Comcast of Little Rock, Inc. v. Bradshaw
2011 Ark. 431
| Ark. | 2011Background
- Comcast appeals a circuit court dismissal of its amended complaint seeking tax refunds and an illegal-exaction remedy.
- The complaints center on ad valorem tax assessments for 2005–2008 when the Commission’s Tax Division included Comcast’s intangible personal property in its tax base.
- Comcast argued § 26-3-302 exempted intangible personal property from ad valorem taxation.
- The Commission’s exclusiveOriginal assessment power over Comcast placed review and refunds within the Commission’s procedures, not § 26-35-901.
- The county court dismissed, holding lack of jurisdiction under § 26-35-901; Comcast appealed to circuit court.
- The circuit court held the matter did not involve a genuine factual dispute but a question of law, and dismissed for lack of jurisdiction; Comcast appeals.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject-matter jurisdiction for § 26-35-901 refund | Comcast (Pltf) argues § 26-35-901 is a separate action. | Bradshaw/Commission (Def) argue exclusive Commission remedy; § 26-35-901 not applicable. | Lack of jurisdiction; § 26-35-901 not applicable to Commission-determined assessments. |
| Illegal exaction claim viability | Comcast argues its illegal-exaction claim is independent of administrative challenges. | Defendants say claim seeks to evade Commission jurisdiction and is improper. | Claim not viable; illegal-exaction does not lie where tax itself is legal and challenged through assessment procedures. |
| Res judicata applicability | Comcast contends prior Commission decisions do not bar current claims. | Defendants assert res judicata bars collateral attack on prior assessments. | Affirmed dismissal on jurisdictional grounds; no need to reach res judicata. |
Key Cases Cited
- Weiss v. American Honda Fin. Corp., 360 Ark. 208 (2004) (general vs. specific statutes; precedence of specific remedies)
- Hambay v. Williams, 373 Ark. 532 (2008) (illegal-exaction not available when taxes themselves are legal)
- Pledger v. Featherlite Precast Corp., 308 Ark. 124 (1992) (illegal-exaction not available for challenges to assessment conclusions)
- Taber v. Pledger, 302 Ark. 484 (1990) (exemption interpretation not within illegal-exaction remedy)
- Western Foods, Inc. v. Weiss, 338 Ark. 140 (1999) (exemption/assessment issues exceed illegal-exaction scope)
- Clay Cnty. v. Brown Lumber Co., 90 Ark. 413 (1909) (historical view of erroneous assessment remedies)