City of Athens v. Callaway
This text of City of Athens v. Callaway (City of Athens v. Callaway) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Tennessee primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
FILED November 19, 1997
Cecil Crowson, Jr. CITY OF ATHENS, TENNESSEE, ) McMINN CIRCUIT Appellate C ourt Clerk ) C.A. NO. 03A01-9707-CV-00256 ) Plaintiff-Appellee ) ) ) ) ) ) vs. ) HON. EARL H. HENLEY ) JUDGE ) ) ) ) ) ROBERT CALLAWAY, ) AFFIRMED AND REMANDED ) Defendant-Appellant )
ROBERT CALLAWAY, Athens, pro se Appellant.
H. CHRIS TREW, Higgins, Biddle, Chester & Trew, Athens, for Appellee.
O P I N I O N
McMurray, J.
This action originated when the appellee, City of Athens,
cited Robert Callaway for his failure to pay the city's service
charges for refuse collection and disposal. The Athens Municipal
Court ordered Callaway to pay a total of $156.26 in trash collec-
tion and disposal charges. Callaway appealed to the Circuit Court
for McMinn County, arguing that the bills from the city were not due and payable. The Circuit Court granted the city summary
judgment. This appeal resulted. We affirm the judgment of the
trial court.
Callaway is a veterinarian who practices his profession in a
building within Athens' city limits. In 1995, the city passed an
ordinance rewriting municipal code section 17-113. The new 17-113
provides:
(1) Institutional, professional, industrial, fraternal, commercial or business establishments operated within the City of Athens shall pay a minimum monthly fee as determined by city council and adopted through its annual budget, plus an additional amount for receipt of services as determined by the supervisor of the city's sanitation department. However, businesses operating out of their residences or vehicles may be eligible for a credit of one hundred percent (100%) for the service as determined by the supervisor of the city's sanitation department.
On June 22, 1995, the city's director of finance sent Callaway a
letter which cited the above section and stated that his minimum
monthly fee "rate has been set at $15 per month and will be
reflected on a quarterly statement from the City of Athens."
Callaway replied with a letter stating that he did not want to
be "a customer of the Athens trash disposal system." He also
inquired, on several different occasions, as to whether the minimum
monthly fee was properly identified or classified as a "user fee"
or a "tax." Upon Callaway's continued refusal to pay the charges
for trash pickup and disposal, this litigation ensued.
Callaway enumerates three issues in his brief, stated as
follows: "(1) whether [he] was denied due process by way of a
summary judgment; (2) whether the money in question was legally
2 due; (3) whether the plaintiff did not act in good faith because
the city failed to answer the defendant[']s question as to the
nature of the invoices, thereby making the bills invalid."
Regarding the first issue, Callaway does not present any
argument, nor cite any authority, in his brief for the proposition
that his due process has been denied under the facts of this case.
We find this assertion to be without merit.
Regarding the issue of whether the bills were legally due,
Callaway presents no cognizable reason as to why they would not be.
The thrust of the argument in his brief turns on whether the
assessment for garbage collection and disposal was properly
characterized as a "fee," or, as he contends, a "tax."
T.C.A. § 6-19-101 provides that every city incorporated under
a city manager-commission charter, as is Athens, has the authority
to "[c]ollect and dispose of drainage, sewage, ashes, garbage,
refuse or other waste, or license and regulate such collection and
disposal, and the cost of such collection regulation or disposal
may be funded by taxation or special assessment to the property
owner[.]"
The city filed the affidavit of Athens City Manager Melvin L.
Barker, who stated that "[a]ll of the charges collected by the City
for collection and disposal of refuse and garbage is maintained in
a separate account from the City's general fund and designated
solely for uses related to refuse and trash collection and
disposal."
3 It is clear that T.C.A. § 6-19-101 provides authority for the
city to assess such a charge as it has done in the present case,
regardless of whether it is classified as a "tax" or a "fee" or
something else. We find no merit in Callaway's contention that the
city's reluctance to respond to his inquiries as to whether the
invoices amounted to a "tax" or a "fee" made the invoices void or
uncollectible.
Finally, we note that the Athens Municipal Code does allow for
persons to "opt-out" of city trash collection and disposal, by
electing to contract with a privately licensed waste hauler:
Commercial, industrial, institutional, professional, fraternal and business establishments . . . electing to utilize a privately licensed waste hauler must provide evidence of a paid invoice on a quarterly basis to the City Sanitation Foreman for the minimum billing to be waived. If proper evidence is not provided, minimum billing along with any penalties are due to the city. Athens Municipal Code § 17-114(2).
Thus, it is clear that if Callaway did not want to be a
"customer" of the city trash collection system, all that was
required of him was to show evidence of a paid invoice to a private
waste hauler. He did not do so. We find no merit in his appeal.
The judgment of the trial court is affirmed in its entirety,
and the case remanded for such further actions as may be necessary.
Costs of appeal are assessed to the appellant.
___________________________ Don T. McMurray, Judge
___________________________________ Houston M. Goddard, Presiding Judge
4 ______________________________ Charles D. Susano, Jr., Judge
5 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
CITY OF ATHENS, TENNESSEE, ) McMINN CIRCUIT ) C.A. NO. 03A01-9707-CV-00256 ) Plaintiff-Appellee ) ) ) ) ) ) vs. ) HON. EARL H. HENLEY ) JUDGE ) ) ) ) ) ROBERT CALLAWAY, ) AFFIRMED AND REMANDED ) Defendant-Appellant )
JUDGMENT
Thi s a ppe a l c a me on t o be he a r d upon t he r e c o r d f r om t h e
Ch a nc e r y Cour t of M M nn Count y, a nd br i e f s f i l e d on be ha l f of t he c i
r e s p e c t i ve pa r t i e s . Upon c ons i de r a t i on t he r e of , t hi s Cour t i s o f
o p i n i o n t ha t t he r e wa s no r e ve r s i bl e e r r or i n t he t r i a l c our t .
and the case remanded for such further actions as may be necessary.
PER CURIAM
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
City of Athens v. Callaway, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/city-of-athens-v-callaway-tennctapp-1997.