FROM JUDGMENT ENTERED IN THE OHIO BOARD OF TAX APPEALS COUNTY
OF SUMMIT, OHIO CASE No. 2017-1706
MATTHEW YACKSHAW, and JOSHUA A. LEMERMAN, Attorneys at Law,
M. MORROW, Attorney at Law, for Appellee.
JO SHANNON SLICK, Attorney at Law, for Appellee.
TIMOTHY J. WALSH, Attorney at Law, for Appellee.
DECISION AND JOURNAL ENTRY
J. CARR, Judge
Appellants Stan and Tiffany Manolakis appeal from the
decision of the Ohio Board of Tax appeals ("the
BTA"). This Court affirms.
At the end of 2015, Mr. and Mrs. Manolakis purchased a home
on Arlington Road in North Canton via an online auction. They
paid $800, 000 plus additional fees for a total of $836,
299.00. The auditor assigned the property a value of $1, 498,
350 for 2016.
In February 2017, Mr. and Mrs. Manolakis filed a complaint
against the valuation of real property with the Summit County
Board of Revision ("the BOR") seeking a decrease in
value to $800, 000 based upon their recent purchase. Appellee
Green Local School District Board of Education
("Green") filed a counter complaint seeking to
maintain the value assigned by the auditor.
The matter proceeded to a hearing before the BOR at which Mr.
Manolakis testified. The BOR concluded that a decrease in
valuation was warranted and valued the property at $836, 300
for the 2016 tax year.
Green appealed to the BTA arguing that the auditor's
value should be reinstated because Mr. and Mrs. Manolakis
failed to meet their burden in the BOR to demonstrate that
the sale was an arm's-length transaction. Absent such
evidence, Green argued that the sales price could not be
considered the best evidence of value. The parties waived a
hearing. While the parties attached documents to their briefs
in the BTA, the BTA refused to consider them as the parties
had "waiv[ed] the opportunity to supplement the record
with new evidence at the [BTA] hearing."
The BTA concluded that Mr. and Mrs. Manolakis failed to
demonstrate that their purchase of the property for $836, 299
was an arm's-length transaction. Ultimately, the BTA
concluded that "the evidence submitted at the BOR
hearing was insufficient, and, therefore, the BOR's
decision to reduce the subject property's value to
reflect the auction sale price is unsupported." Further,
"[b]ecause there [wa]s no other evidence of value
contained in the record," the BTA was "constrained
to reinstate the subject property's initially assessed
Mr. and Mrs. Manolakis have appealed, raising four
assignments of error for our review. They will be addressed
together to facilitate the discussion of the relevant issues.
ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR I
IT WAS UNREASONABLE OR UNLAWFUL FOR THE OHIO BOARD OF TAX
APPEALS (BTA) TO REVERSE THE SUMMIT COUNTY BOARD OF REVISION
(BOR) (APPENDIX A) DETERMINATION THAT THE FAIR MARKET VALUE
OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS $836, 300 AS OF THE STATUTORY
VALUATION DATE OF JANUARY 1, 2016 WHEN ALL OF THE EVIDENCE
PROVES THAT IS THE TRUE VALUE OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY,
INCLUDING THAT WAS THE PRICE WHICH STAN AND TIFFANY MANOLAKIS
(MANOLAKIS) PAID FOR THE PROPERTY LESS THAN TWO MONTHS BEFORE
THE STATUTORY VALUATION DATE AT A PUBLIC AUCTION ...