Phelps Realty Co. v. Board of Revision

243 N.E.2d 97, 16 Ohio St. 2d 83, 45 Ohio Op. 2d 439, 1968 Ohio LEXIS 347
CourtOhio Supreme Court
DecidedDecember 24, 1968
DocketNo. 68-151
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 243 N.E.2d 97 (Phelps Realty Co. v. Board of Revision) 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
Phelps Realty Co. v. Board of Revision, 243 N.E.2d 97, 16 Ohio St. 2d 83, 45 Ohio Op. 2d 439, 1968 Ohio LEXIS 347 (Ohio 1968).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The Phelps Realty Company filed “a complaint against” a “valuation or assessment * * * upon the tax duplicates of the then current year [1966] * * * filed” pursuant to Section 5715.19, Revised Code.

[84]*84Phelps urges that the Board of Revision should have applied the statewide common level of assessment to the fair market value of the property rather than the Hamilton County common level of assessed value.

Section 5715.19, Revised Code, states in part: “Upon request of a complainant, the Board of Tax Appeals shall determine the common level of assessment of real property in the county for the year stated in the request, which common level of assessment shall be expressed as a percentage of true value.”

That language only contemplates giving relief against a claimed “discriminatory valuation” where such valuation varies from the common level of assessment of real property in the county for the year stated in the request.

There is no statute which provides for such relief where a valuation varies from the common level of assessment of real property in the state. This is not to say that the Board of Tax Appeals is not under a mandatory duty to provide by rule for a common level of assessment in all counties throughout the state. See State, ex rel. Park Invest. Co., v. Bd. of Tax Appeals, 16 Ohio St. 2d 85, decided today.

The decision of the Board of Tax Appeals is, therefore, affirmed.

Decision affirmed.

Taft, C. J., ZimmebmaN, Matthias, O’Neill, Doyle, Sohneidee and Beown, JJ., concur. Doyle, J., of the Ninth Appellant District, sitting for Hebbebt, j.

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

Related

Lunkenheimer Co. v. Bd. of Revision
322 N.E.2d 133 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 1974)
Cook Coffee Co. v. Hamilton County Board of Revision
286 N.E.2d 742 (Court of Common Pleas of Ohio, Hamilton County, 1971)
State ex rel. Park Investment Co. v. Board of Tax Appeals
242 N.E.2d 887 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1968)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
243 N.E.2d 97, 16 Ohio St. 2d 83, 45 Ohio Op. 2d 439, 1968 Ohio LEXIS 347, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/phelps-realty-co-v-board-of-revision-ohio-1968.