2018 Ohio 1612
Ohio2018Background
- Lone Star (taxpayer) owned a restaurant property valued by the county auditor at $1,250,000 for tax year 2012 and sought reduction to $750,000 based on a later sale.
- Lone Star submitted certified deed, conveyance-fee statement, and escrow disbursement showing a $700,000 sale price; documents indicate an effective deed date of December 31, 2013 and filing stamps dated January 21, 2014.
- The Board of Revision (BOR) retained the auditor’s valuation, noting Lone Star presented no witness testimony about the sale. Lone Star did not call witnesses.
- On appeal the Board of Tax Appeals (BTA) treated the sale as effective January 21, 2014 (the conveyance-fee filing date), concluded the sale was more than 24 months after the January 1, 2012 tax-lien date, and ruled the sale was too remote unless Lone Star proved market/character stability.
- The Supreme Court of Ohio held the conveyance-fee filing date controls the effective sale date but reversed the BTA: a facially qualifying sale that postdates the lien date by more than 24 months still receives a presumption of recency; the opponent must rebut it.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the effective sale date is the deed date or the conveyance-fee filing date | Sale effective on deed date (Dec 31, 2013), making sale within 24 months | Sale effective on auditor filing (Jan 21, 2014), making sale >24 months after lien date | Effective date is conveyance-fee filing date (Jan 21, 2014) per HIN rule; BTA was correct on date calculation |
| Whether a facially qualifying sale that postdates the tax-lien date by >24 months loses presumption of recency absent proponent evidence on market/character | A facially qualifying sale (deed + conveyance + disbursement) establishes a presumption of recency and arm’s-length; burden then shifts to opponent to rebut | Sale is too remote; under Akron, proponent must show market/character stability when sale is remote from lien date | Akron’s 24-month rule applies to sales before the lien date in reappraisal years; a sale that postdates lien date still enjoys the presumption if facially qualifying; opponent must rebut |
| Whether Lone Star needed witness testimony at BOR to trigger presumption | Documentary proof (deed, conveyance-fee statement) suffices to trigger presumption without in-person witness | Lack of witness undermines arm’s-length showing; BOR/BTA may discount sale | Court reaffirmed that certified documents can trigger the presumption; absence of witness does not deprive proponent of initial showing; opponent bears rebuttal burden |
| Whether the case should be remanded to allow BOE to present rebuttal evidence | N/A (BOE sought remand for opportunity to rebut if court reverses) | BOE requested remand to present evidence it did not present earlier | Court found BOE forfeited belated claim and remand unnecessary; reversed and remanded for BTA to use sale price |
Key Cases Cited
- HIN, L.L.C. v. Cuyahoga Cty. Bd. of Revision, 124 Ohio St.3d 481 (holding that conveyance-fee filing date is the effective sale date for valuation purposes)
- Akron City School Dist. Bd. of Edn. v. Summit Cty. Bd. of Revision, 139 Ohio St.3d 92 (clarifying that sales more than 24 months before the lien date in a reappraisal year are not presumed recent absent evidence of unchanged market/character)
- Cummins Property Servs., L.L.C. v. Franklin Cty. Bd. of Revision, 117 Ohio St.3d 516 (burden-shifting framework: once proponent makes prima facie showing, opponent must rebut)
- Dauch v. Erie Cty. Bd. of Revision, 149 Ohio St.3d 691 (documentary proof can trigger presumption that a sale was arm’s-length and recent)