Worthington City School Dist. Bd. of Edn. v. Franklin Cty. Bd. of Revision

• Decision Date: 31 March 1999
• Docket Number: 97-2423,98-984,Nos. 97-1880,98-704,98-758,s. 97-1880
• Citation: 707 N.E.2d 499,85 Ohio St.3d 156
• Parties: BOARD OF EDUCATION OF WORTHINGTON CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT, Appellee, v. BOARD OF REVISION OF FRANKLIN COUNTY et al.; Ameritech Corporation, Appellant. MIRGE CORPORATION, d.b.a. Electrical Mechanics, Appellant, v. HAMILTON COUNTY BOARD OF REVISION et al., Appellees. BISSETT STEEL COMPANY, Appellant, v. CUYAHOGA COUNTY BOARD OF REVISION et al., Appellees. CLEVELAND HEIGHTS/UNIVERSITY HEIGHTS BOARD OF EDUCATION, Appellant, v. CUYAHOGA COUNTY BOARD OF REVISION et al., Appellees. (Two appeals.)
• Court: Ohio Supreme Court

Page 156

85 Ohio St.3d 156

707 N.E.2d 499

BOARD OF EDUCATION OF WORTHINGTON CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT, Appellee, v. BOARD OF REVISION OF FRANKLIN COUNTY et al.; Ameritech Corporation, Appellant.

MIRGE CORPORATION, d.b.a. Electrical Mechanics, Appellant, v. HAMILTON COUNTY BOARD OF REVISION et al., Appellees.

BISSETT STEEL COMPANY, Appellant, v. CUYAHOGA COUNTY BOARD OF REVISION et al., Appellees.

CLEVELAND HEIGHTS/UNIVERSITY HEIGHTS BOARD OF EDUCATION, Appellant, v. CUYAHOGA COUNTY BOARD OF REVISION et al., Appellees. (Two appeals.)

Nos. 97-1880, 97-2423, 98-704, 98-758, 98-984.

Supreme Court of Ohio.

Submitted Jan. 13, 1999.

Decided March 31, 1999.

In March 1995, Craig P. Treneff, an attorney, prepared and filed with the Franklin County Board of Revision a complaint on the assessment of real property owned by Ohio Bell. The complaint identified "Ameritech" as the owner of the property. "Ameritech" is a registered trade name of Ameritech Corporation and Ohio Bell. Additionally, the complaint identified Treneff as the complainant's attorney. Treneff, however, did not sign the complaint. Rather, Ameritech Corporation's property tax manager, Gregory A. Stein, reviewed and signed the complaint to verify the accuracy of the information contained therein. Stein is not a lawyer, but he reviewed and signed the complaint as directed by Treneff. The Franklin County Board of Revision, acting on the complaint, granted a valuation reduction for the subject property. However, on appeal, the Board of Tax Appeals ("BTA"), relying on Sharon Village Ltd. v. Licking Cty. Bd. of Revision (1997), 78 Ohio St.3d 479, 678 N.E.2d 932, found that the board of revision lacked jurisdiction to hear the complaint. Specifically, the BTA found that Treneff, a lawyer, had prepared and filed the complaint, but that Stein had engaged in the unauthorized practice of law by reviewing the prepared complaint and by signing it. Accordingly, the BTA reversed the decision of the board of revision and remanded the matter to that board to dismiss Ameritech's complaint for lack of jurisdiction. The cause is now before this court upon an appeal as of right.

Case No. 97-2423

Mirge Corporation, d.b.a. Electrical Mechanics, appellant, is an Ohio corporation. Mirge Corporation's vice president, Walter Higginbothan, prepared, signed, and filed with the Hamilton County Board of Revision a complaint on the assessment of real property owned by the corporation. Higginbothan is not a lawyer. The board of revision, relying on Sharon Village, 78 Ohio St.3d 479, 678 N.E.2d 932, concluded that Higginbothan had engaged in the unauthorized practice of law in having prepared, signed, and filed the complaint and, thus, dismissed the complaint for lack of jurisdiction. On appeal, the BTA affirmed the decision of the board of revision. The cause is now before this court upon an appeal as of right.

Case No. 98-704

The Bissett Steel Company, appellant, is an Ohio corporation that owns real property in Cuyahoga County. Barbara Bissett ("Bissett") is the president and chief executive officer of the corporation. Bissett owns seventy-six percent of the common shares and thirty-five percent of the preferred shares of the corporation. In 1995, Bissett prepared and filed with the Cuyahoga County Board of Revision a complaint on the assessment of real property owned by the corporation, seeking a reduction in the assessed valuation. The complaint bears Bissett's signature with her indicated "Title of Office" as "President" of the corporation. Bissett is not a lawyer. The board of revision, acting on the complaint, issued a decision not to change the assessed value of the property. On appeal, the BTA, relying on Sharon Village, 78 Ohio St.3d 479, 678 N.E.2d 932, found that Bissett had engaged in the unauthorized practice of law in having prepared, signed, and filed the complaint. Therefore, the BTA remanded the matter to the board of revision with instructions to dismiss that complaint. The cause is now before this court upon an appeal as of right.

