2200 Carnegie, L.L.C. v. Cuyahoga County Board of Revision
135 Ohio St. 3d 284
| Ohio | 2012Background
- School board filed a valuation complaint for tax year 2006 seeking a $97,800 value increase on Carnegie property.
- Auditor notified Carnegie by letter April 27, 2007, but record lacks proof of mailing; Carnegie alleges it never received notice.
- Carnegie received BOR hearing notice under R.C. 5715.19(C) for August 30, 2007 and moved to dismiss, alleging lack of notice under 5715.19(B).
- Board of Revision conducted hearing and increased value to sale price despite Carnegie’s motion to dismiss.
- Common pleas court remanded on Sept. 6, 2008 to require notice under 5715.19(B) and continue proceedings; remand notice was issued.
- On remand, another hearing occurred and the BOR again increased value to the sale price on Aug. 6, 2009; Carnegie appealed again.
- Eighth District held the failure to give notice within 30 days barred jurisdiction; this court conversely held notification is jurisdictional but the 30-day deadline is not.
- Conclusion: court reinstates common pleas judgment, ruling the auditor’s initial failure to notify was curable by later notice after remand.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether 5715.19(B) notification is jurisdictional | Carnegie contends notification must be timely and jurisdictional | Board argues notification is not jurisdictional or the 30-day limit is not jurisdictional | Notification is jurisdictional; the 30-day deadline is not |
| Whether the 30-day notice deadline can be cured if not timely | Failure to notify within 30 days voids proceedings | Timing can be cured by later notice on remand | 30-day deadline is not jurisdictional and may be cured by later notice on remand |
| Whether failure to notify initially caused permanent lack of jurisdiction, or could be cured on remand | Lack of initial notice barred proceedings | Remand cures defects | Defect cured by remand and subsequent proper notice |
Key Cases Cited
- Knickerbocker Properties, Inc. XLII v. Delaware Cty. Bd. of Revision, 119 Ohio St.3d 233 (2008-Ohio-3192) (address issues analogous to notice defects; not always controlling where mailing evidence lacking)
- Salem Med. Arts & Dev. Corp. v. Columbiana Cty. Bd. of Revision, 80 Ohio St.3d 621 (1998) (notice defects can be remediable to permit proper proceedings)
- Hardy v. Delaware Cty. Bd. of Revision, 106 Ohio St.3d 359 (2005-Ohio-5319) (time for performance of official duties generally directory)
- Jones v. Farrar, 146 Ohio St. 467 (1946) (criteria for distinguishing mandatory vs. directory time requirements)
- Nucorp, Inc. v. Montgomery Cty. Bd. of Revision, 64 Ohio St.2d 20 (1980) (court warns against enforcing jurisdictional barriers not clearly mandated)
- American Restaurant & Lunch Co. v. Glander, 147 Ohio St. 147 (1946) (time for filing appeals linked to jurisdictional prerequisites)
- Worthington City Schools Bd. of Edn. v. Franklin Cty. Bd. of Revision, 124 Ohio St.3d 27 (2009-Ohio-5932) (compliance with R.C. 5715.19 treated as prerequisite for jurisdiction)