Grover Dunn, assistant tax collector of Jefferson County, and Andrew Bennett, assistant tax assessor of Jefferson County v. Sequa Corporation
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
REL: 06/24/2011 Notice: T h i s o p i n i o n i s s u b j e c t t o f o r m a l r e v i s i o n b e f o r e p u b l i c a t i o n i n t h e advance s h e e t s o f Southern R e p o r t e r . R e a d e r s a r e r e q u e s t e d t o n o t i f y t h e R e p o r t e r o f D e c i s i o n s , A l a b a m a A p p e l l a t e C o u r t s , 300 D e x t e r A v e n u e , M o n t g o m e r y , A l a b a m a 3 6 1 0 4 - 3 7 4 1 ((334) 2 2 9 - 0 6 4 9 ) , o f a n y t y p o g r a p h i c a l o r o t h e r e r r o r s , i n o r d e r t h a t c o r r e c t i o n s may b e made b e f o r e t h e o p i n i o n i s p r i n t e d i n Southern R e p o r t e r . ALABAMA COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OCTOBER TERM, 2010-2011 2100299 Grover Dunn, a s s i s t a n t tax c o l l e c t o r o f J e f f e r s o n County, and Andrew Bennett, a s s i s t a n t tax a s s e s s o r o f J e f f e r s o n County v. Sequa C o r p o r a t i o n Appeal from J e f f e r s o n Probate (No. 43643) THOMPSON, P r e s i d i n g Grover County, Dunn, Judge. as a s s i s t a n t a n d Andrew Jefferson County Court Bennett, tax collector as a s s i s t a n t (collectively, of Jefferson t a x assessor of "thetaxing authorities"), 2100299 appeal from the judgment of the Jefferson Probate Court a w a r d i n g a r e f u n d t o Sequa C o r p o r a t i o n ( " S e q u a " ) o f c e r t a i n ad valorem taxes h e r e i n , we The Sequa to the ("the including ad Act ("TIRA"). Our For 1 the reasons set forth a f f i r m t h a t judgment. Hueytown 1 paid. f a c t s are l a r g e l y undisputed. applied Reform had Industrial IDB") valorem of 1992, On May 31, 19, 2005, Sequa Development Board for an taxes, § On May abatement pursuant 40-9B-1 et 2005, Sequa and supreme c o u r t has of of to t h e IDB City certain the seq., the Tax Ala. taxes, Incentive Code entered 1975 into a d e s c r i b e d TIRA as f o l l o w s : "TIRA i s i n t e n d e d t o promote i n d u s t r i a l growth i n A l a b a m a by p e r m i t t i n g m u n i c i p a l i t i e s , c o u n t i e s , and [public industrial a u t h o r i t i e s ] to abate municipal, county, and state noneducational ad valorem taxes, c o n s t r u c t i o n - r e l a t e d ' t r a n s a c t i o n ' t a x e s , m o r t g a g e t a x e s , and r e c o r d i n g t a x e s f o r a 'maximum e x e m p t i o n p e r i o d ' o f 10 y e a r s when s u c h t a x e s w o u l d o t h e r w i s e be l e v i e d o r c o l l e c t e d ' w i t h r e s p e c t t o p r i v a t e use i n d u s t r i a l p r o p e r t y . ' §§ 4 0 - 9 B - 4 and - 5 , A l a . Code 1975. TIRA r e q u i r e s t h e a b a t e m e n t s t o 'be e m b o d i e d i n an a g r e e m e n t ' w h i c h must set forth the estimated amount of the a b a t e m e n t , ' t h e maximum e x e m p t i o n p e r i o d , ' and t h e ' [ g ] o o d - f a i t h p r o j e c t i o n s by t h e p r i v a t e u s e r o f : the amount to be invested[,] the number of i n d i v i d u a l s t o be e m p l o y e d , i n i t i a l l y and i n t h e succeeding t h r e e y e a r s [ , ] and the p a y r o l l . ' § 4 0 - 9 B - 6 ( b ) ( 1 ) and (2) 2 of 2100299 t a x - a b a t e m e n t a g r e e m e n t p u r s u a n t t o w h i c h Sequa was g r a n t e d an abatement from l i a b i l i t y construction-related recording taxes. Commission approval and transaction The the o f Sequa's f o r noneducational property IDB Alabama taxes, notified and the Department of tax-abatement request. taxes, mortgage and Jefferson County Revenue of i t s In a letter to Sequa d a t e d J u l y 1, 