Target Corp. v. Greene County Board of Revision

Target Corp. v. Greene Cty. Bd. of Revision, 122 Ohio St. 3d 142, 2009-Ohio-2492 (2009) · Supreme Court of Ohio · June 3, 2009 · No. 2008-1231

Summary

The Ohio Supreme Court affirmed the Board of Tax Appeals’ adoption of a $4.5 million valuation for Target Corporation’s large, owner-occupied retail store for tax year 2005. The court held that the valuation was supported by reliable and probative evidence concerning economic obsolescence and second-generation big-box retail comparables, particularly because the county presented no controverting evidence.

Holdings

  1. The BTA reasonably could rely on the second-generation sales comparables because the appraisal explained why first-generation rents and sales were not comparable, no first-generation sales were identified, and the county offered no contrary sale or lease evidence.
  2. The special-purpose-property doctrine did not require reversal because the county presented no evidence that Target's store qualified as special-purpose property, and Ohio precedent concerning the doctrine required deference to the BTA's fact-finding rather than second-guessing its supported valuation.
  3. The BTA's adoption of Target's appraised value of $4,500,000 was reasonable and lawful and supported by reliable and probative evidence.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the Board of Tax Appeals could rely on sales of big-box properties sold to second-generation users rather than first-generation sales or build-to-suit leases in valuing Target's property.
  2. Whether the evidence and the special-purpose-property doctrine required the Board of Tax Appeals to reject the appraiser's economic-obsolescence analysis and give greater weight to the cost approach.
  3. Whether the Board of Tax Appeals' valuation decision was supported by reliable and probative evidence and was reasonable and lawful.

Disposition

affirmed

Cases Cited (13)

  • Satullo v. Wilkins, 111 Ohio St. 3d 399, 2006-Ohio-5856, 856 N.E.2d 954, ¶ 14(followed)
  • Gahanna-Jefferson Local School Dist. Bd. of Edn. v. Zaino, 93 Ohio St. 3d 231, 232, 754 N.E.2d 789 (2001)(followed)
  • Am. Natl. Can Co. v. Tracy, 72 Ohio St. 3d 150, 152, 648 N.E.2d 483 (1995)(followed)
  • Strongsville Bd. of Edn. v. Cuyahoga Cty. Bd. of Revision, 112 Ohio St. 3d 309, 2007-Ohio-6, 859 N.E.2d 540, ¶ 15(followed)
  • Natl. Church Residence v. Licking Cty. Bd. of Revision, 73 Ohio St. 3d 397, 398, 653 N.E.2d 240 (1995)(followed)
  • Berea City School Dist. Bd. of Edn. v. Cuyahoga Cty. Bd. of Revision, 106 Ohio St. 3d 269, 2005-Ohio-4979, 834 N.E.2d 782(distinguished)
  • Cincinnati School Dist. Bd. of Edn. v. Hamilton Cty. Bd. of Revision, 118 Ohio St. 3d 263, 2008-Ohio-2450, 888 N.E.2d 411(distinguished)
  • Rhodes v. Hamilton Cty. Bd. of Revision, 117 Ohio St. 3d 532, 2008-Ohio-1595, 885 N.E.2d 236(distinguished)
  • Columbus City School Dist. Bd. of Edn. v. Franklin Cty. Bd. of Revision, 118 Ohio St. 3d 262, 2008-Ohio-2449, 888 N.E.2d 410(distinguished)
  • Meijer, Inc. v. Montgomery Cty. Bd. of Revision, 75 Ohio St. 3d 181, 661 N.E.2d 1056 (1996)(followed)

Showing top 10 of 13.

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Download CaseDownload Case DataDownload Case and DataDownload AI Instructions

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…

More from Ohio Supreme Court