# Muirfield Ass'n v. Franklin County Board of Revision

> Ohio Supreme Court · September 13, 1995 · 73 Ohio St. 3d 710

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6772321

## Case

- **Full name:** Muirfield Association, Inc. v. Franklin County Board of Revision
- **Court:** Ohio Supreme Court
- **Decided:** September 13, 1995
- **Citations:** 73 Ohio St. 3d 710; 654 N.E.2d 110; 1995 Ohio LEXIS 2272
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Pfeifer
- **Judges:** Cook, Douglas, Moyer, Pfeifer, Resnick, Sweeney, Wright
- **Cited by:** 13 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6772321

## Opinion text

Pfeifer, J.,
dissenting. The development scheme at issue in this case transfers value from- one lot to other lots by granting easements of enjoyment in a *713 recreational lot to residential lots. The value of the residential lots — the dominant estates — was increased by these conveyances, and the value of the recreational lot — the subservient estate — was decreased.
Somehow the majority concludes that the General Assembly mandates that county auditors should ignore this transfer of value despite the fact that R.C. 5715.01 provides:
“ * * * The rules shall provide that in determining the true value of lands or improvements thereon for tax purposes, all facts and circumstances relating to the value of the property, its availability for the purposes for which it is constructed or being used, its obsolete character, if any, the income capacity of the property, if any, and any other factor that tends to prove its true value shall be used.” (Emphasis added.)
In this case, the conveyance of an easement appurtenant is a fact that relates to the value of the property and was, thus, appropriately considered by the auditor.
Alliance Towers, Ltd. v. Stark Cty. Bd. of Revision (1988), 37 Ohio St.3d 16 , 523 N.E.2d 826 , is factually distinguishable from this case. Alliance Towers addresses the appropriate standard of valuation to be used for taxation purposes when property is operated with assistance from the federal government. The lots of real property at issue in Alliance Towers were not encumbered by interests conveyed to other parcels of land. Thus, there was no transfer of value from one lot to another.
Wright, J., concurs in the foregoing dissenting opinion.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6772321. Public record. Not legal advice.