Legal Opinion
Throckmorton v. Hamilton County Board of Revision
Ohio Supreme Court
Decided March 5, 1996No. 95-1051PublishedCited by 20 opinions
1Per curiam
Appellant first asserts that the BTA erred in its refusal to order an on-site inspection. Ohio Adm.Code Chapter 5717-1, which contains the rules of the Board of Tax Appeals, sets forth at Ohio Adm.Code 5717-1-11:
“(A) Unless made at a hearing or otherwise ordered, any request to the board shall be by written motion and shall be accompanied by a memorandum in support stating with particularity the grounds for the motion and citations of any authorities relied upon. * * * ”
A review of the record in this case fails to show any motion filed by appellant with the BTA requesting that it make, or…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Cardinal Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n v. Cuyahoga County Board of RevisionOhio Supreme Court · 1975
- Crow v. Cuyahoga County Board of RevisionOhio Supreme Court · 1990
3Cited by20 opinions
- Shinkle v. Ashtabula County Board of RevisionOhio Supreme Court · 2013
- Health Care REIT, Inc. v. Cuyahoga Cty. Bd. of Revision (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2014
- Hotel Statler v. Cuyahoga County Board of RevisionOhio Supreme Court · 1997
- Schutz v. Cuyahoga Cty. Bd. of Revision (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2018
- Valigore v. Cuyahoga County Board of RevisionOhio Supreme Court · 2005
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.