Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
5 Ohio opinions name it 2 courts 2008–2018 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Ohio courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Brown v. Levingreen2 sentences2018Thus, neither statute nor BTA rule requires the hearing that Greenway asserts was required. {¶ 24} Indeed, we have even held that despite R.C. 5717.02(E), which states that "upon the application of any interested party the board shall order the hearing of additional evidence," the BTA is justified in denying a hearing and summarily disposing of a claim when, by the nature of the claim, "there [is] nothing to accomplish by holding a hearing and taking additional evidence." Brown v. Levin , 119 Ohio St.3d 335 , 2008-Ohio-4081 , 894 N.E.2d 35 , ¶ 15, 23-24. 2018Thus, neither statute nor BTA rule requires the hearing that Greenway asserts was required. {¶ 24} Indeed, we have even held that despite R.C. 5717.02(E), which states that "upon the application of any interested party the board shall order the hearing of additional evidence," the BTA is justified in denying a hearing and summarily disposing of a claim when, by the nature of the claim, "there [is] nothing to accomplish by holding a hearing and taking additional evidence." Brown v. Levin , 119 Ohio St.3d 335 , 2008-Ohio-4081 , 894 N.E.2d 35 , ¶ 15, 23-24. | 1 | 2 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Ohio. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Bartchy v. State Board of Education
green
1 sentence2014Bartchy v. State Bd. of Edn., 120 Ohio St.3d 205 , 2008-Ohio-4826 , ¶ 43. {¶ 33} Appeals from a MBOA may be made to the county's court of common pleas or the BTA, and are governed by R.C. 5717.011: Upon the filing of a notice of appeal with the board of tax appeals, the municipal board of appeal shall certify to the board of tax appeals a transcript of the record of the proceedings before it, together with all evidence considered by it in connection therewith. * * * The board may order the appeal to be heard upon the record and the evidence certified to it by the administrator, but upon the ap | 1 | 2014–2014 |
Bloch v. Glander
neutral
2 sentences2011Corp. v. Zaino (2002), 95 Ohio St.3d 11, 16 , 764 N.E.2d 1015 , citing Higbee Co. v. Evatt (1942), 140 Ohio St. 325, 332 , 23 O.O. 543 , 43 N.E.2d 273 ; Bloch v. Glander (1949), 151 Ohio St. 381, 387 , 39 O.O. 216 , 86 N.E.2d 318 . 2011Corp. v. Zaino (2002), 95 Ohio St.3d 11, 16 , 764 N.E.2d 1015 , citing Higbee Co. v. Evatt (1942), 140 Ohio St. 325, 332 , 23 O.O. 543 , 43 N.E.2d 273 ; Bloch v. Glander (1949), 151 Ohio St. 381, 387 , 39 O.O. 216 , 86 N.E.2d 318 . | 1 | 2011–2011 |
Higbee Co. v. Evatt
green
2 sentences2011Corp. v. Zaino (2002), 95 Ohio St.3d 11, 16 , 764 N.E.2d 1015 , citing Higbee Co. v. Evatt (1942), 140 Ohio St. 325, 332 , 23 O.O. 543 , 43 N.E.2d 273 ; Bloch v. Glander (1949), 151 Ohio St. 381, 387 , 39 O.O. 216 , 86 N.E.2d 318 . 2011Corp. v. Zaino (2002), 95 Ohio St.3d 11, 16 , 764 N.E.2d 1015 , citing Higbee Co. v. Evatt (1942), 140 Ohio St. 325, 332 , 23 O.O. 543 , 43 N.E.2d 273 ; Bloch v. Glander (1949), 151 Ohio St. 381, 387 , 39 O.O. 216 , 86 N.E.2d 318 . | 1 | 2011–2011 |
Key Services Corp. v. Zaino
green
2 sentences2011Corp. v. Zaino (2002), 95 Ohio St.3d 11, 16 , 764 N.E.2d 1015 , citing Higbee Co. v. Evatt (1942), 140 Ohio St. 325, 332 , 23 O.O. 543 , 43 N.E.2d 273 ; Bloch v. Glander (1949), 151 Ohio St. 381, 387 , 39 O.O. 216 , 86 N.E.2d 318 . 2011Corp. v. Zaino (2002), 95 Ohio St.3d 11, 16 , 764 N.E.2d 1015 , citing Higbee Co. v. Evatt (1942), 140 Ohio St. 325, 332 , 23 O.O. 543 , 43 N.E.2d 273 ; Bloch v. Glander (1949), 151 Ohio St. 381, 387 , 39 O.O. 216 , 86 N.E.2d 318 . | 1 | 2011–2011 |
Department of Liquor Control v. Sons of Italy Lodge 0917
green
1 sentence2008Adams v. Aluchem, Inc., 104 Ohio St.3d 640 , 2004-Ohio-6891 , 821 N.E.2d 547, ¶ 12 , quoting Dept. of Liquor Control v. Sons of Italy Lodge 0917 (1992), 65 Ohio St.3d 532, 534 , 605 N.E.2d 368 . {¶ 29} Moreover, Ohio Adm.Code 5717-1-11(A) provides that discovery “may be permitted by deposition upon oral examination or written questions; written interrogatories; production of documents or tangible things or permission to enter upon land or other property; and requests for admissions” in accordance with the Rules of Civil Procedure, to the extent that they are not inconsistent with other BTA rul | 1 | 2008–2008 |
State ex rel. Adams v. Aluchem, Inc.
neutral
2 sentences2008Adams v. Aluchem, Inc., 104 Ohio St.3d 640 , 2004-Ohio-6891 , 821 N.E.2d 547, ¶ 12 , quoting Dept. of Liquor Control v. Sons of Italy Lodge 0917 (1992), 65 Ohio St.3d 532, 534 , 605 N.E.2d 368 . {¶ 29} Moreover, Ohio Adm.Code 5717-1-11(A) provides that discovery “may be permitted by deposition upon oral examination or written questions; written interrogatories; production of documents or tangible things or permission to enter upon land or other property; and requests for admissions” in accordance with the Rules of Civil Procedure, to the extent that they are not inconsistent with other BTA rul 2008Adams v. Aluchem, Inc., 104 Ohio St.3d 640 , 2004-Ohio-6891 , 821 N.E.2d 547, ¶ 12 , quoting Dept. of Liquor Control v. Sons of Italy Lodge 0917 (1992), 65 Ohio St.3d 532, 534 , 605 N.E.2d 368 . {¶ 29} Moreover, Ohio Adm.Code 5717-1-11(A) provides that discovery “may be permitted by deposition upon oral examination or written questions; written interrogatories; production of documents or tangible things or permission to enter upon land or other property; and requests for admissions” in accordance with the Rules of Civil Procedure, to the extent that they are not inconsistent with other BTA rul | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.