Legal Opinion
Cardinal Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n v. Cuyahoga County Board of Revision
Ohio Supreme Court
Decided October 15, 1975No. 74-1117PublishedCited by 136 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtWilliam B. Bbown, J.
At the outset we direct our attention to the jurisdictional question presented by appellant’s second proposition of law, which reads:
“Full compliance with Ohio Revised Code 5715.19 and 5715.13 is necessary to confer jurisdiction upon a county board of revision, notwithstanding that the complaint seeks an increase rather than a decrease of the taxable value of real estate. ’ ’
*17In support thereof, appellant relies upon Stanjim Co. v. Bd. of Revision, supra (38 Ohio St. 2d 233), a per curiam opinion, wherein this court stated, at page 235, that: “* * * [F]ull compliance with R. C. 5715.19 and…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Board of Revision v. FodorOhio Supreme Court · 1968
- Stanjim Co. v. Board of RevisionOhio Supreme Court · 1974
- American Steel & Wire Co. of New Jersey v. Board of RevisionOhio Supreme Court · 1942
- B. F. Keith Columbus Co. v. Board of RevisionOhio Supreme Court · 1947
- Equity Land Resources, Inc. v. Department of RevenueOregon Supreme Court · 1974
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by136 opinions
- R.R.Z. Associates v. Cuyahoga County Board of RevisionOhio Supreme Court · 1988
- EOP-BP Tower, L.L.C. v. Cuyahoga County Board of RevisionOhio Supreme Court · 2005
- Board of Education v. Franklin County Board of RevisionOhio Supreme Court · 2001
- Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Mahoning County Board of RevisionOhio Supreme Court · 1981
- Alliance Towers, Ltd. v. Stark County Board of RevisionOhio Supreme Court · 1988
131 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.