Case Nos. 98-758 and 98-984

In March 1995, Melvin S. Ross and Daryl B. Ross filed with the Cuyahoga County Board of Revision several complaints on the assessment of real property, seeking reductions in the taxable value of parcels owned by them. The Cleveland Heights/University Heights Board of Education, appellant, is a school board. The school board's treasurer, Robert Burmeister, prepared, signed, and filed with the board of revision several counter-complaints in response to the Rosses' original complaints. Each of the counter-complaints bore Burmeister's signature with his indicated "Title of Office" as "Treasurer." Burmeister is not a lawyer. The board of revision granted the Rosses' requests for reductions in the assessed values of the subject properties. The school board appealed to the BTA. On appeal, the Rosses filed a motion requesting that the BTA remand the cause to the board of revision for dismissal of the counter-complaints. The BTA dismissed the school board's appeals for lack of jurisdiction, stating, in part:

"As a matter of law, Mr. Burmeister's preparation, signing and filing the counter-complaints on behalf of the [board of education amounted to the unauthorized practice of law]. It is established that the preparation and filing of a complaint pursuant to R.C. 5715.13 and 5715.19(A), or a counter-complaint pursuant to the authority provided by R.C. 5715.19(B), constitut[e] the practice of law. * * * [Citing, among other authorities, Sharon Village, 78 Ohio St.3d 479, 678 N.E.2d 932.]

"In the context of the present cases, the personal activities of Mr. Burmeiste[r] involved in the preparation, signing and filing of the counter-complaints on behalf of the Cleveland Heights/University Heights Board of Education, constituted the unauthorized practice of law by that person in his capacity as a corporate officer, not as an attorney at law. A corporate body cannot act through its corporate officers rather than through an attorney at law to maintain litigation on the corporation's behalf. Union Savings Assn. v. Home Owners Aid, Inc. (1970), 23 Ohio St.2d 60 [52 O.O.2d 329, 262 N.E.2d 558].

"The BOE's [board of education's] complaints were jurisdictionally defective. The BOE therefore never became a complainant before the BOR [board of revision]. Consequently, the BOR was never empowered to consider the merits of its counter-complaints. Sharon Village, supra.

" * * *

"The [BTA] finds and determines, upon the record and as a matter of law, that the BOE lacked a right of appeal to this Board from the decisions of the Cuyahoga County Board of Revision since it never became a party complainant in the proceedings before that Board."

The school board appealed to this court from the decision of the BTA, and also appealed from the BTA's decision denying the school board's request for reconsideration. Those two appeals (case Nos. 98-758 and 98-984) have been consolidated for our review. The cause is now before us upon appeals as a matter of right.

Bricker & Eckler, L.L.P., Charles F. Glander, Jerry O. Allen, Mark A. Engel, Columbus, Mary L. Robins and Mark A. Hamilton, for appellee Board of Education of Worthington City School District in case No. 97-1880.

Treneff & Williams and Craig P. Treneff, Columbus; Nicola, Gudbranson & Cooper and Matthew T. Fitzsimmons, Cleveland; Dean H. Bilton and John M. Brannigan, Chicago, IL, pro hac vice, for appellant Ameritech Corporation in case No. 97-1880.

Klaine, Wiley, Hoffmann & Minutolo and Franklin A. Klaine, Jr., Cincinnati, for appellant Mirge Corporation in case No. 97-2423.

Michael K. Allen, Hamilton County Prosecuting Attorney, and Thomas J. Scheve, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee Hamilton County Auditor in case No. 97-2423.

Wood & Lamping, L.L.P., and David C. DiMuzio, Cincinnati, for appellee Cincinnati School District Board of Education in case No. 97-2423.

Arter & Hadden and Karen H. Bauernschmidt, Cleveland, for appellant Bissett Steel Company in case No. 98-704.

William D. Mason, Cuyahoga County Prosecuting Attorney, and Timothy J. Kollin, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellees Cuyahoga County Board of Revision and Cuyahoga County Auditor in case No. 98-704.

Kolick & Kondzer, Daniel J. Kolick and John P. Desimone, Westlake, for appellant Cleveland Heights/University Heights Board of Education in case Nos. 98-758 and 98-984.

Kelley, McCann & Livingstone, L.L.P., Fred J. Livingstone and Robert A. Brindza, Cleveland, urging reversal for amicus curiae Mayfield City School District Board of Education in case Nos. 98-758 and 98-984.

DOUGLAS, Justice.

In Sharon Village, 78 Ohio St.3d 479, 678 N.E.2d 932, syllabus, we held that "[t]he preparation and filing of a complaint with a board of revision on behalf of a taxpayer constitute the practice of law." Thus, an attorney, or the owner of the property, must prepare and file the complaint. Additionally, in Union Savings Assn., 23 Ohio St.2d 60, 62, 52 O.O.2d 329, 330, 262 N.E.2d 558, 559, this court observed that "[a] corporation is an artificial person, created by the General Assembly and deriving its power, authority and capacity from the statutes." We held that "[a] corporation cannot maintain litigation in propria persona, or appear in court through an officer of the corporation or an appointed agent not admitted to the practice of law." Id. at syllabus.

I

In case No. 97-1880, Treneff, an attorney, prepared and filed or caused to be filed the complaint at issue. This satisfies the requirements of Sharon Village. The fact that Ameritech Corporation's property tax manager, Gregory A. Stein, reviewed and signed the prepared complaint is not fatal. Stein simply reviewed the prepared complaint to verify the accuracy of the information contained therein, and he signed the complaint for that same purpose at the direction of Treneff. Stein did not engage in the practice of law. Accordingly, we find that...