Chestnut Point Realty, LLC v. East Windsor
119 A.3d 1229
Conn. App. Ct.2015Background
- Plaintiff Chestnut Point Realty owned property in East Windsor and appealed the assessor’s valuation to the Board of Assessment Appeals; the board denied relief and mailed notice on May 1, 2013.
- Plaintiff filed an application titled “Complaint” with the Superior Court on June 28, 2013, with a return date of July 23, 2013, and delivered a citation/recognizance to the court.
- The marshal served the town with the citation and complaint on July 10, 2013; the return of service was filed July 17, 2013.
- Town moved to dismiss asserting lack of subject-matter jurisdiction because service occurred after the two-month deadline in General Statutes § 12-117a.
- Trial court granted the motion, concluding that a tax appeal is a civil action and is commenced by service of process; appeal timely only if service occurs within two months of the board’s mailed notice.
- Appellate court affirmed, holding § 12-117a’s two-month period is tied to commencement by service as in civil actions and that strict statutory compliance is required.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether § 12-117a requires service of process on the town within two months of the board’s mailed notice to commence a tax appeal | The two-month deadline applies to making an application (filing) with the court; filing the application with the court within two months was sufficient even if service occurred later | The statute requires the appeal be served and returned in the same manner as a summons in a civil action, so service must occur within two months to commence the appeal | The two-month period is tied to commencement by service; because plaintiff served the town after two months, the appeal was untimely and the court lacked jurisdiction |
Key Cases Cited
- Raines v. Freedom of Information Commission, 221 Conn. 482 (statutory right to appeal requires strict compliance)
- Branford v. Santa Barbara, 294 Conn. 803 (tax/administrative appeals are civil actions)
- New England Road, Inc. v. Planning & Zoning Commission, 308 Conn. 180 (writ/citation as prerequisite to commence civil action)
- Village Creek Homeowners Assn. v. Public Utilities Commission, 148 Conn. 336 (purpose and mechanics of citation/service)
- Southern New England Telephone Co. v. Board of Tax Review, 31 Conn. App. 155 (statutory appeals are subject to mandatory provisions)
- Danbury v. Dana Investment Corp., 249 Conn. 1 (municipal need for fiscal certainty supports short appeal periods)
- Cohn v. Hartford, 130 Conn. 699 (purpose of short statutory limitations on tax appeals)
- Boltuch v. Rainaud, 137 Conn. 298 (distinguishing special proceedings/applications from civil actions)
- Timber Trails Associates v. New Fairfield, 226 Conn. 407 (legislative history of § 12-117a)
- Jolly, Inc. v. Zoning Board of Appeals, 237 Conn. 184 (legislature presumed aware of judicial interpretation)
- Mary Catherine Development Co. v. Glastonbury, 42 Conn. App. 318 (prior treatment of when the two-month period commences)