Legal Opinion

Gammarino v. Hamilton County Board of Revision

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided December 16, 1998No. 98-33PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Per curiam

Gammarino raises two contentions in this appeal. His first contention is that “Al Gammarino, Trustee” is entitled to represent himself before the Board of Tax Appeals. His second contention is that the BTA speculated that there is a trust, and since there is no trust he should be able to appear before the BOR and the BTA representing himself. We agree.

In its October 24,1997 show cause order, the BTA ordered Gammarino to file a response as to why the decision of the BOR should not be affirmed upon the authority of LCL Income Properties v. Rhodes (1995), 71 Ohio St.3d 652, 646 N.E.2d 1108…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Sharon Village Ltd. v. Licking County Board of RevisionOhio Supreme Court · 1997
  2. Lámar v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1964
  3. Hodgson v. DorseySupreme Court of Iowa · 1941
  4. LCL Income Properties v. RhodesOhio Supreme Court · 1995
  5. Mahoning County Bar Ass'n v. AlexanderOhio Supreme Court · 1997

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Lopardo v. Lehman Bros., Inc.District Court, N.D. Ohio · 2008
  2. S.E. Baseball & Softball Assn. v. Deerfield Twp. Bd. of TrusteesOhio Court of Appeals · 2021
  3. Francati v. FuentesOhio Court of Appeals · 2024
  4. Gammarino v. Hamilton Cty. Bd. of RevisionOhio Supreme Court · 1998
  5. Temple v. Temple, Unpublished Decision (1-13-2005)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2005

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

Powered by the Exa API