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

  1. Cardinal Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n v. Cuyahoga County Board of RevisionOhio Supreme Court · 1975
  2. Crow v. Cuyahoga County Board of RevisionOhio Supreme Court · 1990

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. Shinkle v. Ashtabula County Board of RevisionOhio Supreme Court · 2013
  2. Health Care REIT, Inc. v. Cuyahoga Cty. Bd. of Revision (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2014
  3. Hotel Statler v. Cuyahoga County Board of RevisionOhio Supreme Court · 1997
  4. Schutz v. Cuyahoga Cty. Bd. of Revision (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2018
  5. Valigore v. Cuyahoga County Board of RevisionOhio Supreme Court · 2005

15 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