2005, t h e D e p a r t m e n t o f Revenue w r o t e , i n part: "For property t a x purposes, the abatement b e t w e e n [ S e q u a ] and [ t h e I D B ] p r o v i d e s t h a t [ S e q u a ] s h a l l be a l l o w e d an a b a t e m e n t o f p r o p e r t y t a x e s n o t r e q u i r e d t o be u s e d f o r e d u c a t i o n a l p u r p o s e s o r f o r c a p i t a l i m p r o v e m e n t s f o r e d u c a t i o n f o r t h e maximum of 10 y e a r s as s p e c i f i e d i n t h e a b a t e m e n t a g r e e m e n t . " P u r s u a n t t o S e c t i o n 40-7-4, Code o f A l a b a m a 1975, a l l p e r s o n a l p r o p e r t y s u c h as furniture, fixtures, machinery, and/or equipment t h a t has a t t a i n e d s i t u s i n t h e S t a t e o f A l a b a m a as o f O c t o b e r 1, and a l l r e a l p r o p e r t y ( l a n d a n d / o r b u i l d i n g s ) that has been acquired must be reported and a s s e s s e d , b e t w e e n O c t o b e r 1 and December 31, w i t h the [Alabama] County assessing official. A d d i t i o n a l l y , any a b a t e m e n t on s u c h r e a l a n d / o r p e r s o n a l p r o p e r t y t h a t has b e e n g r a n t e d s h o u l d a l s o be c l a i m e d b e t w e e n O c t o b e r 1 a n d December 31, w i t h the AL C o u n t y a s s e s s i n g o f f i c i a l . " T h e r e f o r e , t o e n s u r e t h a t [Sequa] r e c e i v e s t h e p r o p e r c r e d i t due, a c o p y o f any a n d a l l a b a t e m e n t Dobbs v. S h e l b y C o u n t y E c o n . & I n d u s . Dev. A u t h . , 749 So. 2d 425, 428 ( A l a . 1 9 9 9 ) . 3 2100299 agreements i n a d d i t i o n t o t h e l i s t i n g of a l l a b a t e d p r o p e r t y s h o u l d be p r o v i d e d t o t h e c o u n t y a s s e s s i n g official. Not p r o v i d i n g t h i s i n f o r m a t i o n t o t h e c o u n t y a s s e s s i n g o f f i c i a l may d e l a y [ S e q u a ] ' s c r e d i t for the abated taxes." It the i s undisputed t h a t Sequa d i d n o t i m m e d i a t e l y n o t i f y J e f f e r s o n County which i t was tax assessor entitled under the of the t a x exemptions tax-abatement to agreement. M o r e o v e r , i n i t s p e r s o n a l - p r o p e r t y ad v a l o r e m t a x r e t u r n s f o r 2007 and 2008 that i t filed with the J e f f e r s o n County Assessor, Sequa d i d n o t r e f e r e n c e t h e t a x - a b a t e m e n t Tax agreement o r r e s p o n d a f f i r m a t i v e l y when a s k e d i n t h e r e t u r n s w h e t h e r i t c l a i m e d t h a t any o f i t s p r o p e r t y was exempt f r o m t a x a t i o n . its 2009 personal-property ad valorem tax return, In Sequa r e f e r e n c e d i t s e x e m p t i o n f r o m s a l e s and u s e t a x e s , b u t i t d i d not reference i t s exemption taxes. On December 27, 2007, and on December 17, 2008, Sequa p a i d real- and p e r s o n a l - p r o p e r t y from ad ad v a l o r e m t a x e s valorem to the a s s i s t a n t tax c o l l e c t o r on f o u r p a r c e l s b a s e d on a m i l l a g e r a t e t h a t d i d n o t take into account the tax exemptions e n t i t l e d by v i r t u e o f t h e t a x - a b a t e m e n t 4 to which agreement. Sequa was 2100299 On December 18, 2009, Sequa f i l e d a p e t i t i o n f o r a r e f u n d o f ad v a l o r e m t a x e s w i t h t h e J e f f e r s o n P r o b a t e C o u r t to § 40-10-160, A l a . Code 1975. That pursuant section provides: "Any t a x p a y e r who t h r o u g h any m i s t a k e , o r by r e a s o n o f any d o u b l e a s s e s s m e n t , o r by any e r r o r i n the assessment or c o l l e c t i o n of t a x e s , or other e r r o r , has p a i d t a x e s t h a t were n o t due upon t h e p r o p e r t y o f s u c h t a x p a y e r s h a l l be