Find Laws Find Lawyers Free Legal Forms USA State Laws
Laws-info.com » Cases » Indiana » Indiana Tax Court » 2006 » Mercantile National Bank of Indiana, Trust #2624 v. Department of Local Government Finance
Mercantile National Bank of Indiana, Trust #2624 v. Department of Local Government Finance
State: Indiana
Court: Indiana Tax Court
Docket No: 45T10-0601-TA-1 & 49T10-0601-TA-2
Case Date: 09/21/2006
Preview:ATTORNEY FOR PETITIONER: PATRICK A. MYSLIWY MAISH & MYSLIWY Hammond, IN

ATTORNEYS FOR RESPONDENT: STEVE CARTER ATTORNEY GENERAL OF INDIANA JENNIFER E. GAUGER DAWN D. CUMMINGS DEPUTY ATTORNEYS GENERAL Indianapolis, IN

_____________________________________________________________________

IN THE INDIANA TAX COURT
_____________________________________________________________________ MERCANTILE NATIONAL BANK OF INDIANA, TRUST #2624, ) ) ) Petitioner, ) ) v. ) Cause No. 45T10-0601-TA-1 ) Cause No. 45T10-0601-TA-2 DEPARTMENT OF LOCAL ) GOVERNMENT FINANCE, ) ) ) Respondent. ) _____________________________________________________________________ ON APPEAL FROM A FINAL DETERMINATION OF THE INDIANA BOARD OF TAX REVIEW NOT FOR PUBLICATION September 21, 2006 FISHER, J. Mercantile National Bank of Indiana, Trust #2624 (Mercantile) appeals the final determination of the Indiana Board of Tax Review (Indiana Board) upholding the Department of Local Government Finance's (DLGF) assessment of its industrial property for the 2002 tax year. While Mercantile raises several issues on appeal, the

Court consolidates and restates them as: whether Mercantile made a prima facie case that its assessments are improper. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY Mercantile owns two parcels of land in Lake County, Indiana. Specifically, parcel # 009-12-14-0007-0003 (Parcel 3) and parcel # 009-12-14-0007-0029 (Parcel 29) are located at 1716 Sheffield Avenue in Dyer, Indiana. Parcel 3 consists of 5.158 acres of land. Parcel 29 consists of 2.685 acres of land. Both parcels are zoned for industrial usage. For the 2002 assessment, the DLGF valued Parcel 3 at $503,800 ($167,200 for the land and $336,600 for improvements). The DLGF valued Parcel 29 at $135,900 ($135,900 for the land and $0 for the improvements). Believing each land assessment to be too high, Mercantile filed Petitions for Review with the Indiana Board (Forms 139L). In Mercantile's Forms 139L, it complained that its land assessments were too high based upon a 1994 appraisal. The Indiana Board held two hearings on Mercantile's Forms 139L on August 24, 2004 and on October 4, 2005. On November 22, 2005, the Indiana Board issued one final determination in which it denied Mercantile's requests for relief on both parcels. Mercantile filed two original tax appeals on January 5, 2006. 1 The Court heard

The appeal relating to Parcel 3 was assigned a cause number of 45T10-0601TA-2 and the appeal relating to Parcel 29 was assigned a cause number of 45T100601-TA-1. This Court consolidated the appeals on March 7, 2006. Thus, for ease of reference in this opinion, the Court will refer to the administrative record for Parcel 3 as "Cert. Admin. R2" and the administrative record for Parcel 29 as "Cert. Admin. R1." The Court also notes that in its petition, Mercantile argued the Indiana Board improperly disregarded the summary of evidence offered by its attorney at the administrative hearing. (Pet'r Pet. at 3-4.) Because Mercantile never discussed this issue in its brief or at oral argument, the Court deems the issue waived. 2

1

the parties' oral arguments on July 28, 2006. necessary.

Additional facts will be supplied as

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: (1) arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law; contrary to constitutional right, power, privilege, or 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.

(2)

(3)

(4) (5)

IND. CODE ANN.
Download Mercantile National Bank of Indiana, Trust #2624 v. Department of Local Governme

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