In Re: 507-84 Associates, LLC v. Pike County Board of Assessment Appeals
663 C.D. 2017
Pa. Commw. Ct.Apr 23, 2018Background
- Taxpayer (507-84 Associates, LLC) owns property in Pike County assessed at an affirmed assessed value of $152,620 and an actual fair market value of $610,453 on the county record.
- Taxpayer appealed the assessment to the Pike County Board of Assessment Appeals; the Board denied relief after a hearing and the Taxpayer appealed to the Pike County Common Pleas Court.
- At the trial-court de novo hearing, Taxpayer’s appraiser (Fisher) testified to a $240,000 value (as of April 11, 2016); the Board’s appraiser (Romanik) testified to $465,000 (as of January 12, 2017).
- The trial court found the Board’s appraiser more credible but, without explanation, left the assessed value as shown on the county Assessment Card rather than adopting either expert’s valuation.
- On appeal to the Commonwealth Court, the Court concluded the trial court failed to state adequate reasons for departing from the experts’ valuations and remanded for a reasoned determination consistent with controlling precedent.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court erred in affirming the county assessment without explaining its valuation decision | Taxpayer argued the trial court should adopt or credibly reconcile the expert appraisal evidence supporting a lower value (Fisher: $240,000) | Board relied on its assessment record and its appraiser (Romanik: $465,000) and argued the trial court properly found its evidence more credible | Court held the trial court erred by failing to state reasons for adopting the Assessment Card value instead of either expert’s appraisal and remanded for a reasoned de novo valuation |
Key Cases Cited
- Green v. Schuylkill Cty. Bd. of Assessment Appeals, 772 A.2d 419 (Pa. 2001) (describes trial court’s de novo role, order of proof, and requirement that trial court explain valuation choices when experts conflict)
- Westinghouse Elec. Corp. v. Bd. of Prop. Assessment, Appeals & Review of Allegheny Cty., 652 A.2d 1306 (Pa. 1995) (trial court must state basis and reasons for valuation decisions, especially with competing expert testimony)
- Deitch Co. v. Board of Property Assessment, 209 A.2d 397 (Pa. 1965) (explains procedure shifting burden after taxing authority introduces assessment record)
- McKnight Shopping Ctr., Inc. v. Bd. of Prop. Assessment, Appeals & Review of Allegheny Cty., 209 A.2d 389 (Pa. 1965) (distinguishes credibility of witness veracity from reasonableness of expert opinion)
- Traylor v. City of Allentown, 106 A.2d 577 (Pa. 1954) (addresses weight given to oral expert opinion testimony)