e n t i t l e d , upon m a k i n g p r o o f o f s u c h payment t o t h e s a t i s f a c t i o n o f t h e C o m p t r o l l e r , t o have s u c h t a x e s r e f u n d e d t o h i m if application shall be made therefor, as h e r e i n a f t e r p r o v i d e d , w i t h i n two y e a r s f r o m t h e d a t e o f s u c h payment." I n i t s p e t i t i o n , Sequa c o n t e n d e d t h a t i t h a d o v e r p a i d i t s 2007 and 2008 ad v a l o r e m particular, issued i t asserted that to i t consideration that taxes because of mistake i t had for those the years the tax-abatement been charged at tax had bills that failed a g r e e m e n t and, a higher or e r r o r . tax to had been take into as a rate In result, than was real- and assistant tax applicable. On December 31, ad personal-property collector account based the 2009, valorem on taxes a millage tax-abatement amended i t s p e t i t i o n Sequa rate again to that agreement. paid the d i d not take Thereafter, f o r a refund of taxes to r e f l e c t a d d i t i o n a l t a x payment. 5 into Sequa that 2100299 On February 2, 2010, the r e s p o n s e t o Sequa's p e t i t i o n taxing authorities filed i n which they denied t h a t a Sequa was e n t i t l e d t o t h e r e f u n d o f ad v a l o r e m t a x e s t h a t i t s o u g h t . They a r g u e d its that exemption Sequa h a d not n o t i f i e d the t a x a s s e s s o r of f r o m ad v a l o r e m t a x e s u n t i l November 2009 as a r e s u l t , t h a t Sequa h a d l o s t t h e b e n e f i t o f t h a t for the failure prior tax years. They also argued and, exemption that Sequa's to i n f o r m the t a x a s s e s s o r of i t s e n t i t l e m e n t t o t a x exemptions d i d not c o n s t i t u t e a "mistake" or " e r r o r " f o r which it c o u l d o b t a i n a r e f u n d under On held M a r c h 8, a bench 2010, and trial at documentary e v i d e n c e . § 40-10-160. June 25, which 2010, the probate c o u r t i t received F o l l o w i n g the t r i a l , ore tenus and the probate c o u r t e n t e r e d a j u d g m e n t i n w h i c h i t f o u n d , among o t h e r t h i n g s , Sequa had abatement "failure "complied with requirements o f n o n e d u c a t i o n a l ad to note or property tax returns was the claim the valorem of TIRA t a x e s " and abatement on f o r t h e 2007, 2008, and the for taxes f o r the years c o u r t c o n c l u d e d , Sequa was at issue." entitled, 6 under the that i t s personal 2009 t a x y e a r s an i n a d v e r t e n t e r r o r w h i c h r e s u l t e d i n o v e r p a y m e n t s valorem that Thus, the o f ad probate § 40-10-160, t o a 2100299 refund years. of i t s overpayments The t a x i n g o f ad v a l o r e m taxes f o r those a u t h o r i t i e s appealed the probate court's j u d g m e n t t o t h e supreme c o u r t , w h i c h t r a n s f e r r e d t h e a p p e a l t o this c o u r t p u r s u a n t t o § 1 2 - 2 - 7 ( 6 ) , A l a . Code 1975. Because t h i s appeal presents questions of law t h a t are b a s e d on l a r g e l y u n d i s p u t e d f a c t s , o u r r e v i e w i s de novo. Ex p a r t e S o l e y n , See 33 So. 3d 584, 587 ( A l a . 2009) ( " [ I ] t i s w e l l e s t a b l i s h e d t h a t where t h e i s s u e s i n v o l v e o n l y t h e a p p l i c a t i o n of law t o u n d i s p u t e d facts appellate review i s de novo."). The t a x i n g a u t h o r i t i e s a r g u e t h a t t h e t r i a l c o u r t e r r e d i n i t s interpretation o f § 40-10-160 b e c a u s e , they say, t h e terms " m i s t a k e " a n d " e r r o r " as u s e d i n t h a t s t a t u t e do n o t i n c l u d e a t a x p a y e r ' s f a i l u r e t o c l a i m an e x e m p t i o n on i t s t a x r e t u r n s . R e l y i n g on §§ 