Because Cunningham satisfied these three criteria, I would hold that he was entitled to the irrebuttable presumption the statute prescribes. Therefore, I respectfully dissent from the majority’s contrary holding. {¶ 35} The key issue of statutory construction lies in whether the tax commissioner may make a finding that the taxpayer’s verification of out-of-state domicile is false. The majority holds that the commissioner may do so based on other information in his possession. But this interpretation contradicts the irrebuttability of the presumption that arises once a taxpayer has satisfied the three criteria, as Cunningham has done here. A contrary state of the facts can defeat a rebuttable presumption, but not an irrebuttable one. See Black’s Law Dictionary 957, 1377 (10th Ed.2014) (<HOLDING>). {¶ 36} I agree with the conclusion of the
recognizing this presumption recognizing added presumption recognizing irrebuttable presumption as synonymous with conclusive presumption which is a presumption that cannot be overcome by any additional evidence or argument because it is accepted as irrefutable proof that establishes a fact beyond dispute recognizing presumption and finding that it was overcome recognizing presumption