Cited by

Instead, the clear-error standard means that the finding below will stand unless it “is not reasonably supported by the evidence as a whole.” EOP-Nicollet Mall, L.L.C. v. County of Hennepin, 19 (quotation omitted); (“We have defined a clearly erroneous finding variously to mean palpably and manifestly against the weight of the evidence or not reasonably supported by the evidence as a whole.”).

In reviewing the Commissioner’s valuations, we have noted that “the assessed value of property for tax purposes is not relevant to the question of that same property ’s market value.” EOP-Nicollet Mall

The tax court relied heavily on our decision in EOP-Nicollet Mall, when applying the balancing test.

6; see EOP-Nicollet Mall, L.L.C. v. County of Hennepin , (allowing a court to use a protective order if needed).

Admissibility of tax assessments The Bhaktas principally rely on a tax case, EOP-Nicollet Mall, and a bankruptcy case, In re Slovak, 489 B.R.

of Hennepin, n.12 (Minn. 2006) (treating argument as not properly before court to extent that party “did not provide record citation”).

We review such rulings under an abuse of discretion standard, and a matter will not be disturbed on appeal unless the trial court abused its discretion, exercised its discretion in an arbitrary or capricious manner, or based its ruling on an erroneous view of the law.” EOP-Nicollet Mall, -75 (Minn.2006).

of Hennepin, (citation omitted) (internal quotation marks omitted).