Legal Opinion

R.R.Z. Associates v. Cuyahoga County Board of Revision

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided August 24, 1988No. 87-1349PublishedCited by 99 opinions

1Per curiam

We will consider appellant’s first four propositions of law together.

Appellant argues that the board of revision can not be made a party to this proceeding under R.C. 5717.01 and thus may not present evidence to the BTA. Appellant further argues that after the county auditor establishes the property’s value, he is estopped from asserting any other value, and may only correct clerical errors and omissions. Finally, appellant argues that, since the board of education did not present any evidence to the BTA, and since the BTA disregarded the sale price that the board of education alleged was the…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Cardinal Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n v. Cuyahoga County Board of RevisionOhio Supreme Court · 1975
  2. Hawthorn Mellody, Inc. v. LindleyOhio Supreme Court · 1981
  3. Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Mahoning County Board of RevisionOhio Supreme Court · 1981
  4. Ratner v. Stark County Board of RevisionOhio Supreme Court · 1986
  5. American Steel & Wire Co. of New Jersey v. Board of RevisionOhio Supreme Court · 1942

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

3Cited by99 opinions

  1. EOP-BP Tower, L.L.C. v. Cuyahoga County Board of RevisionOhio Supreme Court · 2005
  2. American National Can Co. v. TracyOhio Supreme Court · 1995
  3. Walters v. Knox County Board of RevisionOhio Supreme Court · 1989
  4. Sharon Village Ltd. v. Licking County Board of RevisionOhio Supreme Court · 1997
  5. Witt Co. v. Hamilton County Board of RevisionOhio Supreme Court · 1991

94 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