From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ackerman v. Carbon County

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania
Nov 3, 1997
703 A.2d 82 (Pa. Cmmw. Ct. 1997)

Opinion

Argued October 8, 1997.

Decided November 3, 1997.

Appeal from the Court of Common Pleas, Carbon County, No. 94-2505.

Alfred K. Hettinger, Allentown, for Appellants.

George W. Westervelt, Jr., Stroudsburg, for Appellees.

Before COLINS, President judge, and DOYLE, McMGINLEY, SMITH, FRIEDMAN and FLAHERTY, JJ.


Carbon County and Carbon County Board of Assessments (together, Appellants) appeal from two orders of the Court of Common Pleas of Carbon County (trial court); a September 9, 1996 order concluding that Appellants' assessment of properties is defective because of a lack of uniformity, and a January 10, 1997 order directing Appellants to conduct a county-wide reassessment of all properties within Carbon County within two years of the date of the order.

On appeal to this court, Appellants first contend that the trial court erred or abused its discretion in concluding that Appellants' assessment of properties is constitutionally defective because it violates Article VIII, section I of the Pennsylvania Constitution requiring that all taxes be uniform. We find neither an error of law nor an abuse of discretion and affirm the trial court's September 9, 1996 order, adopting the well-reasoned opinion of Senior Judge Michael V. Franciosa in Ackerman, et. al v. Carbon County Board of Assessment, Court of Common Pleas of Carbon County, No. 94-2505, filed September 9, 1996.

Our scope of review in a tax assessment case is narrow. In re Appeal of V.V.P. Partnership, 647 A.2d 990 (Pa.Commw. 1994), alloc. denied, 540 Pa. 615, 656 A.2d 120 (1995). A verdict of the trial court will be affirmed unless it is not supported by substantial evidence, or the court abused its discretion or made an error of law. Id. We give the trial court's findings great deference and will not disturb its decision unless there is clear error. Id.

Next, Appellants challenge the trial court's authority to order a reassessment in this case. Once again, this issue was raised before the trial court and ably disposed of in the supplemental opinion of Senior Judge Michael V. Franciosa. As a result, we affirm the trial court's January 10, 1997 order and adopt the supplemental opinion, Ackerman et. al v. Carbon County and Carbon County Board of Assessment, Court of Common Pleas of Carbon County, No. 94-2505, filed January 10, 1997.

ORDER

AND NOW, this 3rd day of November, 1997, the orders of the Court of Common Pleas of Carbon County, dated September 9, 1996 and January 10, 1997, are hereby affirmed.

FLAHERTY, J., concurs in the result only.


Summaries of

Ackerman v. Carbon County

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania
Nov 3, 1997
703 A.2d 82 (Pa. Cmmw. Ct. 1997)
Case details for

Ackerman v. Carbon County

Case Details

Full title:HOWARD ACKERMAN, MICHELLE ACKERMAN, LEE G. AL BECKER, JOHN P. BELLIS…

Court:Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania

Date published: Nov 3, 1997

Citations

703 A.2d 82 (Pa. Cmmw. Ct. 1997)

Citing Cases

GM Berkshire Hills LLC v. Berks Cnty. Bd. of Assessment

If pronounced inequalities become pervasive, relief compelling a countywide reassessment may be available.…

GM Berkshire Hills LLC v. Berks Cnty. Bd. of Assessment

If pronounced inequalities become pervasive, relief compelling a countywide reassessment may be available.…