Case Title: Menlo Realty Income Properties 28, L.L.C. v. Franklin Cty. Bd. of Revision

Citation: 2018-Ohio-4305

Docket Number: 2017-0072

State: ohio

Court: Ohio Supreme Court

Date: 2018-10-25T00:00:00Z

Document:
[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as 
Menlo Realty Income Properties 28, L.L.C. v. Franklin Cty. Bd. of Revision, Slip Opinion No. 
2018-Ohio-4305.] 
 
 
 
NOTICE 
This slip opinion is subject to formal revision before it is published in an 
advance sheet of the Ohio Official Reports.  Readers are requested to 
promptly notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of Ohio, 65 
South Front Street, Columbus, Ohio 43215, of any typographical or other 
formal errors in the opinion, in order that corrections may be made before 
the opinion is published. 
 
 
SLIP OPINION NO. 2018-OHIO-4305 
MENLO REALTY INCOME PROPERTIES 28, L.L.C., APPELLANT, v. FRANKLIN 
COUNTY BOARD OF REVISION ET AL., APPELLEES. 
[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it 
may be cited as Menlo Realty Income Properties 28, L.L.C. v. Franklin Cty. Bd. 
of Revision, Slip Opinion No. 2018-Ohio-4305.] 
Taxation—Real-property valuation—Board of Tax Appeals failed to consider 
property owner’s appraisal evidence—Decision of Board of Tax Appeals 
vacated and cause remanded. 
(No. 2017-0072—Submitted July 17, 2018—Decided October 25, 2018.) 
APPEAL from the Board of Tax Appeals, No. 2016-445. 
__________________ 
Per Curiam. 
{¶ 1} Because the Board of Tax Appeals (“BTA”) did not fully consider the 
appraisal evidence presented by appellant, Menlo Realty Income Properties 28, 
L.L.C., we vacate the decision of the BTA and remand the case for further 
proceedings on the authority of Terraza 8, L.L.C. v. Franklin Cty. Bd. of Revision, 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
 
 
2
150 Ohio St.3d 527, 2017-Ohio-4415, 83 N.E.3d 916, and Spirit Master Funding IX, 
L.L.C. v. Cuyahoga Cty. Bd. of Revision, ___ Ohio St.3d ___, 2018-Ohio-4302, ___ 
N.E.3d ___.  On remand, the parties shall not be permitted to present new evidence.  
See Bronx Park S. III Lancaster, L.L.C. v. Fairfield Cty. Bd. of Revision, ___ Ohio 
St.3d ___, 2018-Ohio-1589, ___ N.E.3d ___, ¶ 13. 
Decision vacated 
and cause remanded. 
O’CONNOR, C.J., and O’DONNELL, KENNEDY, FRENCH, FISCHER, DEWINE, 
and DEGENARO, JJ., concur. 
_________________ 
Sleggs, Danzinger & Gill Co., L.P.A., and Todd W. Sleggs, for appellant. 
Rich & Gillis Law Group, L.L.C., Mark H. Gillis, Karol C. Fox, Kelly A. 
Gorry, Kimberly G. Allison, and Richelle L. Thoburn, for appellee Columbus City 
School District Board of Education. 
_________________