ZELL v. HAMILTON COUNTY BD. OF REVISION

No. 96-935.

78 Ohio St.3d 330 (1997)

ZELL, TRUSTEE, APPELLEE, v. HAMILTON COUNTY BOARD OF REVISION ET AL., APPELLEES; CINCINNATI SCHOOL DISTRICT BOARD OF EDUCATION, APPELLANT.

Supreme Court of Ohio.

Decided April 30, 1997.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Fred Siegel Company, L.P.A., and Annrita S. Johnson, for appellee Sam Zell.

Joseph T. Deters, Hamilton County Prosecuting Attorney, and Thomas J. Scheve, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee.

Wood & Lamping and David C. DiMuzio, for appellant.


Per Curiam.

The auditor did not file a notice of appeal, but in his brief as an appellee he argues for reversal of the BTA's decision. Sua sponte, the court strikes the auditor's brief.

The primary difference between this case and case No. 96-934 is that in this case the seller was the appellant at the BTA, while in case No. 96-934 the BOE was the appellant. Here, Zell, as the appellant, bore the burden of proving his right to a reduction in...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases