Opinion

Olmsted Falls Village Ass'n v. Cuyahoga County Board of Revision

  • 75 Ohio St. 3d 552
  • 664 N.E.2d 922
Court
Ohio Supreme Court
Filed
Jun 5, 1996
Status
Published
Author
Douglas
On the bench
Cook, Douglas, Moyer, Pfeifer, Resnick, Sweeney, Wright
Cited by
14 cases

rejecting an appraisal valuation that was not an opinion of the value as of the tax-lien date

How later courts described this case

  • rejecting an appraisal valuation that was not an opinion of the value as of the tax-lien date

Written by the judges who cited it.

The opinion

Douglas, J.,

dissenting. The semantical argument made by the majority does not change, in any way, the true value of the property in question as of tax lien date. Once again, a majority of the court is invading the province of the BTA. I would affirm the decision of the BTA.

Resnick, J., concurs 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.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.