Case ID: ohio-st-3d_102/html/1214-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

H.R. Options, Inc., Appellee, v. Wilkins, Tax Commr., Appellant.
    [Cite as H.R. Options, Inc. v. Wilkins, 102 Ohio St.3d 1214, 2004-Ohio-2085.]
    (No. 2002-1477
    Submitted March 30, 2004
    Decided May 12, 2004.)
    Bricker & Eckler, L.L.P., and Mark A. Engel, for appellee.
    Jim Petro, Attorney General, and Robert C. Maier, Assistant Attorney General, for appellant.
   {¶ 1} The motion for clarification of ¶ 17 of the opinion of January 7, 2004, found at 100 Ohio St.3d 373, 2004-Ohio-l, 800 N.E.2d 740, is granted.

{¶ 2} Paragraph 17 of the opinion currently reads: “Because R.C. 5739.01(JJ)(3) represents an exclusion from taxation, it must be construed most favorably to the taxpayer.” In granting the Tax Commissioner’s motion, this court directs that the sentence will read: “Because R.C. 5739.01(JJ)(3) represents an exclusion from taxation, it must be construed strictly against the taxpayer. In re Estate of Roberts (2002), 94 Ohio St.3d 311, 316, 762 N.E.2d 1001.”

Moyer, C.J., Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Lundberg Stratton, O’Connor and O’Donnell, JJ., concur.

Pfeifer, J., dissents.