Find Laws Find Lawyers Free Legal Forms USA State Laws
Laws-info.com » Cases » Indiana » Indiana Tax Court » 2008 » Joseph Timmons v. John Scott, as Porter Co. Assessor, et al
Joseph Timmons v. John Scott, as Porter Co. Assessor, et al
State: Indiana
Court: Indiana Tax Court
Docket No: 45T10-0706-TA-36
Case Date: 12/23/2008
Preview:ATTORNEY FOR PETITIONER: VINCENT E. PELFREY Valparaiso, IN

ATTORNEYS FOR RESPONDENT: STEVE CARTER ATTORNEY GENERAL OF INDIANA JESSICA E. REAGAN DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL Indianapolis, IN

IN THE INDIANA TAX COURT
JOSEPH TIMMONS, Petitioner, v. JOHN SCOTT, in his capacity as Porter County Assessor and JEAN SWANSON, in her capacity as Liberty Township Assessor, Respondents.1 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

FILED
Dec 23 2008, 2:40 pm
of the supreme court, court of appeals and tax court

CLERK

Cause No. 45T10-0706-TA-36

ON APPEAL FROM A FINAL DETERMINATION OF THE INDIANA BOARD OF TAX REVIEW2 NOT FOR PUBLICATION December 23, 2008 FISHER, J.

Joseph Timmons also named the Department of Local Government Finance (DLGF) as a respondent in this appeal. (See Pet'r V. Am. Pet. at 1.) The DLGF subsequently sought to be dismissed as a party, asserting that it had not been a party to the proceeding before the Indiana Board of Tax Review. (See Resp't Mot. to Dismiss at 1-2.) The Court now GRANTS the DLGF's motion. See Ind. Tax Court Rule 4(B). The Indiana Board issued two Certified Records in this case, one on December 19, 2006 and the other on June 29, 2007. The Court will hereinafter refer to them as "2006 Cert. Admin. R." and "2007 Cert. Admin. R."
2

1

Joseph Timmons (Timmons) challenges the final determination of the Indiana Board of Tax Review (Indiana Board) valuing his mobile home for the 2003 tax year (year at issue) at $18,000. The issue on appeal is whether Timmons is entitled to any further reduction in the assessed value of his mobile home due to depreciation. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY Timmons owns a 1991 Fairmont Commander mobile home, located in Porter County, Indiana. For the year at issue, the Liberty Township Assessor assessed the mobile home at $19,000. Timmons appealed his assessment first to the Porter County Property Tax Assessment Board of Appeals, and then to the Indiana Board. On January 10, 2006, the Indiana Board conducted a hearing on Timmons's appeal. At the hearing, Timmons claimed that his property had been over-valued Timmons explained that he had

because mobile homes are depreciating assets.

purchased his mobile home for $18,000 in 1994 and, consequently, the mobile home should not be assessed at a higher value nine years later. On April 7, 2006, the Indiana Board issued a final determination in which it held that the value of Timmons's mobile home "is no greater than [$18,000]." (2006 Cert. Admin. R. at 69.) On November 21, 2006, Timmons initiated an original tax appeal. On February 5, 2007, this Court, pursuant to the parties' joint motion, dismissed Timmons's appeal without prejudice and remanded the matter, ordering the Indiana Board to clarify whether its "no greater than $18,000" meant "total assessed value or whether it meant . . . $18,000 prior to depreciation." (See 2007 Cert. Admin. R. at 2.) On May 14, 2007, the Indiana Board issued a final determination stating that the total assessed value of

2

Timmons's mobile home was no more than $18,000 because Timmons failed to present sufficient evidence to support any further reduction in the assessed value. On June 14, 2007, Timmons initiated this original tax appeal. The Court heard the parties' oral arguments on November 14, 2008. Additional facts will be supplied as necessary. STANDARD OF REVIEW This Court gives great deference to final determinations of the Indiana Board when it acts within the scope of its authority. Knox County Prop. Tax Assessment Bd. of Appeals v. Grandview Care, Inc., 826 N.E.2d 177, 180 (Ind. Tax Ct. 2005). Consequently, the Court will reverse a final determination of the Indiana Board only if it is: (1) arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law; (2) contrary to constitutional right, power, privilege, or immunity; (3) in excess of statutory jurisdiction, authority, or limitations, or short of statutory jurisdiction, authority, or limitations; (4) without observance of procedure required by law; or (5) unsupported by substantial or reliable evidence. IND. CODE ANN.
Download Joseph Timmons v. John Scott, as Porter Co. Assessor, et al.pdf

Indiana Law

Indiana State Laws
Indiana Tax
Indiana Labor Laws
Indiana Agencies
    > Indiana Bureau of Motor Vehicles
    > Indiana Department of Corrections
    > Indiana Department of Workforce Development
    > Indiana Sex Offender Registry

Comments

Tips