# Musto v. Lorain Cty. Bd. of Revision (Slip Opinion)

> Ohio Supreme Court · December 13, 2016 · 148 Ohio St. 3d 456

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9870224

## Case

- **Full name:** Musto, Appellant, v. Lorain County Board of Revision Et Al., Appellees
- **Court:** Ohio Supreme Court
- **Decided:** December 13, 2016
- **Citations:** 148 Ohio St. 3d 456; 71 N.E.3d 279; 2016 Ohio 8058
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by O'Neill
- **Judges:** O'Connor, O'Donnell, Lanzinger, French, Kennedy, O'Neill, Pfeifer
- **Cited by:** 21 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/9870224

## Opinion text

O’Neill, J.,
dissenting.
{¶ 59} I must dissent. The Board of Tax Appeals (“BTA”) acted totally unreasonably in denying the request to continue the hearing so that the appraiser who submitted the report introduced by appellant, Cynthia M. Musto, could testify either in person or by another method. This is an informal hearing, and in this day of advanced cell-phone technology, the government agency had a duty to accommodate the witness in a reasonable fashion. I would reverse the decision of the BTA on appellant’s first proposition of law.
Pfeifer, J., concurs in the foregoing opinion.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9870224. Public record. Not legal advice.