40-7-4 a n d -6, A l a . Code 1975, t h e y a r g u e t h a t , to claim a property-tax exemption, a taxpayer i s r e q u i r e d t o notify that the tax assessor the property e x e m p t i o n and t h a t , when a t a x p a y e r assessor by fails i s entitled t o an to n o t i f y the t a x o f any e x e m p t i o n t o w h i c h i t i s e n t i t l e d as r e q u i r e d those exemption. statutes, the They p o i n t taxpayer i s not entitled to an o u t t h a t n o t i f i c a t i o n by t h e t a x p a y e r 7 2100299 is t h e o n l y means by w h i c h a t a x a s s e s s o r can l e a r n of a tax abatement. Section [tax] 40-7-4 r e q u i r e s t h a t a t a x p a y e r assessor under which oath he a property of was interest whatever," provides, full and an or complete list in he to annual which the of a l l i n relevant part: on owner, "render basis. had Section any 40-7-6 " A l l p r o p e r t y c l a i m e d exempt f r o m t a x a t i o n u n d e r t h e p r o v i s i o n s o f t h i s t i t l e s h a l l be l i s t e d w i t h t h e tax a s s e s s o r by t h e t a x p a y e r and e n t e r e d on h i s r e t u r n s h o w i n g t h e i t e m s o f p r o p e r t y s o u g h t t o be e x e m p t e d , and no p r o p e r t y o m i t t e d f r o m s a i d r e t u r n s h a l l be e x e m p t e d . " The e f f e c t of these s t a t u t e s i s t h a t , i f a t a x p a y e r wants t o c l a i m the b e n e f i t of a p r o p e r t y - t a x exemption, must list that exemption a t t o r n e y g e n e r a l has as to claims of with opined, exemption the "[t]he assessing officer's duty not tax taxpayer As does the the assessor. i n c l u d e an affirmative s e a r c h of a l l the p r o p e r t y i n h i s j u r i s d i c t i o n t o seek out apply exemptions." Op. Att'y Gen. No. 2002-280 (July and 2, 2002). D e s p i t e t h e d i s a l l o w a n c e i n § 40-7-6 o f an e x e m p t i o n t h a t a taxpayer noted, has failed to c l a i m , § 40-10-160, as p r e v i o u s l y provides that a taxpayer 8 is entitled, upon t h e filing 2100299 of an appropriate application and subject to a limitations p e r i o d o f two y e a r s , t o a r e f u n d o f t a x e s p a i d " t h a t were n o t due upon t h e p r o p e r t y made "through assessment any of such taxpayer" mistake, or any by was the or c o l l e c t i o n of taxes, or other In the present case, comply ... i f t h e payment with § 40-7-6 i t i s undisputed with regard to error in error." t h a t Sequa d i d n o t the ad valorem tax e x e m p t i o n p r o v i d e d by t h e t a x - a b a t e m e n t agreement because i t failed exemptions to list resulting from presented by failure to with the this claim the tax assessor tax-abatement appeal on is i t s tax any tax agreement. whether Sequa's returns p r o v i d e d by t h e t a x - a b a t e m e n t agreement The the question inadvertent tax exemptions or otherwise to n o t i f y t h e t a x a s s e s s o r o f t h e e x e m p t i o n s p r o v i d e d by t h a t agreement causes i t t o l o s e the b e n e f i t of the tax-abatement agreement t o w h i c h i t was o t h e r w i s e e n t i t l e d d u r i n g 2007, 2008, and 2009 o r w h e t h e r § 40-10-160 p r o v i d e s Sequa r e l i e f f r o m i t s f a i l u r e to claim the exemptions provided by the tax-abatement agreement. Regarding s t a t u t o r y c o n s t r u c t i o n , o u r supreme c o u r t written: 9 has 2100299 " I t i s t h i s Court's r e s p o n s i b i l i t y to give e f f e c t to the l e g i s l a t i v e i n t e n t whenever that i n t e n t i s m a n i f e s t e d . S t a t e v. U n i o n Tank C a r Co., 281 A l a . 