Legal Opinion

Westlake Medical Investors, L.P. v. Cuyahoga County Board of Revision

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided February 14, 1996No. 95-444PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Per curiam

Medical Investors principally argues that the BTA should have deducted amounts for the nonrealty items of the state-issued certificate of need, goodwill, and tangible personal property. We disagree.

A taxpayer has the duty to prove his right to a reduction in value. Zindle v. Summit Cty. Bd. of Revision (1989), 44 Ohio St.3d 202, 203, 542 N.E.2d 650, 651. The BTA stated its reasons for why it did not believe Provencher’s testimony, and the record supports its findings as to Provencher’s testimony. We do not find that the BTA abused its discretion in discrediting his report and opinion of value.

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Cleveland Board of Education v. Cuyahoga County Board of RevisionOhio Supreme Court · 1994
  2. Zindle v. Summit County Board of RevisionOhio Supreme Court · 1989

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Simmons v. Cuyahoga County Board of RevisionOhio Supreme Court · 1998
  2. Dublin Senior Community Ltd. Partnership v. Franklin County Board of RevisionOhio Supreme Court · 1997
  3. Salem Medical Arts & Development Corp. v. Columbiana County Board of RevisionOhio Supreme Court · 1998
  4. Dublin City School District Board of Education v. Franklin County Board of RevisionOhio Supreme Court · 1997
  5. Moskowitz v. Cuyahoga Cty. Bd. of Revision (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2017

5 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