September 2016 decisions

Petition Number

Issued

Petitioner Name

Issues

Petitioner Representative

06-010-14-1-1-10067-15

9/6/16

Kouns Farms Inc.

Value; burden; AG land calculation; methodology; conclusory statements

pro se

21-003-14-1-5-00085-16

9/6/16

Robert T & Deborah Jones

Value; burden; ratio study; location cost multiplier; sales comparison

pro se

35-005-15-1-4-00277-15

9/6/16

Jeffrey M Wertenberger

Value; burden; sales comparison; assessment comparison; income capitalization; cost approach; condition; sale of property

pro se

36-009-07-3-4-00001

9/6/16

Baird Mobile Homes Inc.

Value; Form 133; use of Form 133

Joshua G Anderson, Tax Rep

53-009-13-3-5-00001

9/6/16

Kevin Weldon

Standard deduction for homesteads; tax cap credit

pro se

54-030-14-1-7-00079-16

9/9/16

Bryan Snook

Value; business personal property; amended return not timely

pro se

71-029-15-1-5-00957-16

9/13/16

Ronald E. & Christine M. Milliken

Value; burden; Respondent concession; methodology; assessment comparison; prior appeal refunds

pro se

20-015-12-1-4-00169

9/19/16

Pyramid Properties, Inc.

Value; grade; purchase and construction costs; assessment comparison

Michael L White, Tax Rep

20-015-13-1-4-00694-16

20-015-14-1-4-00692-16

36-009-14-1-5-20344-15

9/19/16

Edwin D. Ferris

Value; advertisements for properties; purchase price; appraisal; list price

pro se

36-011-12-1-5-00001

9/19/16

R & D Fritz. Inc

Value; burden; appraisal

pro se

82-029-11-1-7-02728

9/19/16

Evansville Courier Company Inc

Value; business personal property; abnormal obsolescence claim

Joshua C Neal, Barrett McNagny LLP

82-029-13-1-7-05166

82-029-14-1-7-10007-15

18-032-15-1-5-00489-16

9/26/16

Tammy Johnson

Value; burden; purchase price; ;condition; listings; Respondent Concession

pro se

35-005-11-3-5-82422-15

9/27/16

Yvonne C Hiles & Von Inc

Value; Form 133; influence factors

pro se

35-005-11-3-5-82423-15

35-005-14-1-5-00054

9/27/16

Yvonne C Hiles

Value; flood zone; Respondent requested increase; sales comparison

pro se