Ross v. Cuyahoga County Board of Revision

51 N.E.3d 578, 146 Ohio St. 3d 12, 2015 Ohio 3443
Ohio Supreme Court·Decided August 28, 2015·No. No. 2013-1951·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

{¶ 1} The decision of the Board of Tax Appeals (“BTA”) is vacated and the cause is remanded for further proceedings in light of Schwartz v. Cuyahoga Cty. Bd. of Revision, 143 Ohio St.3d 496, 2015-Ohio-3431, 39 N.E.3d 1223, which addressed a property located in close proximity to the property at issue here and which held that a recent arm’s-length sale price of $5,000 was the value of the property. On remand, the BTA shall consider the $5,000 válue of the Schwartz property along with all the other evidence currently in the record to determine the value of the property at issue.

Decision vacated and cause remanded.

O’Connor, C.J., and Pfeifer, O’Donnell, Lanzinger, and O’Neill, JJ., concur. Kennedy and French, JJ., dissent.

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

Ross v. Cuyahoga County Board of Revision, 51 N.E.3d 578, 146 Ohio St. 3d 12, 2015 Ohio 3443 (Ohio 2015).

51 N.E.3d 578 (Ross v. Cuyahoga County Board of Revision) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Schwartz v. Cuyahoga Cty. Bd. of Revision (Slip Opinion)
2015 Ohio 3431 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2015)