246, 248, 201 So. 2d 402, 403 ( 1 9 6 7 ) . When i n t e r p r e t i n g a s t a t u t e , t h i s C o u r t must r e a d t h e statute as a whole because statutory language d e p e n d s on context; we will presume t h a t the L e g i s l a t u r e knew t h e m e a n i n g o f t h e words i t u s e d when i t e n a c t e d t h e s t a t u t e . Ex p a r t e J a c k s o n , 614 So. 2d 405, 406-07 ( A l a . 1 9 9 3 ) . A d d i t i o n a l l y , when a t e r m i s n o t d e f i n e d i n a s t a t u t e , t h e commonly a c c e p t e d d e f i n i t i o n o f t h e t e r m s h o u l d be a p p l i e d . R e p u b l i c S t e e l C o r p . v. H o r n , 268 A l a . 279, 281, 105 So. 2d 446, 447 ( 1 9 5 8 ) . F u r t h e r m o r e , we must g i v e t h e words i n a s t a t u t e t h e i r p l a i n , o r d i n a r y , and commonly understood meaning, and where plain l a n g u a g e i s u s e d we must i n t e r p r e t i t t o mean e x a c t l y what i t s a y s . Ex p a r t e S h e l b y County [ H e a l t h ] C a r e A u t h . , 850 So. 2d 332 ( A l a . 2 0 0 2 ) . " Bean D r e d g i n g , L.L.C. v. A l a b a m a D e p ' t . o f Revenue, 855 So. 2d 513, 517 ( A l a . 2003). Furthermore, " s t a t u t e s concerning the same s u b j e c t m a t t e r a r e t o be r e a d i n p a r i m a t e r i a and s h o u l d be construed together to Jefferson County v. ascertain Weinrib, 36 the So. 3d meaning 508, of 511-12 each." (Ala. 2009). It that i s apparent the l e g i s l a t u r e from the p l a i n language of § 40-10-160 intended to provide a taxpayer relief when an e r r o r o r m i s t a k e r e s u l t s i n t h e t a x p a y e r ' s payment o f taxes that were not due and that, m i s t a k e , w o u l d n o t have b e e n p a i d . 10 but f o r the Reading that error or section i n 2100299 pari materia with § 40-7-6, we conclude that § 40-10-160 c o n s t i t u t e s an e x c e p t i o n t o t h e g e n e r a l r u l e t h a t a taxpayer who the has failed to l i s t i t s property as exempt w i t h tax a s s e s s o r i s n o t e n t i t l e d t o an e x e m p t i o n as t o t h a t p r o p e r t y . Thus, i f t h e r e a s o n assessor was t h e p r o p e r t y was because of a mistake e n t i t l e d , upon t h e f i l i n g 10-160, to property obtain during the a for years application. Such a r e a d i n g operation gives and full l i s t e d w i t h the or e r r o r , of a proper refund two not taxpayer is a p p l i c a t i o n under § 40¬ taxes paid preceding gives both effect the on the the exempt filing of taxpayer erroneously Our can obtain a t o what we refund for the statutes a field b e l i e v e was i n t e n t i o n o f t h e l e g i s l a t u r e i n e n a c t i n g a mechanism by a tax taxes of the which mistakenly or paid. conclusion i n this regard i s i n accord with advice t h e a t t o r n e y g e n e r a l o f A l a b a m a has p r o v i d e d p r e v i o u s l y t o t a x officials. In general was asked pursuant t o § 40-10-160 when t h e t a x p a y e r had an exemption in Op. a Att'y whether prior Gen. 2002-280, taxpayer a No. can tax return. In the obtain attorney a refund f a i l e d to claim response, after q u o t i n g § 40-10-160 and § 40-7-6, t h e a t t o r n e y g e n e r a l w r o t e : 11 2100299 "The a s s e s s i n g o f f i c e r ' s d u t y as t o c l a i m s o f e x e m p t i o n does n o t i n c l u d e an a f f i r m a t i v e s e a r c h o f a l l t h e p r o p e r t y i n h i s j u r i s d i c t i o n t o s e e k o u t and apply exemptions. I f an e x e m p t i o n i s c l a i m e d , he s h o u l d v e r i f y t h e f a c t s upon w h i c h t h e c l a i m o f exemption i s based to s a t i s f y himself of the v a l i d i t y of the claim. The p r o p e r t y o w n e r / t a x p a y e r has t h e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y t o make a c l a i m o f e x e m p t i o