Schwartz v. Cuyahoga Cty. Bd. of Revision (Slip Opinion)
143 Ohio St. 3d 496
| Ohio | 2015Background
- Property at 3259 Desota Ave, a two-family dwelling in Cleveland Heights, sought to challenge 2011 tax value.
- HUD acquired and sold the property in 2011 to Schwartz for $5,000; Schwartz holds title in trust.
- Cuyahoga County’s 2011 fiscal officer valuation was $126,800; Schwartz requested $30,000.
- BOR (Jan 25, 2013) retained the $126,800 valuation; Schwartz did not appear but testified via Victor.
- BTA (2013) affirmed, rejecting the $5,000 HUD sale as best evidence and deeming other sales data insufficient.
- Court reverses, holding the 2011 HUD sale price is best evidence and remands to use $5,000 as 2011 value.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is the 2011 HUD sale price the best evidence of value? | Schwartz argues HUD sale is voluntary/arm's-length and best evidence. | County/ BOR/BTA treat HUD sale as presumptively not value; require other comparable data. | Yes; BTA erred in rejecting HUD sale as best evidence. |
Key Cases Cited
- Cincinnati School Dist. Bd. of Edn. v. Hamilton Cty. Bd. of Revision, 127 Ohio St.3d 63 (2010-Ohio-4907) (HUD-like sales often presumptively not value but can be rebutted)
- Olentangy Local Schools Bd. of Edn. v. Delaware Cty. Bd. of Revision, 141 Ohio St.3d 243 (2014-Ohio-4723) (HUD foreclosures treated as forced sales; arm's-length rebuttal standard)
- Snavely v. Erie Cty. Bd. of Revision, 78 Ohio St.3d 500 (1997) (burden of proof in valuation appeals)
- Columbus City School Dist. Bd. of Edn. v. Franklin Cty. Bd. of Revision, 90 Ohio St.3d 564 (2001-Ohio-740) (burden to prove right to adjustment; not mere challenge to board valuation)
- Satullo v. Wilkins, 111 Ohio St.3d 399 (2006-Ohio-5856) (defer to BTA factual findings when supported by evidence)
- DAK, PLL v. Franklin Cty. Bd. of Revision, 105 Ohio St.3d 84 (2005-Ohio-573) (clarifies burden of proof in valuation disputes)
- Walters v. Knox Cty. Bd. of Revision, 47 Ohio St.3d 23 (1989) (considerations for determining voluntariness of sale)
- HealthSouth Corp. v. Testa, 132 Ohio St.3d 55 (2012-Ohio-1871) (standard for reviewing BTA decisions under R.C. 5717.04)
- Evans v. Dudley, 1 Ohio St. 437 (1853) (repeal-by-implication analysis for constitutional provisions)