Westhaven, Inc. v. Wood County Board of Revision

Appellants’ initial contention is that the BTA erred in accepting Davis’s appraisal because he did not provide all the facts and figures necessary to back up his opinion of value. We disagree.

Appellants cite as the legal basis for their contention Rollman & Sons Co. v. Hamilton Cty. Bd. of Revision (1955), 163 Ohio St. 363, 56 O.O. 337, 127 N.E.2d 1. The taxpayer’s expert in Rollman contended that a twelve-story building used for department store purposes was totally inadequate as a department store because of lack of floor space, and that for department store purposes, floors above the third…