|
Court
Decisions
State of Connecticut Judicial Branch Archives
Town of Windham v. St. Joseph's Living Center
Supreme Court, (SC 17916) March 24,2009. The
3-2 decision affirmed the ability to tax the nursing home, but exempted the
chapel portion. This appeal was on the 2003-2008 Grand Lists, if lost, would
have required refunds totaling over $800,000, including 10% interest. It was a
real "David v. Goliath" case. This case may provide a "blueprint" of sorts
for facilities such as these to be exempt in the future. The Supreme Court has
almost redefined "charitable".
|
Griswold Airport, Inc. v Madison,
Supreme Court, (SC 17938) 12/23/2008.
The primary issue before the court is whether a municipal tax assessor’s
termination of an open space classification for property on the basis of its
proposed use, as opposed to its current use, was proper. The outcome of this
appeal turns on the proper interpretation of General Statutes (Rev. to 2003) §
12-504h, a provision that gives municipal tax assessors discretionary authority
to remove open space classifications previously placed on real property within
their municipalities when the use of that property has changed.
|
Snake Meadow Club, Inc. v. Killingly,
Superior Court,
judicial district of Windham at Putnam, Docket No. CV 07 4006068S (July 24,
2008, Aronson, J.T.R.) (assessor
under no statutory authority to recognize agreement between plaintiff and AT&T
to consider cell tower erected on plaintiff’s property as personalty rather than
realty).
|
Hartford/Windsor Healthcare Properties, LLC v. Hartford, Superior Court,
judicial district of New Britain, Docket No. CV 074014469;
Trinity Hill Realty, Inc. v. Hartford,
Superior Court, judicial district of New Britain, Docket No. CV 074014470 (April
2, 2008, Aronson, J.T.R.) (nursing home classified as commercial,
not residential or apartment property).
|
BREEZY KNOLL ASSOCIATION, INC. v. TOWN OF MORRIS (SC 17815) - May 13,
2008
|
HealthSouth Corp. v. Waterbury, Superior Court, judicial district of
New Britain, Docket No. CV 054011048;
HealthSouth Corp. v. Madison, Superior Court, judicial district of
New Britain, Docket No. CV 054010916;
HealthSouth Corp. v. Fairfield, Superior Court, judicial district of
Fairfield at Bridgeport, Docket No. CV 054010807;
HealthSouth Corp. v. Willimantic, Superior Court, judicial district
of Windham at Putnam, Docket No. CV 054002794;
HealthSouth Corp. v. Norwalk, Superior Court, judicial district of
Stamford/Norwalk at Stamford, Docket No. CV 054006234 (March 13, 2008, Aronson, J.T.R.).
|
Aspetuck Land Trust, Inc. v. Bridgeport,
Superior Court, judicial district of Fairfield at Bridgeport, Docket No. CV
064016847
(March 3,
2008, Cohn, J.) (whether
undeveloped island property held for charitable purpose was entitled to tax
exemption).
|
Burlington Coat Realty v. East Windsor, Superior Court, judicial
district of New Britain, Docket No. CV 064011423S (January 3, 2008, Aronson, JTR)
(valuation of owner/occupied big box retail property)
|
Goodspeed Airport, LLC v. East Haddam, Superior Court, judicial district
of Middlesex at Middletown, Docket Nos. CV 040104527S; CV 064005318S; CV
064005319S (December 20, 2007, Aronson, JTR) (valuation of commercial
utility airport partly classified as open space).
|
J.C. Penney v. Manchester, Superior Court, judicial district of New
Britain, Docket No. CV 064010562S (November 13, 2007, Aronson, JTR)
(issue involved the timely filing of a personal property declaration for a large
commercial distribution center).
|
Dominion Nuclear v. Waterford, Superior Court,
judicial district of New London, Docket No. CV 03 0566126 (November 8,
2007, Aronson, JTR) (valuation of a nuclear power plant).
|
Sullivan v. Bridgeport, Superior Court, judicial district of
Fairfield at Bridgeport, Docket No. CV 04 4000507 (August 2, 2007, Aronson,
JTR) (valuation of eighty-year-old single-family house converted into three
apartments).
