Opinion

Corpline v. Hamilton County Board of Revision

  • 97 Ohio St. 3d 1212
Court
Ohio Supreme Court
Filed
Nov 6, 2002
Status
Published
On the bench
Cook, Douglas, Moyee, Pfeifee, Resnick, Stratton, Sweeney
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 15.3%

The opinion

{¶ 1} Upon consideration of the parties’ joint motion to remand,

{¶ 2} IT IS ORDERED by the court that the joint motion to remand be, and it hereby is, sustained. We acknowledge that under Cleveland Elec. Illum. Co. v. Lake Cty. Bd. of Revision, 96 Ohio St.3d 165 , 2002-Ohio-4033 , 772 N.E.2d 1160 , the appeal may have been filed before the start of the running of the appeal time set forth in R.C. 5717.01. Nevertheless, in the interests of justice and to *1213 facilitate the settlement of the parties, this cause is remanded to the Board of Tax Appeals with directions to remand this cause to the Hamilton County Board of Revision to implement the mediated agreement of the parties.

Goodman & Goodman and Stanley Goodman, for appellant.

Michael K. Allen, Hamilton County Prosecuting Attorney, and Thomas J. Scheve, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee Hamilton County Auditor.

Wood & Lamping, L.L.P., and David DiMuzio, for appellee Deer Park School District Board of Education.

{¶ 3} IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties are to bear their respective costs herein expended, that a mandate be sent to the Board of Tax Appeals to carry this judgment into execution, and that a copy of this entry be certified to the Board of Tax Appeals for entry.

Moyee, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifee, Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.

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.