Legal Opinion

Middleton v. Cuyahoga County Board of Revision

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided January 10, 1996No. 94-2109PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Per curiam

Middleton argues that R.C. 5715.19 renders one who files a complaint seeking a decrease in the valuation of a property owned by another to be “a party affected” under R.C. 5715.13 and able to file a complaint to decrease the value of property owned by the other taxpayer. Appellees counter that Middleton has no interest in reducing the value of the instant property, is not a party affected, and, consequently, lacks standing to seek a reduction in the value of this property.

R.C. 5715.19(A)(1) provides that “[a]ny person owning taxable real property in the county or in a taxing district with…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Stanjim Co. v. Board of RevisionOhio Supreme Court · 1974
  2. Leach v. CollinsOhio Supreme Court · 1931

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Foods v. Cuyahoga County Board of RevisionOhio Supreme Court · 1997
  2. Toledo Public Schools Board of Education v. Lucas County Board of RevisionOhio Supreme Court · 2010
  3. Society National Bank v. Wood County Board of RevisionOhio Supreme Court · 1998
  4. Worthington City School Dist. Bd. of Edn. v. Franklin Cty. Bd. of RevisionOhio Supreme Court · 1999
  5. Buckeye Foods v. Cuyahoga Cty. Bd. of RevisionOhio Supreme Court · 1997

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API