Instead, Howlett argues the district court was required to find the proposed facility would lead to decreased property values even in the absence of such evidence. She argues the district court was compelled to do so by Darnall Ranch v. Banner Cty. Bd. of Equal. , 276 Neb. 296, 753 N.W.2d 819 (2008). In that case, a property owner appealed a county board of equalization's determination of his property value to the Tax Equalization and Review Commission.
TJ 2010 Corp. v . Dawson Cty. Bd. of Equal. , 22 Neb.App. 989, 866 N.W.2d 93 (2015).Darnall Ranch v . Banner Cty. Bd. of Equal. , 276 Neb. 296, 753 N.W.2d 819 (2008) ; Brenner, supra note 7.JQH La Vista Conf. Ctr. , supra note 34.
Additionally, mass appraisal is widely used throughout the country. See, e.g., C.P. & Son, Inc. v. Bd. of Cty. Comm'rs of Cty. of Boulder, 953 P.2d 1303, 1304-05 (Colo. App. 1998) ; Walsh v. State Prop. Tax Appeal Bd., 286 Ill.App.3d 895, 222 Ill.Dec. 286, 677 N.E.2d 489, 493 (Ill. App. Ct. 1997); In re Johnson Cty. Appraiser/Privitera Realty Holdings, 47 Kan.App.2d 1074, 283 P.3d 823, 828 (Kan. Ct. App. 2012) ; Revenue Cabinet, Com. of Ky. v. Gillig, 957 S.W.2d 206, 209 (Ky. 1997) ; Darnall Ranch, Inc. v. Banner Cty. Bd. of Equalization, 276 Neb. 296, 753 N.W.2d 819, 827 (Neb. 2008) ; Appeal of Wagstaff, 42 N.C.App. 47, 255 S.E.2d 754, 756 (N.C. Ct. App. 1979) ; Gray v. Wyoming State Bd. of Equalization, 896 P.2d 1347, 1349 (Wyo. 1995). While our conclusion is not dependent on the practices in other jurisdictions, an examination of such practices demonstrates that our approach in endorsing mass appraisal does not make Wisconsin an outlier.
But the county assessor testified that he did not make any deductions for external depreciation, because he “did not see any or observe any.... [T]his is one the hottest locations in Sarpy County, probably the hottest.” See Darnall Ranch v. Banner Cty. Bd. of Equal., 276 Neb. 296, 753 N.W.2d 819 (2008).JQH acknowledges that it has the burden to overcome the county's valuation.
Decisions rendered by TERC shall be reviewed by an appellate court for errors appearing on the record of the commission.Darnall Ranch v. Banner Cty. Bd. of Equal., ante p. 296, 753 N.W.2d 819 (2008). [2,3] Whether a statute is constitutional is a question of law. Statutory interpretation also is a question of law, which an appellate court resolves independently of the trial court.
Decisions rendered by TERC shall be reviewed by an appellate court for errors appearing on the record of the commission. Darnall Ranch v. Banner Cty. Bd. of Equal., 276 Neb. 296, 753 N.W.2d 819 (2008). When reviewing a judgment for errors appearing on the record, an appellate court's inquiry is whether the decision conforms to the law, is supported by competent evidence, and is neither arbitrary, capricious, nor unreasonable.