Strongsville Board of Education v. Cuyahoga County Board of Revision

Strongsville claims the BTA abused its discretion in denying the motion for continuance, and that the BTA erred in its determination of true value which was based upon evidence which excluded the proposed expert testimony of Strongsville’s appraiser. Riverside’s cross-appeal asserts the erroneous computation of true value based upon the capitalization rate and the net income estimate used by the BTA.

While there is dispute as to the proper capitalization rate and net income estimate, the initial emphasis should be, as Strongsville has placed it, on whether the BTA abused its discretion in…