140 Conn. App. 290
Conn. App. Ct.2013Background
- On Oct. 1, 2007, New Britain conducted a citywide real estate revaluation; plaintiff property at 643 Farmington Ave was valued at $11,173,100.
- Wal-Mart Real Estate Trust appealed the 2007 assessment to the city board of assessment appeals; the board reduced the value to $9,875,700 for the revaluation date.
- Wal-Mart/ plaintiff did not appeal the board’s decision to the Superior Court under § 12-117a.
- In 2009, plaintiff challenged the 2009 grand list by appealing to the board under § 12-111; board made no change, plaintiff then appealed to § 12-117a.
- City moved for summary judgment arguing plaintiff was barred from further challenge until the next statutory revaluation (Oct. 1, 2012) and that Wal-Mart’s earlier appeal bound the property owner for subsequent years.
- Trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the city, holding that any further reduction in 2009 would be an unlawful interim revaluation; ruling relied on § 12-111(a) as amended by P.A. 09-196.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether PA 09-196’s amendment to § 12-111(a) applies retroactively. | Plaintiff contends amendment clarifies prior law and retroactively allows a second challenge. | City argues amendment precludes second appeal within revaluation period. | Amendment clarifies retroactively; retroactive preclusion valid. |
| Whether plaintiff is collaterally estopped by the Wal-Mart board action. | Plaintiff asserts no prior Superior Court decision on the Wal-Mart appeal to estop here. | No collateral estoppel since no prior judicial adjudication on the issues. | Collateral estoppel does not apply. |
| Whether plaintiff may challenge an illegal interim assessment between revaluations. | Plaintiff claims permissible challenge to an illegal interim assessment. | Interim revaluation not permitted; challenge must occur within mandated revaluation period. | Interim challenge barred; § 12-111(a) as amended applies retroactively. |
Key Cases Cited
- Waterbury Hotel Equity, LLC v. Waterbury, 86 Conn. App. 480 (Conn. App. 2004) (interim revaluations and statutory timing guidance)
- Waterbury Hotel Equity, LLC v. Waterbury, 85 Conn. App. 480 (Conn. App. 2004) (prohibits taxpayer demand for interim revaluation; permits challenge to illegal assessment within revaluation period)
- Middlebury v. Dept. of Environmental Protection, 283 Conn. 156 (Conn. 2007) (clarifying retroactivity and intent of amendments)
- D’Eramo v. Smith, 273 Conn. 610 (Conn. 2005) (distinguishes substantive vs. procedural changes for retroactivity)
- Massey v. Branford, 119 Conn. App. 453 (Conn. App. 2010) (summary judgment standards and appellate review)