Legal Opinion

Lakeside Avenue Ltd. Partnership v. Cuyahoga County Board of Revision

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided March 31, 1999No. 98-187PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Per curiam

In Sharon Village Ltd. v. Licking Cty. Bd. of Revision (1997), 78 Ohio St.3d 479, 678 N.E.2d 932, syllabus, we held that the preparation and filing of a real property valuation complaint with a board of revision on behalf of a taxpayer constituted the practice of law. Because the tax agent who prepared and filed the complaint in Sharon Village was not an attorney, we affirmed the BTA’s decision that the board of revision lacked jurisdiction to hear the complaint.

Lakeside contends that Sharon Village does not apply to this matter because the complaint was signed by a partner and owner of the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Walston v. NevinSupreme Court of the United States · 1888
  2. Sharon Village Ltd. v. Licking County Board of RevisionOhio Supreme Court · 1997
  3. State ex rel. Bosch v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1982
  4. Evans v. GalardiCalifornia Supreme Court · 1976
  5. City of North Olmsted v. Cuyahoga County Board of RevisionOhio Supreme Court · 1980

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. Lunsford v. Saberhagen Holdings, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 2009
  2. Lunsford v. Saberhagen Holdings, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 2009
  3. Johnson v. Timmerman-CooperOhio Supreme Court · 2001
  4. Agee v. RussellOhio Supreme Court · 2001
  5. Board of Education v. Hamilton Cty. Bd. of RevisionOhio Supreme Court · 2001

13 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