Sheldon Road Associates, L.L.C. v. Cuyahoga County Board of Revision
963 N.E.2d 794
Ohio2012Background
- Sheldon filed a December 2008 complaint challenging a June 2008 correction that increased the 2007 tax-year value and carried forward to 2008.
- BOR treated the complaint as relating to 2008, retaining the revised 2007 value for 2008; BTA held BOR lacked jurisdiction because the 2007 filing was untimely.
- BTA remanded to dismiss, but Sheldon argued BOR had jurisdiction to review 2008 and to consider the 2007 redetermination.
- Statute RC 5715.19(A)(1) authorizes complaints against determinations for the current tax year, including total valuation for a parcel on the tax list.
- Court held that the December 2008 complaint was timely as to 2008 and that the 2007 redetermination carried forward to 2008 permitted BOR to review both years.
- The June 2008 correction may have been clerical or fundamental; the threshold clerical-vs-fundamental issue must be resolved on remand.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| BOR jurisdiction over 2008 valuation review | Complaint pursued 2008 review; carried-forward 2007 value valid for 2008. | Untimely for 2007; no jurisdiction for 2008 through that route. | BOR had jurisdiction to review 2008 valuation. |
| Whether 2007 redetermination carried forward permits review of 2007 | Carrying forward the 2007 redetermination to 2008 allows review of 2007. | RC 5715.19(A)(1) limits to current-year determinations; prior-year review barred. | Under these facts, BORJurisdiction extended to both 2008 and 2007. |
| Clerical vs. fundamental correction in June 2008 | June 2008 correction may be clerical; permits correction and review. | If fundamental, only BOR can correct; otherwise limited. | Threshold clerical-vs-fundamental issue must be resolved on remand. |
Key Cases Cited
- Royal Financing v. Cleveland, 105 Ohio St.3d 404 (Ohio 2005) (untimely challenge to prior-year adjustments; remedial interpretation allowed in some carryover contexts)
- IBM Corp. v. Franklin Cty. Bd. of Revision, 2006-Ohio-6258 (Ohio 2006) (premature filings regarding amended prior years generally invalid)
- Knickerbocker Properties, Inc. XLII v. Delaware Cty. Bd. of Revision, 119 Ohio St.3d 233 (Ohio 2008) (year identified on complaint not required by statute for BOR jurisdiction)
- Nucorp, Inc. v. Montgomery Cty. Bd. of Revision, 64 Ohio St.2d 20 (Ohio 1980) (jurisdictional principles in review of assessments)
- State ex rel. Poe v. Raine, 47 Ohio St. 447 (Ohio 1890) (limits auditor corrections to clerical errors)
- Sisters of Notre Dame v. Montgomery Cty. Commrs, 31 Ohio St. 271 (Ohio 1877) (early clerical/fundamental distinction in valuation corrections)
- Kline v. Carroll, 96 Ohio St.3d 404 (Ohio 2002) (threshold for corrections and valuation adjustments)
- Springfield Local School Dist. Bd. of Edn. v. Lucas Cty. Budget Comm., 71 Ohio St.3d 120 (Ohio 1994) (clerical vs. fundamental error standards in corrections)
- Columbus City School Dist. Bd. of Edn. v. Franklin Cty. Bd. of Revision, 90 Ohio St.3d 564 (Ohio 2001) (burden of proof in contested-valuation proceedings)
- Meadows Dev., L.L.C. v. Champaign Cty. Bd. of Revision, 124 Ohio St.3d 349 (Ohio 2010) (remedial interpretation of statutory tax-valuation procedures)