Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
8 Ohio opinions name it 2 courts 2005–2021 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Ohio courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Quill Corp. v. North Dakota Ex Rel. Heitkampred2 sentences2016We hold that the $500,000 sales- receipts threshold complies with the substantial-nexus requirement of the Complete Auto test. {¶ 53} In so holding, we express our view that the quantitative standard is necessary to make the CAT applicable to a remote seller such as Crutchfield, because the Commerce Clause standard does require the nexus to be “substantial.” This means that in order to render receipts susceptible to taxation by Ohio, the Commerce Clause requires more than the “ ‘definite link’ ” to this state, or the “ ‘purpose[ful] avail[ment]’ ” of Ohio’s protections, that would satisfy due 2016We hold that the $500,000 sales- receipts threshold complies with the substantial-nexus requirement of the Complete Auto test. {¶ 53} In so holding, we express our view that the quantitative standard is necessary to make the CAT applicable to a remote seller such as Crutchfield, because the Commerce Clause standard does require the nexus to be “substantial.” This means that in order to render receipts susceptible to taxation by Ohio, the Commerce Clause requires more than the “ ‘definite link’ ” to this state, or the “ ‘purpose[ful] avail[ment]’ ” of Ohio’s protections, that would satisfy due | 1 | 1 |
Mécanique C.N.C., Inc. v. Durr Environmental, Inc.green1 sentence2013Mecanique C.N.C., Inc. v. Durr Environmental, Inc., 304 F.Supp.2d 971, 976 (S.D.Ohio 2004); Corporex Dev. & Constr. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Ohio. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Thompkins
red
2 sentences2016State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380, 386 , 678 N.E.2d 541 (1997). 2016State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380, 386 , 678 N.E.2d 541 (1997). | 4 | 2016–2016 |
Board of Trustees v. Kinney
neutral
2 sentences2021Kinney, 5 Ohio St.3d at 174 , 449 N.E.2d 1282 . {¶ 31} Here, O’Keeffe offers a quantitative analysis of the use of the airport parcel based upon the physical areas of the airport devoted to different uses and the percentage of educational use of each particular area. 2021Kinney, 5 Ohio St.3d at 174 , 449 N.E.2d 1282 . {¶ 31} Here, O’Keeffe offers a quantitative analysis of the use of the airport parcel based upon the physical areas of the airport devoted to different uses and the percentage of educational use of each particular area. | 1 | 2021–2021 |
Corrigan v. Testa (Slip Opinion)
green
1 sentence2016We hold that the $500,000 sales- receipts threshold complies with the substantial-nexus requirement of the Complete Auto test. {¶ 53} In so holding, we express our view that the quantitative standard is necessary to make the CAT applicable to a remote seller such as Crutchfield, because the Commerce Clause standard does require the nexus to be “substantial.” This means that in order to render receipts susceptible to taxation by Ohio, the Commerce Clause requires more than the “ ‘definite link’ ” to this state, or the “ ‘purpose[ful] avail[ment]’ ” of Ohio’s protections, that would satisfy due | 1 | 2016–2016 |
Brecht v. Abrahamson
green
2 sentences2005Id. at ¶ 50. {¶ 45} Appellant also relies on the decision of the United States Supreme Court in Brecht v. Abrahamson (1993), 507 U.S. 619 , in which the court stated that where testimony is admitted regarding a defendant's post-arrest silence, such error should "be quantitatively assessed in the context of other evidence presented in order to determine [the effect it had on the trial]." Id. at 629 . {¶ 46} Upon conducting such a quantitative analysis, it is this court's conclusion that there was substantial evidence of appellant's guilt including verbal statements given by appellant himself. 2005Id. at ¶ 50. {¶ 45} Appellant also relies on the decision of the United States Supreme Court in Brecht v. Abrahamson (1993), 507 U.S. 619 , in which the court stated that where testimony is admitted regarding a defendant's post-arrest silence, such error should "be quantitatively assessed in the context of other evidence presented in order to determine [the effect it had on the trial]." Id. at 629 . {¶ 46} Upon conducting such a quantitative analysis, it is this court's conclusion that there was substantial evidence of appellant's guilt including verbal statements given by appellant himself. | 1 | 2005–2005 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.