Clyde A. "Rock" Gisclair, Assessor for St. Charles Parish VS State of Louisiana Through the Louisiana Department of Revenue and Taxation and Louisiana Tax Commission
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL FIRST CIRCUIT 2010 CA 0952 L CLYDE A ROCK GISCLAIR ASSESSOR FOR ST CHARLES PARISH VERSUS STATE OF LOUISIANA THROUGH THE LOUISIANA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE AND TAXATION AND ET ALS Judgment rendered DEC 2 2 2010 On Appeal from the 19 Judicial District Court Parish of East Baton Rouge State of Louisiana Suit Number 582 Division A 27 121 The Honorable Todd W Hernandez Judge Presiding William W Edelman Counsel for the Plaintiff Appellant Metairie Louisiana Clyde A Rock Gisclair Assessor for St Charles Parish Victor E Bradley Jr Norco Louisiana Robert D Hoffman Jr Covington Louisiana Counsel for Defendant Appellee Louisiana Tax Commission BEFORE KUHN PETTIGREW AND KLINE JJ 1 Judge William F Kline Jr retired is serving as judge pro tempore by special appointment of n the Louisiana Supreme Court KLINE J Clyde A Rock Gisclair Assessor for St Charles Parish Gisclair appeals a judgment that denied his request for a writ of mandamus to the Louisiana Tax Commission Tax Commission the appellee For the following reasons we affirm the judgment of the trial court PERTINENT FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY Among other relief sought in his second amendment to the petition Gisclair asked the trial court to issue a writ of mandamus directing the Tax Commission to s Gisclair hold an administrative hearing and rule on his exceptions and appeal petition avers that the Tax Commission unlawfully refused to consider or act on his exceptions and appeal in which he claimed the Tax Commission significantly undervalued Entergy when it determined the 2009 value of Entergy Louisiana LLC in St Charles Parish After hearing argument on Gisclair mandamus request the trial court took s the matter under advisement It issued a written ruling explaining why it denied the writ of mandamus and subsequently entered judgment accordingly 2 Gisclair now appeals asserting two assignments of error summarized as follows 1 The trial court erred in concluding that a Louisiana assessor has no legal or constitutional right or ability to compel the Tax Commission to consider and rule on the assessor administrative challenge s 2 The trial court erred in refusing to issue the writ of mandamus DISCUSSION In its thorough and well reasoned written ruling the trial court succinctly set forth the pertinent facts and issues before it It concluded that there is no Pursuant to this court interim order the trial court submitted an amended judgment designating the judgment as s final after expressly determining that there was no just reason for delay Accordingly this appeal is properly before tl s Pa authority to order the Tax Commission to grant Gisclair hearing We agree s and we affirm the judgment of the trial court denying Gisclair request for writ of s mandamus In Gisclair v Louisiana Tax Com 100563 La 09 44 So n 10 24 3d 272 the Louisiana Supreme Court considered a different challenge by Gisclair to the Tax Commission valuation of the Entergy property s In that challenge Gisclair sought to enjoin unlawful exemptions given by the Tax Commission to Entergy and also sought to enjoin unlawful appraisal practices that benefitted Entergy Without considering the merits of Gisclair claims the supreme court s raised and sustained on its own motion the peremptory exception of no right of action In deciding the matter the supreme court observed that the substantive right at issue herein is the right to challenge the application of the relevant laws governing the tax valuation of public service properties Id 100563 at p 7 44 3d So at 278 It distinguished La R 47 which allows an assessor to S 1998C seek judicial review over local assessments and concluded that La R 47 S 1856G contained the tax provisions specific to the assessment of public service property Id 100563 at p 8 44 So at278 Paragraph G provides as follows 3d Any taxpayer asserting that a law or laws including the application thereof related to the valuation or assessment of public service properties is in violation of any act of the Congress of the United States the Constitution of the United States or the constitution of the state shall file suit in accordance with the provisions of R S C 2134 47 and D The provisions of R 47 and F shall S 1856 E be applicable to such proceedings however the tax commission and all affected assessors and the officers responsible for the collection of any taxes owed pursuant to such assessment shall be made parties to such suit If such suit affects assessments of property located in more than one parish such suit may be brought in either the district court for the parish in which the tax commission is domiciled or the district court of any one of the parishes in which the property is located and ouisiana L Revised Statutes 47 provides as follows 19980 The assessor shall bring suit when necessary to protect the interest of the state and shall also have the right of appeal and such proceedings shall be without cost to hun or the state N assessed No bond or other security shall be necessary to perfect an appeal in such suit Any appeal from a judgment of the district court shall be heard by preference within sixty days of the lodging of the record in the court of appeal The appeal shall be taken thirty days from the date the judgment of the district court is rendered The supreme court concluded that the right of action sought to be enforced belonged solely to the public service taxpayer and not to the assessor Id 10 0563 at p 10 44 So at 28081 3d Accordingly the supreme court noticed and sustained the peremptory right on no right of action against Gisclair Concluding that the grounds of exception could not be removed by amendment it dismissed s Gisclair petition against the Tax Commission with prejudice Id Pursuant to the Louisiana Supreme Court guidance we conclude that s Gisclair has no right of action to pursue the remedy he seeks While the trial court did not articulate the peremptory exception of no right of action it did find that it had no authority to grant the relief Gisclair requested The trial court did not err in denying Gisclair request for a writ of mandamus Gisclair assignments of error s s are without merit DECREE We affirm the judgment of the trial court Costs of this appeal are assessed to Clyde A Rock Gisclair Assessor for St Charles Parish in the amount of 50 878 0I011901M11 I 4
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.
