LOVE v. FULTON COUNTY BOARD OF TAX ASSESSORS
311 Ga. 682
Ga.
2021

Background:

  • Atlanta Falcons Stadium Company (StadCo) operated Mercedes‑Benz Stadium under pre‑construction MOUs with the Georgia World Congress Center Authority (GWCCA); MOUs contemplated StadCo would hold a usufruct (non‑estate) interest not subject to ad valorem tax.
  • Fulton County Board of Tax Assessors unanimously issued an Exemption Decision in 2013 finding StadCo’s interest non‑taxable as a usufruct after reviewing the MOUs and related materials; StadCo later executed a formal Stadium License and Management (SLM) Agreement with GWCCA.
  • Fulton County taxpayers (Love et al.) sued, alleging the Board failed to investigate the SLM Agreement, that StadCo actually held a taxable leasehold, that the Board’s action was a gross abuse of discretion (seeking mandamus, declaratory and injunctive relief), and that OCGA § 10‑9‑10 was unconstitutional; they later sought a taxpayer refund claim.
  • Procedural history: trial court granted motions to dismiss earlier petitions; Court of Appeals affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded; after interventions and a fourth amended petition, the trial court dismissed all counts for failure to state a claim; Georgia Supreme Court affirmed.
  • Central legal determinations: (1) the Board had discretion in how to investigate tax status and had in fact investigated and relied on MOUs; (2) the SLM Agreement did not materially change the MOUs’ essential terms; (3) plaintiffs failed to show a gross abuse of discretion or entitlement to mandamus, injunctive or declaratory relief; statutory‑constitutionality challenge deemed irrelevant to the Board’s ruling and dismissed on that basis.

Issues:

Issue Plaintiff's Argument Defendant's Argument Held
Mandamus / gross abuse of discretion (OCGA § 48‑5‑299) Love: Board failed to review SLM Agreement and thus failed its duty; mandamus should compel a proper investigation Board: Board exercised discretion, held hearing, reviewed MOUs and relied on them; no total failure to investigate; SLM did not change material terms Dismissed — Board investigated and reached a decision; no gross abuse shown; mandamus unavailable
Injunction barring enforcement of Exemption Decision Love: Board acting unlawfully; injunction needed to prevent continuation of exempt treatment Board: Exemption Decision based on evidence; plaintiffs cannot show Board acted arbitrarily or capriciously Dismissed — no legal basis for injunctive relief given lack of gross abuse
Declaratory judgment that SLM created taxable leasehold Love: SLM converted the usufruct into a taxable leasehold; uncertainty warrants declaratory relief Board: MOUs and SLM show a usufruct; court should construe SLM as a matter of law; no present uncertainty Dismissed — SLM did not materially change MOUs; no uncertainty; declaratory relief inappropriate
Constitutional challenge to OCGA § 10‑9‑10 (as amended) Love: 1989 amendment broadened GWCCA exemption to private lessees without referendum; statute unconstitutional Board: Board did not rely on § 10‑9‑10; decision rested on usufruct analysis from MOUs, so constitutionality is irrelevant Dismissed as unnecessary — statute’s constitutionality irrelevant because Board found non‑taxable usufruct independent of § 10‑9‑10
Tax refund claim under OCGA § 48‑5‑380 / adding County defendants Love: County taxpayers entitled to class refund for taxes paid due to alleged improper exemption Board/County: Trial court denied adding County and Tax Commissioner; without defendants refund claim cannot proceed Dismissed / not reached — plaintiffs did not challenge trial court’s denial of joinder; refund count failed for lack of proper defendants

Key Cases Cited

  • Anderson v. Flake, 267 Ga. 498 (1997) (motion to dismiss standard explained)
  • Love v. Fulton County Bd. of Tax Assessors, 348 Ga. App. 309 (2018) (prior Court of Appeals ruling on investigatory discretion and mandamus)
  • Clayton County Bd. of Tax Assessors v. Aldeasa Atlanta Joint Venture, 304 Ga. 15 (2018) (usufruct is not an estate and is not taxable)
  • GeorgiaCarry.Org., Inc. v. Atlanta Botanical Garden, Inc., 306 Ga. 829 (2019) (discussion of usufruct and present estate retention by landlord)
  • Emory Univ. v. Levitas, 260 Ga. 894 (1991) ("any evidence" standard for judicial review of administrative decisions)
  • R.A.F. v. Robinson, 286 Ga. 644 (2010) (mandamus is extraordinary; standards for relief)
  • Ga. Assn. of Professional Process Servers v. Jackson, 302 Ga. 309 (2017) (mandamus issues: required duty and gross abuse of discretion)
  • Walker v. Owens, 298 Ga. 516 (2016) (scope and purpose of Declaratory Judgment Act)
Read the full case