Vroman Ice Cream Co. v. Porterfield
270 N.E.2d 348, 26 Ohio St. 2d 157, 55 Ohio Op. 2d 307, 1971 Ohio LEXIS 500
Opinion
Appellant now seeks a review by this court of the decision below solely on a question of value, which is peculiarly a question of fact.
“It is not the function of this court to substitute its judgment for that of the Board of Tax Appeals on factual issues.” Citizens Financial Corp. v. Porterfield (1971), 25 Ohio St. 2d 53.
This court cannot find that the decision of the Board of Tax Appeals is unreasonable or unlawful, and it is, therefore, affirmed.
Decision affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Vroman Ice Cream Co. v. Porterfield, 270 N.E.2d 348, 26 Ohio St. 2d 157, 55 Ohio Op. 2d 307, 1971 Ohio LEXIS 500 (Ohio 1971).
270 N.E.2d 348 (Vroman Ice Cream Co. v. Porterfield) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Aluminum Co. of America v. Kosydar
377 N.E.2d 785 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1978)