94 So. 3d 1039
La. Ct. App.2012Background
- Louisiana Machinery Co., LLC and Louisiana Machinery Rentals, LLC appeal partial summary judgments favoring several parish and town plaintiffs as to sales and use tax assessments.
- Notices of assessment were issued December 24, 2009, followed by Second Revised and Third Revised Assessments in 2010; collectors argued finality of the assessment.
- Defendants argued defective notices, prescription, and in LMR's case, improper party status since it did not engage in sales or leases.
- The ULSTC provides three enforcement remedies: assessment and distraint, summary proceedings, and ordinary suit; final assessment is treated as equivalent to a judgment when using distraint.
- The trial court granted partial summary judgments and held the Second Revised Assessment final; the court remanded but the court of appeal reverses and remands for further proceedings.
- The opinion emphasizes procedural distinction between final assessments via distraint and money judgments via summary or ordinary proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Are the notices of assessment defective under 47:337.51? | Plaintiffs contend notices complied with statutory requirements. | Defendants argue notices fail to satisfy mandatory language and timing. | Issues remanded; defects found in notices discussed but not ultimately resolved here. |
| May the collector obtain a money judgment under 47:337.61 based on a summary proceeding without a formal prior assessment? | Collector may prove tax transactions via affidavit and receive judgment under 337.61. | Procedural requirements and burden of proof require full compliance with notices and proper proceedings. | Not supported as to a valid 337.61 judgment; remanded to allow proper amendment and trial under 337.61. |
| Did prescription bar defendants' defenses in the summary proceeding? | Waiver and prescription defenses were not properly preserved due to administratively exhausted remedies. | Prescription and exhaustion issues bar assertions and defense; notices defective vitiate response. | Remanded to address prescription and exhaustion on proper record. |
| Is LMR a proper party defendant given it allegedly did not engage in sales/use/leases? | LMR is an affiliate and registrant; liable as part of corporate structure. | LMR did not engage in taxable transactions; improper party. | Remanded for consideration of party status and evidentiary record. |
| Should the court sustain the collected claims under 337.33 injunctive relief or 337.61 money judgments, given ULSTC distinctions? | Collector seeks injunctive relief and a monetary judgment as alternative remedies. | Final assessments and judgments must be proven separately; cumulative pleadings may be improper. | Partial judgment reversed; remand for proper 337.61 proceedings consistent with 337.33 and ULSTC distinctions. |
Key Cases Cited
- Collector of Revenue v. Olvey, 238 La. 980, 117 So.2d 563 (1959) (distraint and sale procedural prerequisites; assessment not required for ordinary/summarized collection)
- Collector of Revenue v. Frost, 240 La. 1067, 127 So.2d 151 (1961) (no formal assessment required when collecting by summary or ordinary remedy)
- Pioneer Bank & Trust Co., 250 La. 446, 196 So.2d 270 (1967) (distinguishes between tax claims and final assessments; finality may exist outside court judgments)