n i n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h t h e l a w i f he e x p e c t s t o be granted the b e n e f i t of the exemption. See S t a t e v. R o s s G r a d y I n s . A g e n c y , I n c . , [48 A l a . App. 578,] 266 So. 2d 787 ( [ C i v . App.] 1 9 7 2 ) . I f , however, a t a x p a y e r i s e n t i t l e d t o an e x e m p t i o n , b u t p a i d t h e t a x e s b e c a u s e , by m i s t a k e , t h e t a x p a y e r f a i l e d t o c l a i m the exemption, the taxpayer i s e n t i t l e d to a r e f u n d p u r s u a n t t o [§] 40-10-160 o f t h e Code o f Alabama." Op. Att'y 2003-26 opinion Gen. (Nov. No. 6, 2002-280. 2002). of the a t t o r n e y general's opinion ... See also A l t h o u g h we general, can be we Op. are Att'y not note t h a t Gen. b o u n d by "an persuasive No. an attorney authority." H e a l t h S o u t h C o r p . v. J e f f e r s o n C o u n t y Tax A s s e s s o r , 978 So. 2d 737, 741 ( A l a . C i v . App. 2006), a f f ' d , 978 So. 2d 745 ( A l a . 2007). The t a x i n g a u t h o r i t i e s r e l y on J o n e s v. J o h n s o n , 240 A l a . 357, 199 So. 539 ( 1 9 4 1 ) , b u t we f i n d t h a t c a s e d i s t i n g u i s h a b l e from the p r e s e n t case. I n J o n e s , o u r supreme c o u r t w r o t e t h a t "the law r e q u i r e s the t a x p a y e r i n h i s r e t u r n from year t o year to list the homestead separately 12 thus d i s c l o s i n g the lands 2100299 claimed as exempt absence of such return, 542. from State claim the exemption in ad the valorem return i s lost." However, t h e o n l y or by and to which 199 So. at that holding directed was exemption taxpayer, in his return, [must] the benefit disclose of was o f t h e h o m e s t e a d f r o m S t a t e ad v a l o r e m t a x e s , the " [ t ] o obtain i n the supplementary 240 A l a . a t 360, question whether, taxes, the the ... realty c o n s t i t u t i n g t h e h o m e s t e a d , o r o t h e r w i s e make c l a i m t o h i s t a x exemption t h e r e o n [ . ] " was 240 A l a . a t 359, 199 So. a t 541. no i s s u e r a i s e d i n t h a t c a s e as t o w h e t h e r mistakenly fails exempt from refund of taxes to taxation claim that certain of a taxpayer who i t s property is i s thereafter permitted p a i d based on § 40-10-160. that a taxpayer who has exempt w i t h t h e t a x a s s e s s o r as t o t h a t In App. obtain noted as exemption 266 So. 2d 787 I n s u r a n c e Agency, ( C i v . App. I n c . , 48 A l a . 1972), the o t h e r case w h i c h t h e t a x i n g a u t h o r i t i e s r e l y , an i n s u r a n c e a g e n c y a refund the above, i t s property i s n o t e n t i t l e d t o an a property. S t a t e v. R o s s G r a d y 578, f a i l e d to l i s t to In e f f e c t , J o n e s c o u r t m e r e l y r e s t a t e d t h e g e n e r a l r u l e we i.e., There of d o m e s t i c - c o r p o r a t i o n 13 share taxes on sought i t had p a i d on 2100299 the basis that, because i n s t i t u t i o n , i t was 48 A l a . App. a t 580, reversed, 266 So. have filed exemption. agency the holding that excise-tax 48 Ala. App. B e c a u s e t h e a g e n c y had the and, a g e n c y had in qualified inform that 48 A l a . App. taxpayer Ross f o r the the tax exemptions on to n o t i f y entitled refund the financial On i t had sought, by this for the t o have p a i d e x c i s e t a x e s and to 582-85, be 266 entitled So. 2d at to the 792-94. n o t done s o , t h i s c o u r t c o n c l u d e d t h a t i t was not a t 585, 266 Grady, in exemptions assessor i t s tax of entitled So. the at returns. the 2d a t 794. present issue; those to case, Thus, Unlike Sequa i t simply exemptions Ross refund or note Grady tax assessor virtue of the i t the fully failed to