Preview:

ATTORNEYS FOR PETITIONERS: JOHN S. DULL ATTORNEY AT LAW Crown Point, IN BRIAN P. POPP LASZLO & POPP PC Merrillville, IN DOCK MCDOWELL JR. THE MCDOWELL LAW FIRM Merrillville, IN

ATTORNEYS FOR RESPONDENT: THOMAS A. ATHERTON DAVID A. SUESS BOSE MCKINNEY & EVANS LLP Indianapolis, IN

CHARLES C. MEEKER PARKER POE ADAMS & BERNSTEIN Raleigh, NC _____________________________________________________________________

IN THE INDIANA TAX COURT
_____________________________________________________________________ LAKE COUNTY ASSESSOR, CALUMET TOWNSHIP ASSESSOR, and LAKE COUNTY PROPERTY TAX ASSESSMENT BOARD OF APPEALS, ) ) ) ) ) Petitioners, ) Cause No. 49T10-0703-TA-19 ) v. ) ) UNITED STATES STEEL CORPORATION, ) ) Respondent. ) _____________________________________________________________________ ORDER ON RESPONDENT'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT NOT FOR PUBLICATION September 19, 2007 FISHER, J. The Lake County Assessor, the Calumet Township Assessor, and the Lake

County Property Tax Assessment Board of Appeals (PTABOA) (collectively, Lake County) appeal the final determination of the Indiana Board of Tax Review (Indiana Board) valuing United States Steel Corporation's (US Steel) real property for the 2001 tax year (year at issue). The matter is currently before the Court on US Steel's motion for partial summary judgment. The issue for the Court to decide is whether the Indiana Board, during its hearing, properly determined that certain evidence offered by Lake County was inadmissible. For the following reasons, the Court determines that the Indiana Board properly excluded the evidence and GRANTS US Steel's motion for partial summary judgment. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY The facts in this case are undisputed. US Steel owns and operates an integrated steel manufacturing plant in Lake County, Indiana. For the year at issue, US Steel's real property was valued at $269,801,300 ($59,582,900 for land and $210,218,400 for improvements). Believing that its real property was entitled to additional obsolescence depreciation, US Steel appealed its assessment to the PTABOA. At the time US Steel initiated its appeal, it had another appeal pending with the PTABOA regarding obsolescence depreciation on its 2001 personal property assessment. Before the

PTABOA held a hearing on that matter, however, a settlement agreement resolving the personal property appeal was executed. The PTABOA subsequently denied US Steel's request for additional obsolescence depreciation on its 2001 real property assessment. US Steel then appealed its real property assessment to the Indiana Board. During the Indiana Board's administrative hearing, Lake County attempted to

2

introduce into evidence the settlement agreement and other documents with respect to US Steel's 2001 personal property tax appeal, claiming that US Steel was improperly attempting to obtain a "double recovery." More specifically, Lake County argued that the evidence showed that US Steel previously received a reduction on its personal property for the same causes of obsolescence that it currently claimed reduced the value of its real property. US Steel objected to the introduction of those documents, arguing that they were irrelevant. The Indiana Board sustained US Steel's objection. The Indiana Board subsequently issued a final determination granting US Steel's requests for additional obsolescence depreciation. On March 29, 2007, Lake County initiated an original tax appeal claiming, inter alia, that the Indiana Board erred in excluding its evidence because the evidence established that res judicata applied to US Steel's 2001 real property tax appeal. On April 27, 2007, US Steel moved for summary judgment with respect to this claim. On August 2, 2007, the Court heard the parties' oral arguments. Additional facts will be supplied as necessary. ANALYSIS AND OPINION Standard of Review This Court gives great deference to final determinations of the Indiana Board when it acts within the scope of its authority. Wittenberg Lutheran Vill. Endowment Corp. v. Lake County Prop. Tax Assessment Bd. of Appeals, 782 N.E.2d 483, 486 (Ind. Tax Ct. 2003), review denied. Consequently, the Court will reverse a final determination of the Indiana Board only if it is arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law; contrary to constitutional right, power, privilege, or

3

immunity; in excess of statutory jurisdiction, authority, or limitations, or short of statutory jurisdiction, authority, or limitations; without observance of procedure required by law; or unsupported by substantial or reliable evidence. See IND. CODE ANN.

Download Lake County Assessor, et al. v. United States Steel Corp..pdf

Indiana Law