State of Maine v. LeDuc

CourtSuperior Court of Maine
DecidedApril 22, 2008
DocketKENcv-07-18
StatusUnpublished

This text of State of Maine v. LeDuc (State of Maine v. LeDuc) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Superior Court of Maine primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
State of Maine v. LeDuc, (Me. Super. Ct. 2008).

Opinion

STATE OF MAINE SUPERIOR COURT KENNEBEC, ss. CIVIL ACTION Docket No. CV-07-~~ I

1/.1 ;1.1 ,N\ - ,I.c:,t tJ--L-J/;)C)/.;J.oe> '-i, STATE OF MAINE, ) ) Plaintiff, ) DECISION AND ORDER ON v. ) PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR ) SUMMARY JUDGMENT EUGENE O. LEDUC, ) ) Defendant. )

Plaintiff State of Maine (the "State") has moved for summary

judgment in its favor on its Complaint for Collection of Unpaid Maine

Sales Tax, Interest, and Penalties ("Complaint") pursuant to M.R. Civ. P.

56. Pursuant to M.R. Civ. P. 56(c), the State is entitled to summary

judgment if there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and it is

entitled to judgment as a matter of law. For the reasons cited herein, the

Court finds that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact, and

the State is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Accordingly, the

Court GRANTS the State's motion in its entirety.

Procedural Background

The State filed its Complaint on or about January 17, 2007. At the

same time, the State sUbmitted its Certificate of State Tax Assessor

Pursuant to 36 M.R.S.A. § 174(1) ("Certificate"). Mr. LeDuc was

personally served with the Summons, Complaint and Certificate in

Holiday, Florida, on January 30, 2007. Mr. LeDuc subsequently filed his pro se handwritten [undated] letter Answer on or about February 12,

2007 ("Answer"). The Answer denies generally that Mr. LeDuc is

responsible for payment of the sales taxes of Duke's Ladder & Scaffold,

Inc. l On April 26,2007, the Court issued its Scheduling Order, which

set a discovery deadline of December 26, 2007. It does not appear that

the parties conducted any discovery.2

STATEMENT OF FACTS

At all relevant times, Mr. LeDuc was the owner of Duke's Ladder &

Scaffold ("Duke's"), doing business in Casco, Maine from at least June 1,

1993, through June 30, 1998. At all relevant times as the owner of

Duke's, Mr. LeDuc was an employer who maintained an office or

transacted business within this State.

1 Mr. LeDuc's Answer does not address the individually numbered paragraphs in the State's

Complaint, which are therefore deemed admitted. M.R. Civ. P. 8(d). In any event, in support of its Motion for Summary Judgment, the State also submitted the Affidavit of Philip O. Young and the Certificate which also establish its claims by affirmative evidence. 2 Any issue relating to Mr. LeDuc's underlying tax liability is not relevant here, as he may not

now collaterally attack the tax liability which is valid and final. See 36 M.R.S.A. §174 ("In this action, the certificate of the assessor showing the amount of the delinquency is prima facie evidence of the levy of the tax, of the delinquency and of the compliance by the assessor with this Title in relation to the assessment of the tax."); see also Quirion v. P. U.C., 684 A.2d 1294, 1296 (Me. 1996) (recognizing the court has extended the principle of res judicata effect of final judgments to adjudicative decision of administrative bodies, and barring a collateral attack on an otherwise finaljudgmerit of an administrative body); Cline v. Maine Coast Nordic, 1999 ME 72, ~9, 728 A.2d 686, 688 (recognizing that collateral estoppel is applicable to administrative proceedings, and dismissing appellant's complaint for declaratory relief based upon estoppel as a result of earlier proceedings); Maine Cent. R.R. Co. v. Town ofDexter, 588 A.2d 589 (Me. 1991 )(in tax proceedings, court determined that under principles of resjudicata, when an administrative determination becomes final, the Superior Court should not grant a collateral review on the merits of the administrative determination); and Decision and Order on Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment dated October 3, 2006 in State ofMaine v. James H Furlong, CV-06-177. Here, Mr. LeDuc did not request reconsideration of the assessment at issue, which therefore became valid and final within thirty (30) days. Because Mr. LeDuc's underlying tax Iliabilities became valid and final long ago, discovery related to those liabilities is now irrelevant.