|
Sullivan v. Bridgeport, Superior Court, judicial district of New
Britain, Docket No. CV 07 4013444 (August 2, 2007, Aronson, JTR)
(personal property consisting of stoves and refrigerators located in leased
apartments are not exempt from taxation as household furniture pursuant to
General Statutes § 12-81 (31)).
|
PJM & Associates, LC v. Bridgeport, Superior Court, judicial
district of Fairfield at Bridgeport, Docket No. CV 05 4009473;
Bridgeport Towers, LLC v. Bridgeport, Superior Court, judicial
district of Fairfield at Bridgeport, Docket No. CV 05 4009474 (July 27, 2007, Aronson, JTR) (interpretation of the penalty provision in General Statutes §
12-63c dealing with taxpayers' failure
to provide the assessor with rental income and expense information).
|
Krevis v. Bridgeport, Superior Court, judicial district of
Fairfield at Bridgeport, Docket No. CV 06 4014350 (July 17, 2007, Aronson,
JTR) (declaratory judgment denied and judgment entered in favor of the
defendant; one-year statute of limitations in General
Statutes § 12-119 applicable to the facts in this case; plaintiff failed
to overcome the statutory presumption that his motor vehicles are sited for tax
purposes at his residence in Bridgeport).
|
Sakon v. Glastonbury, Superior Court, Judicial District of New
Britain, Docket Nos. CV 054003783 & 054006620 (April 27, 2007, Aronson, JTR)
(highest and best use of three, contiguous parcels of undeveloped land, owned or
controlled by the same taxpayer, located in a planned travel zone, were for
commercial use, not for a park).
|
Moutinho v. Bridgeport, Superior Court, judicial district of Fairfield
at Bridgeport, Docket No. CV 04 0412557 (April 11, 2007, Aronson, JTR)
(valuation of 1.86 acre parcel of land located in a light industrial zone
improved with two buildings consisting of an office/warehouse and garage).
|
Griswold Airport v. Madison, Superior Court, judicial district of New
Britain, Docket No. CV 05 4011562 (March 30, 2007, Aronson, JTR) (assessor was
without authority to terminate open space classification of airport and then
revalue property for condominium use).
|
Rizzuto v. DRS, Superior Court, judicial district of New Britain,
Docket No. CV 06 4008351 (February 28, 2007, Aronson, JTR) (Burden of Proof
involving change of domicile is by clear and convincing evidence).
|
St. Joseph Living Center v. Windham, Superior Court, judicial district
of Windham at Putnam, Docket No. CV 04 0072963 (February 23, 2007, Aronson, JTR)
(church-affiliated nursing home facility not exempt from property taxes because
it was not used exclusively for charitable purpose).
|
Sheridan v. Killingly, Superior Court, judicial district of Windham
at Putnam, Docket No. CV 03 007 0359 (January 12, 2007, Aronson, JTR) (on
remand, valuation of 202-acre site with 31 acres divided into 274 lots; issue of
the valuation of leasehold interests in the lots).
|
Middletown Oxford L.P. v. Middletown, Superior Court, judicial district
of Middlesex at Middletown, Docket No. CV 04 0104632 (December 11, 2006,
Aronson, JTR) (valuation of property containing thirteen, three-story walk-up,
garden-style apartment buildings with 336 units).
|
Hotshoe Enterprises, LLC v. Hartford, Superior Court, Judicial District
of New Britain, Docket No. CV 05 4007951 (November 30, 2006, Aronson, JTR)
(condominium hangar units located on a state-owned airport and leased to private
individuals exempt from municipal property taxes pursuant to § 12-64 (c)).
|
Dominion Nuclear v. Waterford, Superior Court, judicial district of New
Britain, Docket No. CV 03 0566126 (April 7, 2006, Aronson, JTR) (transferability
of exemption).
|
Executive Square v. Wethersfield, Superior Court, judicial district
of New Britain, Docket No. CV 04 4000074 (January 4, 2006, Aronson, JTR)
(valuation of 12-story housing complex for low and moderate income elderly
residents where the issue was whether, under the income approach, contract rent
or market rent should be used in determining net income).
|
Dominion Nuclear v. Waterford, Superior Court, judicial district of New
Britain, Docket No. CV 03 0566126 (May 27, 2005, Aronson, JTR) (Statutory
exemption cannot be transferred unless specifically provided for in the statute;
the role of the assessor in relationship to the grant of statutory exemption).
|
| |
|
