# Ohio Bell Telephone Co. v. Levin

> Ohio Supreme Court · December 3, 2009 · 124 Ohio St. 3d 211

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9802029

## Case

- **Full name:** Ohio Bell Telephone Company, Appellee, v. Levin, Tax Commr., Appellant
- **Court:** Ohio Supreme Court
- **Decided:** December 3, 2009
- **Citations:** 124 Ohio St. 3d 211; 921 N.E.2d 212; 2009 Ohio 6189
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Stratton
- **Judges:** Cupp, Moyer, Pfeifer, O'Connor, O'Donnell, Lanzinger, Stratton
- **Cited by:** 5 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/9802029

## Opinion text

Lundberg Stratton, J.,
dissenting.
{¶ 35} I believe that a remand to the Tax Commissioner is appropriate in light of the intervening case of Cincinnati Bell Tel. v. Zaino (June 10, 2005), BTA Nos. 2003-K-765 and 2003-K-1612, which rejected a valuation study similar to that upon which Ohio Bell relied, instead allowing an appraisal of unit value.
{¶ 36} I also believe that Ohio Bell’s appeal provided sufficient notice of the claimed errors to establish jurisdiction and that the valuation study and appraisal went to the method of proof and the evidence presented, not to jurisdiction. The BTA, as the trier of fact, accepted the evidence, pursuant to the method it had already determined acceptable in Cincinnati Bell.
{¶ 37} Therefore, I would defer to the expertise of the BTA and would affirm its judgment of the value of Ohio Bell’s personal property as $1,702,157,675.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9802029. Public record. Not legal advice.