]*504asphalt plants in question, but attacks the formula used by the commissioner. Considering the dates of acquisition of the plants, expenditures made thereon since acquisition, the number of years they have been in use and the expected remaining life of the plants as disclosed by the evidence, this court is of the opinion that the evidence fails to show that the result reached by the Board of Tax Appeals is unreasonable or unlawful.

The decision is affirmed.

Decision affirmed.

Weygandt, C. J., Middleton, Hart, Zimmerman and Lamneck, JJ., concur.

Shafer v. Glander, 160 Ohio St. (N.S.) 503 (Ohio 1954).

Pincite

160 Ohio St. (N.S.) 503 (Shafer v. Glander) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.