Opinion
No. 35134
Decided November 6, 1957.
Taxation — Application for exemption from and remission of taxes — Jurisdiction of Board of Tax Appeals — Determination of validity of taxes — Filled-in land along Lake Erie — Title conveyed by state to city — Public use — Appeal — Questions of fact — Court will not substitute its judgment for that of board.
APPEAL from the Board of Tax Appeals.
The city of Cleveland and the state of Ohio made applications to the Board of Tax Appeals for the remission of and exemption from real property taxes, and the board denied the applications.
On appeal from that decision, this court, in State v. Carney, Aud., 166 Ohio St. 81, 139 N.E.2d 339, reversed the decision of the board, holding that the board had jurisdiction to determine whether the taxes were illegally assessed, and remanded the cause to the board for further proceedings.
Upon reconsideration, the board remitted the real property taxes in question, finding that such taxes were levied and assessed against the littoral rights of the upland owners; that such rights, in and of themselves, are not subject to real property taxation in Ohio; that the taxes were illegally assessed; and that the taxes and penalties are such as may be remitted by the board under the provisions of Section 5715.39, Revised Code.
As to the applications for exemption of real property filed by the city of Cleveland for the tax year 1954, the board ordered that all parcels of real property listed in the applications, title to which is in the city, be exempted from taxation for the year 1954, as public property used exclusively for a public purpose, under the pertinent provisions of Section 5709.08, Revised Code.
Mr. John T. Corrigan, prosecuting attorney, Mr. George W. Leddon and Mr. A.M. Braun, for appellant.
Mr. Ralph S. Locher, director of law, Mr. Joseph H. Crowley and Mr. Richard O. Horn, for appellee city of Cleveland.
Mr. William Saxbe, attorney general, Mr. Hugh A. Sherer and Mr. John M. Tobin, for appellee state of Ohio.
It is not the function of this court to substitute its judgment for that of the Board of Tax Appeals on factual issues but only to determine from an examination of the entire record whether the decision reached by the board is unreasonable or unlawful. From an examination of the entire record, this court is unable to find that the decision of the board is unreasonable or unlawful. The decision is, therefore, affirmed.
Decision affirmed.
WEYGANDT, C.J., ZIMMERMAN, STEWART, BELL, TAFT, MATTHIAS and HERBERT, JJ., concur.