Legal Opinion
Sharon Village Ltd. v. Licking County Board of Revision
Ohio Supreme Court
Decided May 21, 1997No. Nos. 95-2591, 95-2594 and 95-2596PublishedCited by 56 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Francis E. Sweeney, Sr., J.
In this case we are not asked to decide whether a taxpayer may prepare and file a complaint with the BOR. Clearly, such action is permissible. See R.C. 5715.13. Instead, the sole issue presented to us is whether appellants’ agent, a nonlawyer, engaged in the unauthorized practice of law when he prepared and filed the complaints with the BOR. For the following reasons, we answer this question in the affirmative. Accordingly, we affirm the BTA.
R.C. 4705.01 governs the practice of law in Ohio. It states:
“No person shall be permitted to practice as an attorney and…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Land Title Abstract & Trust Co. v. DworkenOhio Supreme Court · 1934
- R.R.Z. Associates v. Cuyahoga County Board of RevisionOhio Supreme Court · 1988
- Stanjim Co. v. Board of RevisionOhio Supreme Court · 1974
- Gustafson v. v. C. Taylor & Sons, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1941
- Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. EstepOhio Supreme Court · 1995
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by56 opinions
- State ex rel. Cooker Restaurant Corp. v. Montgomery County Board of ElectionsOhio Supreme Court · 1997
- State ex rel. Cooker Restaurant Corp. v. Montgomery Cty. Bd. of ElectionsOhio Supreme Court · 1997
- Toledo Public Schools Board of Education v. Lucas County Board of RevisionOhio Supreme Court · 2010
- Cincinnati School District Board of Education v. Hamilton County Board of RevisionOhio Supreme Court · 2010
- Cincinnati School Dist. Bd. of Edn. v. Hamilton Cty. Bd. of RevisionOhio Supreme Court · 2010
51 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.