Case ID: ohio-st-3d_56/html/0068-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Per Curiam.\n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Hope, Appellant, v. Highland County Board of Revision, Appellee.
    [Cite as Hope v. Highland Cty. Bd. of Revision (1990), 56 Ohio St. 3d 68.]
    (No. 90-179
    Submitted September 27, 1990
    Decided December 12, 1990.)
    
      Jack I. Hope, pro se, for appellant.
    
      Rocky A. Coss, prosecuting attorney, and Ralph W. Phillips, for appellee.
   Per Curiam.

Adherence to the provisions of the appellate statutes is essential to confer jurisdiction upon the BTA to hear appeals. American Restaurant & Lunch Co. v. Bowers (1946), 147 Ohio St. 147, 34 O.O. 8, 70 N. E. 2d 93. R.C. 5717.01 is specific and mandatory. It requires that notice of appeal be filed by the appellant both with the board of revision and with the BTA. Failure to comply with the appellate statute is fatal to the appeal. Austin Co. v. Cuyahoga Cty. Bd. of Revision (1989), 46 Ohio St. 3d 192, 546 N.E. 2d 404. See, also, Fineberg v. Kosydar (1975), 44 Ohio St. 2d 1, 73 O. O. 2d 1, 335 N.E. 2d 705; and Zephyr Room, Inc. v. Bowers (1955), 164 Ohio St. 287, 58 O.O. 67, 130 N.E. 2d 362.

The decision of the BTA is neither unreasonable nor unlawful and it is hereby affirmed.

Decision affirmed.

Moyer, C.J., Sweeney, Holmes, Douglas, Wright, H. Brown and Resnick, JJ., concur.