BOARD OF EDUCATION OF VANDALIA BUTLER CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT v. MONTGOMERY COUNTY BOARD OF REVISION (2002)

 The judgment of this court in case No. 2001-0948 is limited to addressing appellant's Proposition of Law No. 4, which states:

{¶ 2} “A landlord and a tenant cannot file separate complaints against same property during the same interim period under R.C. 5715.19(A)(2).”

{¶ 3} The decision of the Board of Tax Appeals in case No. 2001-0948 is reversed on the authority of R.C. 5715.19(A)(2).

{¶ 4} The judgment of this court in case No. 2001-0949 is limited to addressing appellant's Proposition of Law No. 2, which states:

{¶ 5} “A landlord and a tenant cannot file separate complaints against same property during the same interim period under R.C. 5715.19(A)(2).”

{¶ 6} The decision of the Board of Tax Appeals in case No. 2001-0949 is reversed on the authority of R.C. 5715.19(A)(2).

{¶ 7} I concur with the majority's implicit determination that R.C. 5715.19(A)(1) requires complaints to be brought in the name of the owner.   However, I strongly disagree with the majority's implicit conclusion that this case amounts to multiple appeals within the statutory time period.   When one large  parcel is divided into many distinct plots, the right to appeal should be determined by plot, not by the parcel as a whole.   To do otherwise is grossly unfair to the actual users because of the multiple uses to which the land is put.   Accordingly, I concur in part and dissent in part.

MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, RESNICK, FRANCIS E. SWEENEY, SR., COOK and LUNDBERG STRATTON, JJ., concur. PFEIFER, J., concurs in part and dissents in part.