Hope v. Highland County Board
This text of 564 N.E.2d 433 (Hope v. Highland County Board) 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.
Opinion
Adherence to the provisions of the appellate statutes is essential to confer jurisdiction upon the BTA to hear appeals. American Restaurant & Lunch Co. v. Bowers (1946), 147 Ohio St. 147, 34 O.O. 8, 70 N. E. 2d 93. R.C. 5717.01 is specific and mandatory. It requires that notice of appeal be filed by the appellant both with the board of revision and with the BTA. Failure to comply with the appellate statute is fatal to the appeal. Austin Co. v. Cuyahoga Cty. Bd. of Revision (1989), 46 Ohio St. 3d 192, 546 N.E. 2d 404. See, also, Fineberg v. Kosydar (1975), 44 Ohio St. 2d 1, 73 O. O. 2d 1, 335 N.E. 2d 705; and Zephyr Room, Inc. v. Bowers (1955), 164 Ohio St. 287, 58 O.O. 67, 130 N.E. 2d 362.
The decision of the BTA is neither unreasonable nor unlawful and it is hereby affirmed.
Decision affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
564 N.E.2d 433, 56 Ohio St. 3d 68, 1990 Ohio LEXIS 1710, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hope-v-highland-county-board-ohio-1990.