282 So.3d 180
La.2019Background
- In 2015 Ulrich and Alleman purchased residential solar systems expecting a $12,500 Louisiana income tax credit under La. Rev. Stat. 47:6030.
- Act 131 (2015) amended §47:6030 to impose an aggregate, first‑come/first‑served cap on solar tax credits ($25M total; $10M fiscal years 2015–16 and 2016–17, later $5M in subsequent years), and plaintiffs’ claims were denied or reduced as the cap was exhausted.
- Plaintiffs appealed to the Board of Tax Appeals and filed a class action in district court seeking a declaratory judgment that Act 131 was unconstitutional as retroactive deprivation of vested property rights and as impairing private contracts; district court declared Act 131 unconstitutional.
- Meanwhile the Legislature enacted Act 413 (2017), which (inter alia) provided that taxpayers whose claims were denied under the cap would be granted the full credit and set out installment payment mechanisms over several fiscal years.
- The Department of Revenue raised exceptions including mootness; the Supreme Court considered whether Act 413 cured the alleged constitutional injury and thus rendered the controversy non‑justiciable.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the case is moot / justiciable after Act 413 | Ulrich: Act 413 does not fully restore plaintiffs to original position because payments are delayed and plaintiffs incurred financing costs; controversy remains live | Robinson: Act 413 cures the injury by mandating full payment of denied credits and therefore the case is moot | Held: Case is moot; Act 413 cured the complained‑of deprivation and neither mootness exception applies |
| Whether Act 131 retroactively deprived taxpayers of a vested property right in the credit | Ulrich: §47:6030 conferred a vested property right in the credit upon purchase/installation, and Act 131 retroactively took that right away | Robinson: Act 131 did not leave a vested right, and in any event Act 413 remedied the denial | Held: Court did not reach merits because mootness disposes of the case (no justiciable controversy) |
| Whether Act 131 substantially impaired private contracts (contracts clause) | Ulrich: Act 131 impaired contracts between state and taxpayers and between taxpayers and installers/financers | Robinson: Any effect on contracts is incidental and not destructive; plus remedied by Act 413 | Held: Not reached due to mootness dismissal |
| Whether collateral‑consequences or voluntary‑cessation exceptions to mootness apply | Ulrich: Plaintiffs have collateral monetary harms (interest/loan costs) and risk of reenactment supports exception | Robinson: Legislature’s remedial Act 413 specifically intended to fix the problem and payments have begun; no reasonable expectation of recurrence | Held: Exceptions do not apply; voluntary cessation is insufficiently likely to recur and collateral‑consequences exception fails because plaintiffs sought only a declaratory judgment regarding Act 131 |
Key Cases Cited
- City of New Orleans v. Louisiana Assessors’ Retirement & Relief Fund, 986 So.2d 1 (La. 2008) (standard of de novo review for statutory‑unconstitutionality judgments)
- Cat’s Meow, Inc. v. City of New Orleans Through Dept. of Finance, 720 So.2d 1186 (La. 1998) (mootness doctrine and exceptions: voluntary cessation and collateral consequences)
- St. Charles Parish Sch. Bd. v. GAF Corp., 512 So.2d 1165 (La. 1987) (ripeness and justiciability principles)
- Perschall v. State, 697 So.2d 240 (La. 1997) (definition and effect of mootness)
- Abbott v. Parker, 249 So.2d 908 (La. 1971) (definition of a justiciable controversy)