2 Beginning on or before June 1, 1993, Mr. LeDuc, as the owner of

Duke's, was required to remit Maine sales taxes and to file monthly

returns remitting payment as prescribed by law. Duke's filed an

application for tax registration with Maine Revenue Services in or about

October 1995. Duke's failed to file sales tax returns or remit sales taxes

for the following periods: June 1, 1993, through March 31, 1996; and

July 1, 1996, through June 30, 1998.

When Duke's failed to file the required returns for June. 1, 1993,

through March 31, 1996; and July 1, 1996, through June 30, 1998, the

Assessor sent Mr. LeDuc a notice and demand for filing the returns for

those periods ("Demand for Filing") by certified mail to his last known

address on or about June 26, 2002. This Demand for Filing was

delivered to Mr. LeDuc on or about July 8, 2002.

When Duke's still failed to file the required returns, in accordance

with 36 M.R.S.A. § 14 1(2)(C) ,3 the Assessor issued an assessment to Mr.

LeDuc for sales taxes owed by Duke's ("Assessment for Sales Taxes").

The notice of the Assessment for Sales Taxes was delivered to Mr. LeDuc

on or about August 3,2002. Mr. LeDuc did not seek reconsideration of

I Although Duke's registered with the Maine Secretary of State as a corporation in 1997, Mr. LeDuc was assessed for the entire period pursuant to 36 M.R.S.A. :§ 141(2)(C), rather than as a "responsible individual" under 36 M.R.S.A. § 177 for 1997 and 1998, because Mr. LeDuc filed Schedules C with his federal individual tax returns for 1997 and 1998, rather than corporate income tax :returns. In either case, Mr. LeDuc was responsible for the sales taxes of Duke's.

3 the Assessment for Sales Taxes. Thus, the assessment became final on

or about September 3, 2002.

When Mr. LeDuc did not pay the amount due under the

Assessment for Sales Taxes, the Assessor issued a notice and demand for

payment of the tax, interest, and penalties within 10 days (" 10- Day

Demand for Sales Taxes") on or about February 8,2004. The 10-Day

Demand for Sales Taxes was delivered to Mr. LeDuc on or about

February 17, 2004.

Amount Owed

Mr. LeDuc has failed to pay the full amount of sales taxes,

penalties, and interest for June 1, 1993, through June 30, 1998, that he

owes the State, despite the demands of the Assessor. As of the date of

the State's Complaint, the total that Mr. LeDuc owed the State of Maine

for sales taxes, interest, and penalties for June 1, 1993, through June

30, 1998, was as follows: sales taxes of $64,332.34, interest of

$92,101.86 (accrued through February 15,2007), and $38,501.66 in

penalties, for a total of$194,935.86.

As of the date of the State's Complaint, the total that Mr. LeDuc

owed the State of Maine for sales taxes, interest, and penalties for June

1, 1993, through June 30, 1998, was $194,935.86, with interest

continuing to accrue monthly. The total that Mr. LeDuc owes the State

of Maine for sales taxes, interest and penalties for June 1, 1993, through

,June 30, 1998, has since been updated by the Assessor to include

4 additional interest, for a total amount of $201,287.70 as of June 15,

2007, with additional interest continuing to accrue monthly.

Standard of Review

Pursuant to M.R. Civ. P.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cline v. MAINE COAST NORDIC
1999 ME 72 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1999)
City of Lewiston v. Maine State Employees Ass'n
638 A.2d 739 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1994)
Davric Maine Corp. v. Bangor Historic Track, Inc.
2000 ME 102 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 2000)
Quirion v. Public Utilities Commission
684 A.2d 1294 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1996)
Curtis v. Porter
2001 ME 158 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 2001)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
State of Maine v. LeDuc, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-of-maine-v-leduc-mesuperct-2008.