Case Name: Maxxim Medical, Inc., Appellant, v. Tracy, Tax Commr., Appellee
Court: Supreme Court of Ohio
Jurisdiction: Ohio
Decision Date: 1996-07-24
Citations: 76 Ohio St. 3d 1201
Docket Number: No. 95-2447
Parties: Maxxim Medical, Inc., Appellant, v. Tracy, Tax Commr., Appellee.
Judges: Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Stratton, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Ohio State Reports, Third Service
Volume: 76
Pages: 1201–1202

Head Matter:
Maxxim Medical, Inc., Appellant, v. Tracy, Tax Commr., Appellee.
[Cite as Maxxim Med., Inc. v. Tracy (1996), 76 Ohio St.3d 1201.]
(No. 95-2447
— Submitted May 2, 1996
— Decided July 24, 1996.)
Buckingham, Doolittle & Burroughs, Steven A. Dimengo and David L. Drechshler, for appellant.
Betty D. Montgomery, Attorney General, Richard C. Farrin and Steven L. Zisser, Assistant Attorneys General, for appellee.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
Under Kempf Surgical Appliances, Inc. v. Tracy, we grant Maxxim's motion to remand this matter to the BTA for it to rule on whether the equipment supplements impaired functions of the human body or aids human perambulation. We note that Maxxim had conceded that this equipment does not support weakened or non-functioning parts of the human body.
Furthermore, we reserve judgment on whether R.C. 4121.44(F) relieves Maxxim from collecting the sales tax when the Bureau of Workers' Compensation pays for the equipment for Maxxim's customers.
Judgment accordingly.
Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Stratton, JJ., concur.