Hibschman v. Board of Tax Appeals

Ohio Supreme Court

Hibschman v. Board of Tax Appeals

49 N.E.2d 949, 142 Ohio St. 47, 142 Ohio St. (N.S.) 47, 26 Ohio Op. 239, 1943 Ohio LEXIS 329

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedJune 30, 1943

Docket29497

StatusPublished

Cited by14 cases

This text of 49 N.E.2d 949 (Hibschman v. Board of Tax Appeals) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Hibschman v. Board of Tax Appeals, 49 N.E.2d 949, 142 Ohio St. 47, 142 Ohio St. (N.S.) 47, 26 Ohio Op. 239, 1943 Ohio LEXIS 329 (Ohio 1943).

Pincite

Opinion

By the Court.

The Board of Tax Appeals is not required to adopt the valuation fixed by any expert or witness. Citizens Building Co. of Cleveland v. Board of Revision of Cuyahoga County, 141 Ohio St., 47, 51, 46 N. E. (2d), 413; American Steel & Wire Co. of New Jersey v. Board of Revision of Cuyahoga County, 139 Ohio St., 388, 393, 40 N. E. (2d), 426.

“The burden is upon a taxpayer to prove his right to a deduction and he is not entitled to the full amount of deduction claimed merely because no evidence is adduced contra his claim.” Higbee Co. v. Evatt, Tax Commr., 140 Ohio St., 325, 332, 43 N. E. (2d), 273.

When considering net income as a factor in establishing the true value of income producing property, operating expenses estimated by a witness need not be given the same weight as actual expenses. Liquidation or distress sales of neighboring and comparable properties are not persuasive in fixing the true value in money.

The decision of the Board of Tax Appeals is not unlawful or unreasonable.

Decision affirmed.

Weygandt, C. J., Matthias, Hart, Zimmerman, Bell and Turner, JJ., concur. Williams, J., not participating.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI