Park 'N Go v. Airport Authority, 321 Neb. 798

Airport Authority, a Nebraska political subdivision operating Eppley Airfield, imposed a June 2021 resolution charging off-airport parking companies a monthly user fee for continued access to Commercial Vehicle Lanes. 1
The charge began at 10% of gross receipts from parking and shuttle-related business, and the Resolution said the revenue would help defray airport operating and administration expenses and comply with FAA self-sustaining requirements. 2
Park ‘N Go operates an off-airport parking lot and shuttle service, uses the Commercial Vehicle Lanes, and sued for declaratory and injunctive relief alleging the charge was an unconstitutional tax. 3
After a bench trial, the district court found the charge was an impermissible tax, relied on a three-part fee-versus-tax test, and enjoined collection while ordering repayment of sums collected. 4
Airport Authority appealed, arguing the district court erred in treating the charge as a tax, adopting the test, and granting injunctive relief. 5
The Nebraska Supreme Court reversed and remanded with directions to dismiss Park ‘N Go’s complaint. 6

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Was the Resolution charge a tax or fee? 7	Park ‘N Go said it was a revenue-raising tax.	Airport Authority said it was an optional user fee for airport access.	It was a fee, not a tax. 8
Should a single fee-versus-tax test control? 9	Park ‘N Go urged the district court’s three-part test.	Airport Authority opposed adopting any fixed test.	No single controlling test applies; case-specific analysis governs. 10
Could Park ‘N Go obtain relief if the charge was not a tax? 11	Park ‘N Go sought injunction and repayment if the charge was unlawful.	Airport Authority argued the complaint depended on proving a tax.	No; without a tax, Park ‘N Go’s requested constitutional relief failed. 12
Did the court decide any statutory reasonableness/uniformity claim under § 3-504(11)? 13	Park ‘N Go said the charge was unreasonable and not uniform.	Airport Authority said that issue was outside the pleaded claim.	No; the court declined to reach that separate statutory issue. 14

PSK v. Legacy Outdoor Advertising, 318 Neb. 1 (Neb. 2024) (declaratory judgment action is sui generis 15)
Charter West Bank v. Riddle, 314 Neb. 263 (Neb. 2023) (injunction sounds in equity 16)
Flinn v. Strode, 320 Neb. 813 (Neb. 2026) (appellate review of legal questions is independent 17)
City of Ord v. Biemond, 175 Neb. 333 (Neb. 1963) (airport user charges and statutory reasonableness issues 18)
Schumacher v. Johanns, 272 Neb. 346 (Neb. 2006) (tax definition depends on factual and legal context; primary purpose matters 19)
Ace Rent-A-Car v. Airport Authority, 612 N.E.2d 1104 (Ind. App. 1993) (airport percentage-of-receipts charge upheld as an authorized user fee 20)
Jacksonville Port Auth. v. Alamo, 600 So. 2d 1159 (Fla. App. 1992) (gross-receipts airport charge treated as a user fee, not a tax 21)
Westrac, Inc. v. Walker Field, 812 P.2d 714 (Colo. App. 1991) (charges on public-facility users ordinarily are not taxes 22)
Enterprise Leasing v. Metropolitan Airports, 250 F.3d 1215 (8th Cir. 2001) (commercial entities may use and benefit from an entire airport market 23)
T-Mobile South, LLC v. Bonet, 85 So. 3d 963 (Ala. 2011) (taxes raise general revenue; fees exchange payment for a government benefit 24)
Barber v. Ritter, 196 P.3d 238 (Colo. 2008) (primary purpose distinguishes a fee from a tax 25)