Charles R. and Linda D. Wright v. Angela Banks, Assessor
753 S.E.2d 100
W. Va.2013Background
- The Wrights bought a 4,260 sq ft house in Jefferson County on June 23, 2010, for $234,000 in an undisputed open-market, arm’s‑length sale.
- The county Assessor later valued the property for tax purposes at $355,200 for the 2011 tax year using the Tax Commissioner’s CAMA/IAS methodology and comparable‑sales in the tax neighborhood.
- The Assessor excluded the Wrights’ sale from her comparable‑sales pricing, calling it an “anomaly,” and excluded three foreclosure sales.
- The Wrights appealed the assessment to the County Board of Review; the Board upheld the Assessor’s valuation.
- The circuit court affirmed the Board, stating the Wrights had not provided competent, clear and convincing evidence to rebut the assessment.
- The Supreme Court reversed, holding the circuit court was plainly wrong for failing to treat the recent arm’s‑length purchase price as substantial evidence of market value and remanded for further proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a recent arm’s‑length purchase price is substantial evidence of true and actual value | Wright: the June 23, 2010 purchase price ($234,000) is a substantial indicator of market value and must be considered | Assessor: purchase price was an "anomaly" and inconsistent with neighborhood pricing; valuation based on CAMA/neighborhood sales is correct | Held: Recent arm’s‑length sale is substantial evidence of true value and the court erred by failing to consider it |
| Whether the Assessor may exclude a recent arm’s‑length sale as an "anomaly" without investigation | Wright: Assessor offered no analysis, interviews, or investigation to justify excluding the sale | Assessor: relied on neighborhood sales analysis and CAMA methodology; sale aligned with foreclosure pricing and would distort neighborhood ratio | Held: Assessor cannot exclude such a sale without investigation and explanation; omission was improper |
| Burden of proof in contesting an assessment | Wright: presenting the recent sale sufficed as competent evidence to rebut the assessment | Assessor: taxpayer bears burden of proving assessment erroneous by clear and convincing evidence; assessor need not rebut | Held: While taxpayers bear the burdens generally, the undisputed arm’s‑length sale was competent and substantial evidence that the lower courts should have considered; remand for further consideration of all relevant evidence |
| Whether the Board/circuit court decision was supported by substantial evidence | Wright: exclusion of sale rendered decision unsupported | Assessor/Board: used mandated methodology and neighborhood sales producing a consistent ratio across properties | Held: Circuit court’s finding that Wrights offered no competent evidence was plainly wrong; reversal and remand for further proceedings |
Key Cases Cited
- Crouch v. County Court of Wyoming County, 116 W.Va. 476, 181 S.E. 819 (W. Va. 1935) (recent arm’s‑length sale is important evidence of value)
- Kline v. McCloud, 174 W.Va. 369, 326 S.E.2d 715 (W. Va. 1985) (purchase price in arm’s‑length transaction is relevant and on par with an appraiser’s testimony)
- Eastern Am. Energy Corp. v. Thorn, 189 W.Va. 75, 428 S.E.2d 56 (W. Va. 1993) (arm’s‑length sale strongly indicative of true and actual value)
- In re: Tax Assessment of Foster Foundation’s Woodlands Retirement Community, 223 W.Va. 14, 672 S.E.2d 150 (W. Va. 2008) (assessment will not be reversed if supported by substantial evidence; taxpayer bears burden to prove error)
- Mountain America, LLC v. Huffman, 224 W.Va. 669, 687 S.E.2d 768 (W. Va. 2009) (reiterating standards for review of tax assessments and taxpayer’s burden)