Cleve Corp. v. Franklin Cty. Bd. of Revision
2017 Ohio 8090
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Property: a UPS distribution/truck terminal over 300,000 sq. ft., built and continuously used for UPS operations; characterized as a "special purpose" facility due to dock doors and unique interior configuration.
- Initial county assessment: $13,500,000; taxpayer Cleve Corp. sought reduction to $6,500,000 before the Board of Revision (BOR), which retained the original value.
- Cleve Corp. appealed to the Board of Tax Appeals (BTA); competing appraisals were presented and BTA relied heavily on precedent in a similar local appellate decision.
- BTA determined true value $13,670,490 and taxable value $4,784,670; Cleve Corp. appealed to the Tenth District Court of Appeals.
- Central legal question: whether the BTA erred in valuing the property and in treating it as a special-purpose property (thus permitting valuation based on present use rather than market-exchange value).
- Court of Appeals reviewed under the deferential BTA standard (BTA has wide discretion to weigh competing appraisals and assess credibility) and affirmed the BTA decision.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether BTA's valuation is contrary to the weight of the evidence | Cleve: BTA ignored taxpayer's appraisal and evidence, so valuation is unsupported | BOR/BTA: BTA properly weighed competing appraisals and relied on BOR appraiser; its factual findings are supported | Affirmed BTA; no abuse of discretion in weighing appraisals |
| Whether BTA failed to consider all evidence | Cleve: BTA improperly disregarded evidence and appraisal conclusions | BTA: considered both appraisals and exercised statutory discretion in assigning weight | Rejected; BTA considered evidence and its choice stands |
| Whether property qualifies as "special purpose" allowing present-use valuation | Cleve: Building is a typical open-plan structure; designation as special-purpose is improper | BTA/BOR: built for unique UPS needs, in current use and foreseeable future—fits special-purpose doctrine | Court affirmed special-purpose designation and valuation approach |
| Whether BTA's reliance on BOR appraiser was legal error | Cleve: reliance on BOR appraisal was improper | BTA: reliance permissible; appellate precedent supports deference to BTA credibility determinations | No legal error; reliance upheld |
Key Cases Cited
- RNG Properties, Ltd. v. Summit Cty. Bd. of Revision, 140 Ohio St.3d 455 (2014) (standard of review for BTA decisions; appellate courts do not retry facts)
- EOP-BP Tower, L.L.C. v. Cuyahoga Cty. Bd. of Revision, 106 Ohio St.3d 1 (2005) (BTA has wide discretion to weigh competing appraisals and assess credibility)
- Gahanna-Jefferson Local School Dist. Bd. of Edn. v. Zaino, 93 Ohio St.3d 231 (2001) (appellate courts will reverse BTA for incorrect legal conclusions)
- Am. Natl. Can Co. v. Tracy, 72 Ohio St.3d 150 (1995) (BTA factual findings entitled to deference if supported by reliable, probative evidence)
- Cuyahoga Cty. Bd. of Revision v. Fodor, 15 Ohio St.2d 52 (1968) (valuation by BTA not disturbed unless unreasonable or unlawful)
- J.M. Smucker, L.L.C. v. Levin, 113 Ohio St.3d 337 (2007) (abuse of discretion requires showing BTA action was arbitrary or unconscionable)
- Columbus City School Dist. Bd. of Edn. v. Franklin Cty. Bd. of Revision, 90 Ohio St.3d 564 (2001) (burden on appellant to present competent, probative evidence to change BOR value)
- Rite Aid of Ohio, Inc. v. Washington Cty. Bd. of Revision, 146 Ohio St.3d 173 (2016) (default rule: market-exchange valuation; present-use valuation barred except for special-purpose properties)
- Johnston Coca-Cola Bottling Co. v. Hamilton Cty. Bd. of Revision, 149 Ohio St.3d 155 (2017) (clarifies special-purpose doctrine elements: built for unique purpose, in good condition, present and foreseeable future use)
- Dinner Bell Meats, Inc. v. Cuyahoga Cty. Bd. of Revision, 12 Ohio St.3d 270 (1984) (Article XII §2 does not categorically forbid consideration of present use for valuation)