Bollenbacher v. Wayne Cty. Bd. of Commrs.
2012 Ohio 4198
Ohio Ct. App.2012Background
- Board Resolution on June 2, 2010 declared necessity of a sewer project near Batdorf Rd. and Scenic Heights and included a tentative $10,000-per-parcel assessment.
- June 30, 2010 resolution stated post-June 30, 2010 parcel changes would not be recognized for assessment calculations.
- Bollenbachers own residential parcel and co-trustees own an adjoining unimproved parcel in the project area and sought consolidated assessment.
- Board denied combining parcels and denied deferment of assessment under R.C. 6117.061.
- Bollenbachers sued for declaratory judgment, injunction, and other relief challenging the June 30, 2010 resolution as unlawful and seeking deferment relief.
- Trial court dismissed for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction; Court of Appeals partially affirmed, reversed in part, and remanded for further proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction over statutory challenges to the assessment. | Bollenbachers argue probate court exclusive for assessment appeals. | Board contends statutory remedies govern assessment challenges under R.C. 6117.09. | Partial jurisdiction: statutory challenges barred; constitutional challenges cognizable in trial court. |
| Whether the challenge to the June 30, 2010 resolution prohibiting parcel combination falls within probate court jurisdiction. | Challenge to parcel-merge prohibition not covered by 6117.09. | Alleged apportionment issues fall under probate court appeal procedure. | Statutory challenge barred; constitutional claim may proceed in trial court. |
| Whether the deferment denial is subject to judicial review. | Deferment denial should be reviewable. | R.C. 6117.061 provides final decision with no appeal. | Deferment issue dismissed; no appellate review available. |
| Whether the constitutional taking and due process claims could be reviewed by the trial court despite statutory remedies. | Constitutional taking claims are reviewable in court notwithstanding statutory procedure. | Statutory remedies must be pursued; some claims barred from injunctive relief. | Constitutional taking claims cognizable; remand for proper consideration. |
Key Cases Cited
- Domito v. Maumee, 140 Ohio St. 229 (1942) (constitutional challenges may be entertained despite statutory remedies)
- Wagner v. Messner, 136 Ohio St. 514 (1940) (statutory remedies may bar injunctive relief for apportionment challenges)
- Concerned Businessmen of Catawba Island Twp. v. Ottawa Cty. Bd. of Commrs., 115 Ohio App.3d 437 (1996) (proceedings to challenge assessments limited to probate court)
- Jones v. Chagrin Falls, 77 Ohio St.3d 456 (1997) (exhaustion of statutory remedies may affect relief but not necessarily jurisdiction)
- Smith v. Bd. of Cty. Commrs. of Highland County, 2000 WL 33226171 (2000) (constitutional challenges to assessments may be entertained where statutory remedies not applicable)