Worthington City Schools Bd. of Edn. v. Franklin Cty. Bd. of Revision (Slip Opinion)
140 Ohio St. 3d 248
| Ohio | 2014Background
- This is a 2005 Franklin County real-property-valuation case involving a 205,430-square-foot warehouse-office building on 15.304 acres.
- The auditor valued the property at $5,650,000; Northpointe sought $4,700,000 and presented an income-approach owner’s opinion to the BOR, which adopted it.
- The BOE appealed to the BTA, which held the income-approach did not qualify as an owner’s opinion and was not probative, reinstating the auditor’s value.
- Northpointe appealed, arguing the income-approach qualified as an owner’s opinion and that the BOR’s adoption was improper.
- The court held that Northpointe’s owner’s income-approach testimony was competent and the BTA erred in treating it as non-owner evidence, and erred in reverting to the auditor’s value.
- The BOR’s valuation is reinstated and the decision of the BTA is reversed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Carroll’s testimony with the written income-approach constitutes an owner’s opinion | Northpointe: yes, Carroll provides owner-opinion evidence | Worthington BOE/BTA: no, lacking owner-opinion basis and market data | Yes; competent owner-opinion testimony recognized |
| Whether the written income-approach valuation was authored by counsel or Carroll | Northpointe: Carroll authored the valuation; not counsel | BOE/BTA: counsel authored the written valuation | Reversed; record shows Carroll authored the valuation or there is no basis to attribute to counsel |
| Whether Carroll, as an employee of an affiliate, may give owner-opinion testimony | Northpointe: allowed under owner-opinion rule | BOE/BTA: must be officer/shareholder or direct owner | Allowed; employee of a management affiliate may convey owner-opinion testimony |
| Whether the Bedford rule permits reverting to the auditor’s value when competent owner evidence exists | Northpointe: BOR’s value should stand, not revert | BOE/BTA: revert to auditor if owner’s opinion is not probative | Bedford rule applies; where owner’s evidence negates auditor’s value, revert is improper; BOR value reinstated |
Key Cases Cited
- Bedford Bd. of Edn. v. Cuyahoga Cty. Bd. of Revision, 115 Ohio St.3d 449 (2007-Ohio-5237) (limits reversing to auditor when owner’s evidence negates it)
- Vandalia-Butler City School Dist. Bd. of Edn. v. Montgomery Cty. Bd. of Revision, 106 Ohio St.3d 157 (2005-Ohio-4385) (board notes objecting to evidence affect burden of proof)
- Columbus City School Dist. Bd. of Edn. v. Franklin Cty. Bd. of Revision, 90 Ohio St.3d 564 (2001-Ohio-4758) (default valuation rules and burden of proof at BTA)
- Tokles & Son, Inc. v. Midwestern Indemn. Co., 65 Ohio St.3d 621 (1992-Ohio-223) (owner-opinion rule depends on witness’s knowledge not title)
- Smith v. Padgett, 32 Ohio St.3d 344 (1987-Ohio-271) (owner may testify on market value without expert qualification)
- Amsdell v. Cuyahoga Cty. Bd. of Revision, 69 Ohio St.3d 572 (1994-Ohio-197) (recognition of owner-opinion rule in real property valuation)
- WJJK Invests., Inc. v. Licking Cty. Bd. of Revision, 76 Ohio St.3d 29 (1996-Ohio-244) (owner-opinion rule and competency considerations)
- Tokles & Son, Inc. v. Midwestern Indemn. Co., 65 Ohio St.3d 621 (1992-Ohio-223) (owner-opinion rule depends on knowledge over title)