316 So.3d 45
La. Ct. App.2020Background
- Acadian owns an eight-acre parcel assessed as bona fide timberland (use-value) since 2008; DOTD expropriated ~1 acre in 2013 and the assessor later discovered an expropriation deed showing a higher sale price.
- In March 2015 the St. Tammany Parish Assessor reassessed the parcel for tax years 2012–2014 and imposed penalties under La. R.S. 47:2306 for alleged false certification or failure to notify loss of timberland eligibility.
- Acadian filed a legality challenge (July 17, 2015), paid the disputed 2014 taxes under protest within 30 days of suit, but did not pay the 2012 reassessed taxes/penalties.
- The district court granted the Assessor’s cross-motion for summary judgment and dismissed Acadian; this court previously vacated an earlier judgment for lack of 30-day notice and remanded.
- On appeal the assessor’s prescription exception was raised for the first time; the appellate court denied it because supporting evidence was not in the record.
- The appellate court found the district court improperly weighed competing evidence (timber use vs. commercial development intent), held a genuine issue of material fact exists about classification/intent, reversed the summary judgment, and remanded for further proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Prescription of Acadian’s suit (La. R.S. 47:2134) | Acadian timely paid disputed 2014 taxes under protest and filed suit within 30 days | Assessor contends claims are prescribed | Denied—prescription not evident on face; assessor failed to produce record evidence on appeal to prove prescription |
| Proper classification: bona fide timberland vs commercial use | Parcel qualified as bona fide timberland; use-value assessment valid | Property was intended and used for commercial development; planting was cosmetic; reassessment proper | Reversed—genuine issue of material fact exists about use/intended use; trial court improperly weighed evidence; remand for fact finding |
| Authority to reassess/penalize retroactively for 2012 under La. R.S. 47:2306 | Acadian argues assessor cannot retroactively change prior use-value assessment for 2012; no protested payment was made for 2012 | Assessor imposed penalties for false certification/failure to notify | Pretermitted by appellate court’s reversal of summary judgment; remand required to resolve factual classification issues before deciding legal consequences |
| Admissibility / reliance on exhibits and hearsay at summary judgment | Acadian contends trial court relied on hearsay and unauthenticated documents and improperly made credibility determinations | Assessor submitted permits, surveys, realtor correspondence and prior-assessor letter to support commercial-intent theory | Appellate court held trial court improperly weighed and made credibility findings on competing evidence; reversed and remanded. Concurring opinion emphasized several assessor exhibits were unauthenticated and should not have been considered |
Key Cases Cited
- Acadian Properties Northshore, L.L.C. v. Fitzmorris, 234 So. 3d 927 (La. App. 1 Cir. 2017) (prior remand for procedural notice defect)
- Pottinger v. Price, 289 So. 3d 1047 (La. App. 1 Cir. 2019) (standards for appellate de novo review of summary judgment)
- Wooley v. Lucksinger, 61 So. 3d 507 (La. 2011) (appellate review addresses judgment, not reasons)
- Smith v. Our Lady of the Lake Hosp., Inc., 639 So. 2d 730 (La. 1994) (definition of genuine issue and material fact at summary judgment)
- Pumphery v. Harris, 111 So. 3d 86 (La. App. 1 Cir. 2012) (summary judgment: affiants presumed credible)
- Allen v. State, 934 So. 2d 172 (La. App. 1 Cir. 2006) (burden when prescription is evident on pleadings)