Court Opinion

ID: 9745373
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 22:51:53.268918+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:26:24.330033
License: Public Domain

Tart, J.,
concurring. I have considerable doubt about' paragraph two of the syllabus. However, I reach the same result on another ground. The Houdry plant, even before it was “capable of operation,” was at that time “acquired or held as means or instruments for carrying on the business ’ ’ within the meaning of the words found in Section 5325, General Code. At that time, the Houdry plant might not be so “held” but it was so “acquired.” The words “acquired or held” are in the disjunctive.
Stewart, J., concurs in the foregoing concurring opinion.