119 N.E.3d 245
Ind. T.C.2019Background
- CHH owns the JW Marriott in Indianapolis; the Marion County Assessor raised its 2010 assessment from ~$18.5M to ~$87M and mailed a Form 11 on Oct. 13, 2010.
- CHH filed a Form 130 with the county PTABOA on Nov. 24, 2010; the PTABOA took no action. In June 2017 CHH filed a Form 131 with the Indiana Board; the Board also took no further action.
- CHH filed a Petition for judicial review in the Indiana Tax Court on May 1, 2018, asserting constitutional and market-value claims and seeking fees under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983 and 1988.
- The Tax Court limited briefing to the threshold issue of subject matter jurisdiction and ordered simultaneous briefs; the Assessor briefly removed the case to federal court but it was remanded.
- The legal question centered on whether Indiana Code §§ 6-1.1-15-4 and -15-5 let a taxpayer bypass the Indiana Board and appeal directly to the Tax Court when the Board fails to act within statutory time limits.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Tax Court has subject matter jurisdiction under I.C. § 6-1.1-15 when the Indiana Board fails to hold a hearing or issue a final determination | CHH: §§ 15-4 and 15-5 allow taxpayer to seek judicial review once the Board's mandatory deadlines lapse (i.e., after Board fails to hold hearing) | Assessor: jurisdiction requires a final determination or hearing by the Board; CHH failed to exhaust administrative remedies | Held: No jurisdiction. "Maximum time" equals 9 months to hold hearing plus 90 days to issue determination = 12 months; CHH filed judicial petition before 12 months elapsed, so premature. |
Key Cases Cited
- Grandville Co-op., Inc. v. O’Connor, 25 N.E.3d 833 (Ind. Tax Ct. 2015) (explaining courts only have jurisdiction conferred by constitution or statute)
- Marion Cty. Auditor v. State, 33 N.E.3d 398 (Ind. Tax Ct. 2015) (scope-of-authority test for subject matter jurisdiction)
- Pivarnik v. N. Ind. Pub. Serv. Co., 636 N.E.2d 131 (Ind. 1994) (describing inquiry for subject matter jurisdiction)
- Hamilton Square Inv., LLC v. Hamilton Cty. Assessor, 60 N.E.3d 313 (Ind. Tax Ct. 2016) (statutory construction principles in tax context)
- Goldstein v. Indiana Dep’t Local Gov’t Fin., 876 N.E.2d 391 (Ind. Tax Ct. 2007) (jurisdictional defects render judgments void)
- State Bd. of Tax Comm’rs v. Ispat Inland, Inc., 784 N.E.2d 477 (Ind. 2003) (jurisdictional consequences of failure to exhaust administrative remedies)
- UACC Midwest, Inc. v. Indiana Dep’t of State Revenue, 667 N.E.2d 232 (Ind. Tax Ct. 1996) (de novo review by the Tax Court when statutory provisions permit)