126 N.E.3d 80
Ind. T.C.2019Background
- CHH filed a Form 131 petition with the Indiana Board; disputes arose over the Board’s timing to issue a final determination and CHH’s right to a direct appeal to the Indiana Tax Court.
- The Tax Court previously dismissed CHH’s first direct appeal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction in Convention Headquarters I, holding the “maximum time” for the Board to act elapses 366 days after filing the Form 131.
- On remand the Board scheduled a March 1, 2019 hearing; the Assessor subpoenaed CHH’s 30(B)(6) witness for February 22 and sought related documents.
- CHH refused to attend the deposition and informed the Board it would file a second direct appeal once it believed the maximum time had elapsed (it calculated February 28, 2019).
- CHH filed its second direct appeal on March 1, 2019 at 12:02 a.m.; the Board proceeded with the March 1 hearing in CHH’s absence and the Assessor moved to dismiss the appeal as premature.
- The Tax Court held CHH’s appeal was premature under Convention Headquarters I because the maximum time expired March 3, 2019, so the Court dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and remanded to the Board.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Tax Court has subject matter jurisdiction over CHH’s second direct appeal | CHH: appeal was timely—maximum time elapsed Feb 28, 2019, so direct review was proper | Assessor: appeal was premature; maximum time had not yet elapsed when filed | Held: No jurisdiction; appeal premature under Convention Headquarters I (maximum time = 366 days, expired Mar 3, 2019) |
| Whether Assessor waived Rule 12(B)(1) challenge by late filing | CHH: motion untimely under Trial Rules and thus waived | Assessor: subject matter jurisdiction may be raised anytime; motion timely for jurisdictional challenge | Held: 12(B)(1) motion not time-barred; jurisdictional challenge may be raised at any time |
| Whether CHH could relitigate timing calculation decided in Convention Headquarters I | CHH: new calculation and authorities justify different date | Assessor: Convention Headquarters I preclusive; CHH did not seek rehearing or review | Held: Court applied res judicata and refused to reconsider timing; CHH bound by prior holding |
| Whether CHH’s failure to attend hearing barred extension of the Board’s timing | Assessor: CHH’s nonattendance prevented Board from extending time; CHH shouldn’t benefit | CHH: (implicit) nonattendance not determinative of timing for direct appeal | Held: Court noted issue but did not decide it; dismissed on other grounds (timing per Convention Headquarters I) |
Key Cases Cited
- Grandville Co-op., Inc. v. O’Connor, 25 N.E.3d 833 (2015) (court’s subject matter jurisdiction derives only from constitution or statute)
- Marion Cty. Auditor v. State, 33 N.E.3d 398 (2015) (scope of jurisdiction is defined by constitution or statute)
- Pivarnik v. N. Ind. Pub. Serv. Co., 636 N.E.2d 131 (1994) (standard for determining whether claim falls within a court’s granted authority)
- Georgos v. Jackson, 790 N.E.2d 448 (2003) (subject matter jurisdiction may be raised at any time, sua sponte)
- Convention Headquarters Hotels v. Marion Cty. Assessor, 119 N.E.3d 245 (Ind. Tax Ct. 2019) (holding maximum time for Indiana Board to issue final determination is 366 days after Form 131 filing)
- Indiana Alcohol & Tobacco Comm’n v. Spirited Sales, LLC, 79 N.E.3d 371 (2017) (res judicata bars relitigation of adjudicated issues)
- Indiana Dep’t of State Revenue v. Horizon Bancorp, 644 N.E.2d 870 (1994) (unambiguous statutes must be applied according to their plain meaning)