those has no case. t a x i n g a u t h o r i t i e s n e x t c o n t e n d t h a t Sequa's the taxes. appeal from a statute providing returns at a p p l i c a t i o n to the present The a not been e n t i t l e d t o the e x e m p t i o n i t c l a i m e d therefore, sought. as 2d a t 788-89. exemption r e q u i r e d the taxpayer to qualified e n t i t l e d t o an e x e m p t i o n f r o m t h o s e judgment a w a r d i n g the court i t failure of the exemptions to which i t was tax-abatement not 14 a g r e e m e n t does 2100299 constitute a "mistake" or "error" under § 40-10-160. We disagree. C o n s t r u i n g § 40-10-160 and, i n p a r t i c u l a r , d i s c u s s i n g t h e meaning of the terms " m i s t a k e s " statute, this c o u r t has and "error" as u s e d i n t h a t written: "The p e r t i n e n t l a n g u a g e o f [§ 40-10-160] i s : 'Any t a x p a y e r who t h r o u g h any m i s t a k e , ... o r by any e r r o r i n the assessment or c o l l e c t i o n of t a x e s , or o t h e r e r r o r , has p a i d t a x e s t h a t were n o t due upon the p r o p e r t y of such t a x p a y e r . . . . ' Nothing i n § 40-10-160, A l a . Code 1975, l e a d s us t o b e l i e v e t h a t the l e g i s l a t u r e i n t e n d e d a n y t h i n g other than the p l a i n meaning of those words. We do n o t f i n d t h e language to be ambiguous, and because the l e g i s l a t u r e f a i l e d t o d e f i n e t h e words ' m i s t a k e ' and ' e r r o r , ' we must g i v e t h o s e words t h e i r common, everyday meaning. The t e r m ' m i s t a k e ' i s d e f i n e d as 'a wrong a c t i o n o r s t a t e m e n t p r o c e e d i n g f r o m f a u l t y judgment, inadequate knowledge, or inattention.' M e r r i a m - W e b s t e r ' s C o l l e g i a t e D i c t i o n a r y 795 (11th ed. 2 0 0 3 ) . The t e r m ' e r r o r ' i s d e f i n e d as 'an a c t i n v o l v i n g an u n i n t e n t i o n a l d e v i a t i o n f r o m t r u t h o r accuracy.' Merriam-Webster's C o l l e g i a t e D i c t i o n a r y 425 ( 1 1 t h ed. 2 0 0 3 ) . " H e a l t h S o u t h C o r p . v. J e f f e r s o n C o u n t y Tax A s s e s s o r , 978 So. at 2d 741. Although, Sequa received in the a present letter indicating t h a t i t was exemption with the from case, the i t i s undisputed Department of that Revenue r e q u i r e d t o c l a i m t h e ad v a l o r e m tax assessor, 15 nothing in the tax record 2100299 indicates that exemptions Sequa to abatement which i t was agreement f a i l i n g to l i s t intentionally or entitled that i t s property property tax authorities showing not that the find that, r e j e c t the v i r t u e of received some was inadvertent, challenged evidence of that record tax- benefit inference the f i n d i n g on not by found i t s personal- and did tax the In f a c t , the p r o b a t e c o u r t t o c l a i m i t s a b a t e m e n t on returns have i t by to as exempt s u c h t h a t an of such i n t e n t c o u l d a r i s e . t h a t Sequa's f a i l u r e chose taxing appeal support by that finding. We under the facts of this case, Sequa's f a i l u r e t o c l a i m t h e ad v a l o r e m t a x e x e m p t i o n s , u n d e r § 40-7¬ 6, to sought court which i t was a refund defined entitled and constituted a those H e a l t h S o u t h Corp. terms As for f o r which "mistake" purposes a r e s u l t , we i t subsequently or " e r r o r " as of § 40-10-160 conclude t h a t the p e t i t i o n e d i s due t o be affirmed. AFFIRMED. Pittman, B r y a n , Thomas, and 16 Moore, J J . , c o n c u r . in probate c o u r t ' s j u d g m e n t p r o v i d i n g f o r t h e r e f u n d o f ad v a l o r e m f o r w h i c h Sequa had this taxes
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
