TNHYIF Reiv Golf LLC v. Forrest County, Mississippi

275 So. 3d 92
CourtCourt of Appeals of Mississippi
DecidedNovember 6, 2018
DocketNO. 2017-CA-00574-COA
StatusPublished

This text of 275 So. 3d 92 (TNHYIF Reiv Golf LLC v. Forrest County, Mississippi) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Mississippi primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
TNHYIF Reiv Golf LLC v. Forrest County, Mississippi, 275 So. 3d 92 (Mich. Ct. App. 2018).

Opinion

GRIFFIS, P.J., FOR THE COURT:

¶ 1. TNHYIF REIV GOLF LLC (True North) appeals the circuit court's entry of summary judgment in favor of Forrest County regarding the County's tax assessments of a student-housing complex for tax years 2014, 2015, and 2016. We reverse and render.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

¶ 2. True North owns the Boardwalk at Dewberry Landing (Dewberry), a 150-unit student-housing complex located in Hattiesburg. The Dewberry operates as an offsite college dormitory for students attending the University of Southern Mississippi and Pearl River Community College.

¶ 3. In 2014, the County appraised the Dewberry at $13,230,640. It then assessed the Dewberry at 15% of this appraised value, yielding an assessed value of $1,984,597 that, when multiplied by the total millage of .17349, resulted in a total tax liability of $344,307.73.

¶ 4. In 2015, the County appraised the Dewberry at $13,757,980. It then assessed the Dewberry at 15% of this appraised value, yielding an assessed value of $2,063,698 that, when multiplied by the total millage of .17758, resulted in a total tax liability of $366,471.48.

¶ 5. In 2016, the County appraised the Dewberry at $13,784,110. It then assessed the Dewberry at 15% of this appraised value, yielding an assessed value of $2,067,617 that, when multiplied by the total millage of .18041, resulted in a total tax liability of $373,018.80.

¶ 6. True North objected to the County's tax assessments each year. However, the Board of Supervisors rejected each objection and gave its final approval to the Forrest County tax rolls for the applicable tax years. The tax rolls were submitted to and approved by the Mississippi Department of Revenue.

¶ 7. True North filed a timely appeal of the decisions of the Board of Supervisors to the Forrest County Circuit Court, which consolidated the appeals.

¶ 8. True North and the County filed cross-motions for summary judgment on the issue of the true value of the Dewberry. True North claimed that the true value of the Dewberry was $6,700,000, based on the property's actual data and income. The County claimed that "[t]he challenged assessments [we]re properly based on the subject property's income as modeled with reference to typical market properties." Both parties relied on the testimony and analysis of their respective expert appraisers: Tracy Wofford for True North and Bruce Templeton for the County.

¶ 9. After a hearing, the circuit court issued a memorandum opinion and found "that the law allow[ed] the County tax assessor to use market[-]typical properties for valuation." The circuit court concluded that "the County's assessments of the Dewberry for tax years 2014, 2015[,] and 2016 reflect the true value of the Dewberry." As a result, the circuit court entered a judgment that granted the County's motion for summary judgment and denied True North's motion for summary judgment. It is from this judgment that True North now appeals.

STANDARD OF REVIEW

¶ 10. "[W]e review the circuit court's decision to grant summary judgment de novo." Bennett v. Highland Park Apartments, LLC , 170 So.3d 450 , 452 (¶ 4) (Miss. 2015). "[S]ummary judgment is proper only where there exists no genuine issue of material fact and the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law." Id. "Because the movant must be entitled to a judgment as a matter of law, a summary-judgment motion is usually limited to questions of law, which this Court reviews de novo." 1 Id.

ANALYSIS

¶ 11. "Taxation shall be uniform and equal throughout the State." Miss. Const. Art. 4, § 112. "Property shall be assessed for taxes under general laws, and by uniform rules, and in proportion to its true value ...." Id. Mississippi Code Annotated section 27-35-50(1) (Rev. 2005) defines "[t]rue value" as "market value, cash value, actual cash value, proper value and value for the purposes of appraisal for ad valorem taxation." In ascertaining true value, the county tax assessor shall consider the income capitalization approach, the cost approach, and the market data approach. 2 Miss. Code Ann. § 27-35-50 (2). "For differing types of categories of property, differing approaches may be appropriate." Id. "The choice of the particular valuation approach or approaches to be used should be made by the assessor upon a consideration of the category or nature of the property, the approaches to value for which the highest quality data is available, and the current use of the property." Id.

¶ 12. Here, the County offered a valuation of the Dewberry based on the modified cost approach, while True North offered a valuation based on the income capitalization approach. Interestingly, both parties agree that the cost approach was not the best approach to use. In fact, the County conceded that the income capitalization approach, used by True North, is appropriate for an income-producing property such as the Dewberry and is the method for which the most data is available. Yet, despite this concession, the circuit court adopted the County's valuation based on the modified cost approach.

¶ 13. When a taxpayer appeals a county's ad valorem assessment of its property, the circuit court must make a de novo determination of the property's true value. Miss. Code Ann. § 11-51-77 (Rev. 2012) (providing that when a taxpayer appeals the assessment of taxes, the "controversy shall be tried anew in the circuit court"). Here, the record reflects that the circuit court deferred to the County's valuation since the circuit court was "not convinced the County acted outside of the Constitutional mandate, or violated a statute, in using market typical property in its analysis." However, such deference to the County's appraisal is not permitted when an individual taxpayer takes a de novo appeal challenging the assessment of the property.

¶ 14.

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

Related

Rebelwood, Ltd. v. Hinds County
544 So. 2d 1356 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1989)
Lavecchia v. Mayor, of Vicksburg
20 So. 2d 831 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1945)
Willow Bend Estates, LLC v. Humphreys County Board of Supervisors
166 So. 3d 494 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 2013)
Bennett v. Highland Park Apartments, LLC
170 So. 3d 450 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 2015)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
275 So. 3d 92, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tnhyif-reiv-golf-llc-v-forrest-county-mississippi-missctapp-2018.