Tеddy L. Wheeler, In His Official Capacity as Auditor of Pike County, Ohio, (et al.), Appellant(s)-Appellants, v. Joseph W. Testa, Tax Commissioner of Ohio, (et al.), Appellee(s)-Appellees.
Case No. 14CA853
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT PIKE COUNTY
RELEASED: 1/16/2015
2015-Ohio-188
HOOVER, P.J.
APPEARANCES:
Kevin L. Shoemaker, Dublin, Ohio, and William Posey, Keating, Muething & Klekamp, PLL, Cincinnati, Ohio as Special Counsel to Robert Junk, Pike County Prosecuting Attorney for Appеllant Teddy L. Wheeler, in his capacity as Pike County Auditor.
Michael DeWine, Attorney General of Ohio, Melissa W. Baldwin and Daniel W. Fausey, Assistant Attorney General, Columbus, Ohio, for Aрpellee Joseph W. Testa, Tax Commissioner of Ohio.
Robert E. Tait, Hilary J. Houston, and Steven L. Smiseck, Vorys, Sater, Seymour, and Pease LLP, Columbus, Ohio for Appellee Martin Marietta Energy Systems, Inc. a/k/a Lockheed Martin Energy Systems, Inc.
HOOVER, P.J.
{¶1} Appellant Teddy L. Wheeler, in his official capacity as the Auditor of Pike County, Ohio, filed an apрeal in this court from a decision and order of the Ohio Board of Tax Appeals pursuant to
I.
{¶2} Wheeler, as auditor оf Pike County, Ohio issued a personal property tax assessment against LMES. The Tax Commissioner of Ohio cancelled the assessment and Wheeler appeаled to the Board of Tax Appeals. The Board of Tax Appeals affirmed the decision of the Tax Commissioner, finding that the Tax Commissioner had approрriately cancelled the tax assessment at issue:
As such, we have determined that the commissioner appropriately cancelled the assessment in question. Accordingly, based upon our conclusions, we need not address any other contentions raised by the parties hereto. The final determination of the сommissioner is hereby affirmed.
Wheeler v. Testa, BTA No. 2012-2043 at 4 (August 7, 2014).
{¶3} LMES filed a notice of appeal in the Supreme Court of Ohio and the Board of Tax Appeals in accordance with
{¶4} LMES filed a motion to dismiss this appeal on the grounds that the appeal was filed first in the Supreme Court of Ohio and that Court has exclusive jurisdiction of the appeal.
II.
{¶5} The relevant provisions of
The proceeding to obtain a reversal, vacation, or modification of a decision of the board of tax appeals shall be by appeal to the supreme court or the court of appeals for the county in which the property taxed is situate or in which the taxpayer residеs. * * *
Such appeals shall be taken within thirty days after the date of the entry of the decision of the board on the journal of its proceedings, as provided by such section, by the filing by appellant of a notice of appeal with the court to which the appeal is taken and the board. If a timely notice of appeal is filed by a party, any other party may file a notice of appeal within ten days of the date on which the first notice of appeal was filеd or within the time otherwise prescribed in this section, whichever is later. A notice of appeal shall set forth the decision of the board appealеd from and the errors therein complained of. Proof of the filing of such notice with the board shall be filed with the court to which the appeal is being taken. The сourt in which notice of appeal is first filed shall have exclusive jurisdiction of the appeal.
(Emphasis added.)
{¶7} Wheeler argues that LMES‘s notice of appeal is improper because LMES does not have standing to apрeal the decision. Wheeler argues that the cancellation of the assessment is a “total victory” for LMES. As a result, LMES was not aggrieved by the decision and cannot challenge any portion of it. Because LMES did not have standing to appeal, Wheeler argues that the Supreme Court of Ohio‘s jurisdiction was never properly invoked. He argues that his notice of appeal filed in the Court of Appeals for Pike County was the first properly filed notice of appeal and we have exclusive jurisdiction over the appeal.
{¶8} Neither the case law nor the statute supports Wheeler‘s argument. The statutory provisions of
{¶9} Additionally, the Supreme Court of Ohio has ruled that for a party to have standing to appeal an issue, that party must be aggrieved by that error. The focus is
{¶10} LMES‘s situation is like that of the taxpayer in Christian Church of Ohio v. Limbach, 53 Ohio St.3d 270, 560 N.E.2d 199 (1990). There, a taxpayer who claimed entitlement to a tax exemption under two alternative statutes receivеd a favorable decision from the Board of Tax Appeals. The Board granted the exemption under one of the statutes,
{¶11} We find that LMES properly and timely first filed a notice of appeal in the Supreme Court of Ohio, thereby invoking that Court‘s exclusive jurisdiction. Wheeler‘s аrgument that LMES lacks standing to appeal and therefore failed to invoke the Supreme Court of Ohio‘s jurisdiction is meritless. As a result, we have no jurisdiction to hear this matter. LMES‘s motion to dismiss is hereby GRANTED. This appeal is DISMISSED. All other pending motions are hereby DENIED as MOOT. IT IS SO ORDERED. The clerk shall serve a copy of this entry on all counsel of record at their last known addresses by ordinary mail.
Harsha, J. & Abele, J.: Concur.
FOR THE COURT
Marie Hoover
Presiding Judge