132 N.E.3d 77
Ind. T.C.2019Background
- CHH owns the JW Marriott in downtown Indianapolis and received a Form 11 increasing its 2010 assessment from $18.5M to $87M.
- CHH filed a Form 130 with PTABOA; PTABOA took no action. CHH then filed a Form 131 with the Indiana Board alleging constitutional violations; the Indiana Board did not hold a hearing.
- CHH filed two earlier direct appeals to the Indiana Tax Court (May 2018, March 2019); both were dismissed for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction because they were filed before the Board’s maximum time to act had elapsed; matters were remanded each time.
- After the Board failed to act within the maximum time, CHH filed a third direct appeal (June 28, 2019) asserting Equal Protection, Due Process, 42 U.S.C. § 1983, state constitutional claims, and market value-in-use issues.
- Marion County Assessor moved to dismiss the entire appeal (or alternatively CHH’s § 1983 claim) on procedural grounds: (1) petition failed to request a certified administrative record per Tax Court Rule 3(F); (2) § 1983 claim untimely; (3) failure to file a tort-claim notice; (4) § 1983 claim was not presented to the Indiana Board.
- The Court denied the Assessor’s Motion to Dismiss in full on August 16, 2019.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether failure to request a certified administrative record requires dismissal | CHH: Rule 3(F) does not apply because appeal is under I.C. § 6-1.1-15-5(g) (Board failed to act) and Tax Court reviews de novo | Assessor: Rule 3(F) requires petition to request certified record; absence hinders Court and warrants dismissal | Court: Denied dismissal; Rule 3(F) inapplicable to appeals under § 5(g); de novo review makes certified record unnecessary |
| Whether § 1983 claim is time-barred | CHH: Claim accrued in May 2017 when Assessor’s e-mail revealed comparative assessment facts; timely under discovery rule and Journey’s Account Statute after prior dismissals | Assessor: Claim accrued Oct 13, 2010 (Form 11); two-year limitations expired before filing in 2018/2019 | Court: Applied federal accrual rule + discovery rule; accrual in May 2017; prior timely appeals and non-merits dismissals invoke Journey’s Account Statute so § 1983 claim is timely |
| Whether Indiana Tort Claims Act notice is required for § 1983 claim | CHH: ITCA does not apply to § 1983 claims | Assessor: CHH failed to file required tort-claim notice before suit | Court: Denied dismissal; ITCA notice provisions are inapplicable to § 1983 claims (Felder preemption and Indiana precedent) |
| Whether § 1983 claim must have been presented to the Indiana Board before Tax Court review | CHH: § 5(g) appeal is de novo before the Tax Court; no administrative presentation requirement applies | Assessor: Statutes and regs require issues be presented to Board (so CHH should have amended Form 131) and de novo in context requires prior presentation | Court: Denied dismissal; § 5(g) means Tax Court conducts a de novo proceeding and petitioner may litigate claims in Tax Court without prior Board presentation |
Key Cases Cited
- Devbrow v. Kalu, 705 F.3d 765 (7th Cir. 2013) (statute of limitations for § 1983 claims assessed under state personal-injury limitation)
- Wallace v. Kato, 549 U.S. 384 (U.S. 2007) (federal law looks to state law for statute-of-limitations period for § 1983 claims)
- Sellars v. Perry, 80 F.3d 243 (7th Cir. 1996) (accrual for § 1983 claims when plaintiff knows or has reason to know of injury)
- Dique v. New Jersey State Police, 603 F.3d 181 (3d Cir. 2010) (discovery rule tolling of statute of limitations explained)
- Perryman v. Motorist Mut. Ins. Co., 846 N.E.2d 683 (Ind. Ct. App. 2006) (discovery rule applies to tort claims in Indiana)
- Munoz v. Woroszylo, 29 N.E.3d 164 (Ind. Ct. App. 2015) (purpose and application of Journey’s Account Statute)
- Eads v. Cmty. Hosp., 932 N.E.2d 1239 (Ind. 2010) (Journey’s Account requires original action failed for reasons other than plaintiff’s negligence)
- Irwin Mortg. Corp. v. Marion Cty. Treasurer, 816 N.E.2d 439 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004) (refiling permitted after administrative/jurisdictional missteps where dismissal was not on merits)
- Felder v. Casey, 487 U.S. 131 (U.S. 1988) (state notice-of-claim statutes preempted for § 1983 claims)
- Cantrell v. Morris, 849 N.E.2d 488 (Ind. 2006) (ITCA does not apply to § 1983 claims)
- Kellogg v. City of Gary, 562 N.E.2d 685 (Ind. 1990) (state notice-of-claim statutes inapplicable to federal § 1983 litigation)
- Vesolowski v. Repay, 520 N.E.2d 433 (Ind. 1988) (Journey’s Account requires original decision not on merits)
- Convention Headquarters Hotels, LLC v. Marion Cty. Assessor (Convention Headquarters I), 119 N.E.3d 245 (Ind. Tax Ct. 2019) (prior Tax Court dismissal for premature filing)
- Convention Headquarters Hotels, LLC v. Marion Cty. Assessor (Convention Headquarters II), 126 N.E.3d 80 (Ind. Tax Ct. 2019) (subsequent dismissal for premature filing)