Mesivtah Eitz Chaim of Bobov, Inc. v. Pike County Board of Assessment Appeals
44 A.3d 3
Pa.2012Background
- Mesivtah Eitz Chaim of Bobov, Inc. seeks exemption as a 'purely public charity' under Article VIII, § 2(a)(v) of the Pennsylvania Constitution for its Pike County summer camp.
- The camp primarily offers Orthodox Jewish teachings, food, recreation, and some financial aid to students from various countries; facilities are open to the public but no Pike County resident is known to use them.
- The Pike County Board of Assessment Appeals denied the exemption; the trial court conducted a de novo hearing and also denied it.
- Commonwealth Court affirmed, applying the Hospital Utilization Project (HUP) test to determine 'purely public charity' status.
- Act 55 (10 P.S. §§ 371-385) was enacted to define 'burden relieving' more broadly; Mesivtah argued Act 55 should govern exemption analysis.
- The issue presented is whether Act 55 deforms or replaces the constitutional test, or whether the judiciary retains the constitutional minimum for exemption.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does Act 55 control the exemption standard over HUP? | Bobov argues Act 55 defines burden relief and should govern. | Pike argues constitutionally defined HUP controls; Act 55 cannot override. | Act 55 cannot override the constitutional HUP standard. |
| Is the constitutional definition of 'purely public charity' fixed by HUP or subject to legislative refinement? | Bobov urges deference to Legislature's broad definitional role via Act 55. | Pike asserts judiciary must stick to constitutional text and HUP; legislature cannot displace it. | Judiciary retains the constitutional definition; Act 55 cannot supplant it. |
| May the Legislature define 'purely public charity' through statute when the Constitution vests that power in the judiciary? | Bobov contends Act 55 reflects policy evolution and legislative input should be honored. | Pike maintains separation of powers; legislature cannot rewrite constitutional terms. | Legislature cannot redefine constitutional terms; Act 55 does not create exemption absent HUP compliance. |
Key Cases Cited
- Hospital Utilization Project v. Commonwealth, 507 Pa. 1 (Pa. 1985) (establishes the HUP test for purely public charity)
- Alliance Home of Carlisle v. Board of Assessment Appeals, 591 Pa. 436 (Pa. 2007) (confirms constitutional framework and limits of legislative definitions)
- Ogontz School Tax Exemption Case, 361 Pa. 284 (Pa. 1949) (pre-HUP authority on relief of government burden)
- Young Men's Christian Association of Germantown v. Philadelphia, 323 Pa. 401 (Pa. 1936) (charity relief of government burden recognized)
- Donohugh's Appeal, 86 Pa. 306 (Pa. 1878) (early constitutional framing of exemptions)