Opinion

Board of Education v. Board of Revision

37 Ohio St. 3d 318
526 N.E.2d 64
1988 Ohio LEXIS 204

Court: Ohio Supreme Court
Filed: Jul 6, 1988
Status: Published
Author: Douglas
On the bench: Brown, Douglas, Holmes, Locher, Moyer, Sweeney, Wright
Cited by: 23 cases
Authority: More cited than 15.1%

The opinion

Douglas, J.,

dissenting. I respectfully dissent. It has long been the policy of this court not to disturb a decision of the BTA regarding valuation unless the decision of the BTA is unreasonable or unlawful. Bd. of Revision v. Fodor (1968), 15 Ohio St. 2d 52 , 44 O.O. 2d 30, 239 N.E. 2d 25 .1 do not find from the record that the decision of the BTA fails either test. I would affirm the decision of the BTA.

Moyer, C.J., and Sweeney, J., concur in the foregoing dissenting opinion.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.