Local tax boards do not have the authority to dismiss a tax case for a party’s “failure to prosecute,” such as not appearing at a hearing, the Ohio Supreme Court concluded today.

The unanimous decision overruled a 1995 Ohio Supreme Court case that permitted these types of dismissals, and returned the appeal from an Auglaize County couple back to the local tax board to determine the value of the property in question.

Couple Questions Home’s Tax Valuation
Charles and Christina Ginter opposed the auditor’s 2012 valuation of their home in St. Marys. The auditor valued the property at $113,511, while the Ginters presented documents to the Auglaize County Board of Revision to support a lower value of $99,900.

The Supreme Court set aside the dismissal power provided in LCL Properties because that power is outside the authority given to the local tax boards by statute.

The Supreme Court set aside the dismissal power provided in LCL Properties because that power is outside the authority given to the local tax boards by statute.

The board of revision scheduled a hearing on May 30, 2013, and notified the Ginters. However, neither they nor anyone representing them showed up at the hearing. In a June 2013 order, the board dismissed the complaint because of their absence.

The Ginters appealed to the state Board of Tax Appeals (BTA). While the BTA determined that a board of revision can dismiss a complaint when the complaining party does not appear at a hearing, the BTA also decided that the local tax board exceeded its authority because of the evidence the Ginters had provided. The BTA reversed the decision and ordered the local tax board to value the property at $99,900, which was the sale price of the house in 2010. The local tax officials asked the Supreme Court to review the case.

Court Overrules Earlier Tax Decision
In 1995, the Ohio Supreme Court decided LCL Income Properties v. Rhodes, ruling that boards of revision could dismiss a tax case if the complaining party did not appear at a hearing to challenge a valuation.

In today’s per curiam opinion, the court pointed out that it had mistakenly relied in LCL Properties on cases involving jurisdictional defects, such as not filing an appeal within a deadline, to justify the dismissal in that case. The decision created “a new layer of litigation concerning the propriety of the board of revision’s dismissal, which distracts from the proper focus: the valuation of the property.”

The court has now set aside the dismissal power provided in LCL Properties because that power is outside the authority given to the local tax boards by statute.

“We remedy our error today by overruling LCL Properties,” the court wrote. “In doing so, we return to the statutorily prescribed path of requiring a determination of value whenever a complaint properly invokes a board of revision’s jurisdiction.”

“This change is procedural in character,” the opinion stated. “Taxpayers will benefit because they will be assured of obtaining a determination of value, even if that determination retains the auditor’s valuation. The result is that the issue of value will be front and center, as it should be, both before the board of revision and at the BTA.”

In this case, the court noted, the board of revision had jurisdiction, and the Ginters had submitted a complaint and further evidence to support their position. Because the board of revision dismissed the case, however, it never determined the value of the property. As a result, the case must go back to the Auglaize County Board of Revision to decide the appropriate property value for taxes, the court concluded.

2013-1710. Ginter v. Auglaize Cty. Bd. of Revision, Slip Opinion No. 2015-Ohio-2571.

Please note: Opinion summaries are prepared by the Office of Public Information for the general public and news media. Opinion summaries are not prepared for every opinion, but only for noteworthy cases. Opinion summaries are not to be considered as official headnotes or syllabi of court opinions. The full text of this and other court opinions are available online.

PDF files may be viewed, printed, and searched using the free Acrobat^® Reader
Acrobat Reader is a trademark of Adobe Systems Incorporated.