Society Nat. Bank v. Wood County Bd. of Revision, 97-1058
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Ohio |
| Citation | 692 N.E.2d 148,81 Ohio St.3d 401 |
| Docket Number | No. 97-1058,97-1058 |
| Parties | SOCIETY NATIONAL BANK, Appellant, v. WOOD COUNTY BOARD OF REVISION et al., Appellees. |
| Decision Date | 22 April 1998 |
Page 401
v.
WOOD COUNTY BOARD OF REVISION et al., Appellees.
Decided April 22, 1998.
Arter & Hadden and Karen H. Bauernschmidt, Cleveland, for appellant.
Teaford, Rich & Wheeler and James R. Gorry, Columbus, for appellees Wood County Board of Revision and Wood County Auditor.
PER CURIAM.
Society contends that it met all the requirements of R.C. 5715.13 and 5715.19, and therefore had standing to file a complaint for [692 N.E.2d 150] a decrease in the valuation of the real property. We disagree.
The two statutes of primary importance when considering the standing of a party to file a complaint for a decrease in valuation with a board of revision are R.C. 5715.19 and 5715.13.
R.C. 5715.19(A)(1) provides:
Page 403
"Any person owning taxable real property in the county or in a taxing district with territory in the county * * * may file such a complaint regarding any such determination affecting any real property in the county * * *." (Emphasis added.)
R.C. 5715.13 provides:
"The county board of revision shall not decrease any valuation complained of unless the party affected thereby or his agent makes and files with the board a written application * * *."
The thrust of Society's argument is that it was a "party affected," within the meaning of R.C. 5715.13, because on the tax lien date, January 1, 1995 (see R.C. 323.11), it was the owner of the property listed in its complaint and because of its contractual obligation to credit the buyer with the prorated taxes for a portion of tax year 1995.
While Society's argument primarily focuses on R.C. 5715.13, we believe that our decision in Middleton v. Cuyahoga Cty. Bd. of Revision (1996), 74 Ohio St.3d 226, 658 N.E.2d 267, requires that consideration of this matter start with R.C. 5715.19. In Middleton we stated, "R.C. 5715.19 is a general statute providing who may complain about various actions taken by the auditor." (Emphasis added.) Id. at 227, 658 N.E.2d at 268. A review of the pertinent language of R.C. 5715.19(A)(1), which lists the persons and entities that have standing to file a complaint, shows only one classification for which Society might qualify as a complainant, and that is, "[a]ny person owning taxable real property in the county."
In Am. Restaurant & Lunch Co. v. Glander (1946), 147 Ohio St. 147, 34 O.O. 8, 70 N.E.2d 93, at paragraph one of the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Groveport Madison Local Sch. Bd. of Educ. v. Franklin Cnty. Bd. of Revision, 2012–1476.
...must own taxable real property in the county at the time the complaint is filed. Soc. Natl. Bank v. Wood Cty. Bd. of Revision, 81 Ohio St.3d 401, 403, 692 N.E.2d 148 (1998). The question here is whether a complainant's failure to accurately assert the basis for its standing on the face of i......
-
Diley Ridge Med. Ctr. v. Fairfield Cnty. Bd. of Revision, 2013–1432.
...authority to maintain a valuation 141 Ohio St.3d 153 complaint. Victoria Plaza ; accord Soc. Natl. Bank v. Wood Cty. Bd. of Revision, 81 Ohio St.3d 401, 403, 692 N.E.2d 148 (1998) ; see also Village Condominiums Owners Assn. v. 22 N.E.3d 1076 Montgomery Cty. Bd. of Revision, 106 Ohio St.3d ......
-
Toledo Pub. Sch. Bd. Of Educ. v. Lucas County Bd. Of Revision, 2009-0849.
...v. Cuyahoga Cty. Bd. of Revision (1997), 78 Ohio St.3d 459, 461, 678 N.E.2d 917; Soc. Natl. Bank v. Wood Cty. Bd. of Revision (1998), 81 Ohio St.3d 401, 403, 692 N.E.2d 148; Victoria Plaza Ltd. Liab. Co. v. Cuyahoga Cty. Bd. of Revision (1999), 86 Ohio St.3d 181, 183, 712 N.E.2d 751; Villag......
-
Fort Frye Teachers Ass'n, OEA/NEA v. State Employment Relations Bd., 96-2642
...entitled to First Amendment protection. In that case, the court stated, "[the] question of whether speech of a government employee is [692 N.E.2d 148] constitutionally protected expression necessarily entails striking 'a balance between the interests of the teacher, as a citizen, in comment......