Wednesday, April 12, 2017
Ind. Decisions - Tax Court posts one today, decided yesterday
In Mary K. Fisher v. Carroll County Assessor, a 14-page opinion, Sr. Judge Fisher writes:
Mary K. Fisher challenges the final determination of the Indiana Board of Tax Review that established the assessed value of her real property for the 2012 and 2014 tax years. Upon review, the Court affirms the Indiana Board’s final determination. * * *
While these are all “pearls” of information relevant to performing an income approach, it was Fisher’s responsibility – not the Indiana Board’s – to string them together and actually form the necklace (i.e., to do an income approach). Given that there is no necklace, the Court will not craft one for her now. See, e.g., Clark v. Dep’t of Local Gov’t Fin., 779 N.E.2d 1277, 1282 n. 4 (Ind. Tax Ct. 2002) (explaining that litigants must walk both the Indiana Board and the Court through every element of their analyses; it is not enough for litigants to claim they made their case by simply citing to portions of the record as though they speak for themselves).
CONCLUSION. The final determination in this case reveals that the Indiana Board, as an impartial adjudicator, considered the parties’ evidentiary presentations, weighed their probative value, and concluded that the Assessor's appraisal corroborated her assessment by best reflecting the market value-in-use of Fisher’s lot. The Court finds no basis for reversing the Indiana Board’s conclusion and, therefore, its final determination is AFFIRMED.
Ind. Decisions - Court of Appeals issues 3 opinion(s) today (and 18 NFP memorandum decision(s))
For publication opinions today (3):
In CH v. AR , a 10-page opinion, Judge Bailey concludes:
There was sufficient evidence adduced to sustain the trial court’s finding of “true” as to a single count of Child Molesting. There was no fundamental error associated with S.B.’s competence to testify at trial.In State of Indiana v. Amber E. McHenry , an 8-page opinion, Judge Friedlander writes:
The State of Indiana appeals the trial court’s grant of Amber McHenry’s motion to dismiss her Level 2 felony charge of burglary while armed with a deadly weapon, in which the trial court essentially determined that a handgun obtained in the course of a burglary cannot support the elevated charge of burglary while armed with a deadly weapon under IC 35-43-2-1(3)(A). We affirm. * * *In Tipton County Board of Commissioners, et al. v. Gayle Prather, et al., a 9-page opinion, Judge Barnes writes:
Having concluded that IC 35-43-2-1(3)(A) does not fairly encompass within its language McHenry’s taking of the handgun from the burglary of Stoffel’s residence, we affirm the trial court’s grant of her motion to dismiss the Level 2 felony charge of burglary while armed with a deadly weapon.
The Tipton County Board of Commissioners and the City of Tipton (collectively, “Commissioners”) appeal the trial court’s denial of their motion for a bond in a judicial review action brought by Robert and Gayle Prather. We affirm and remand.NFP civil decisions today (4):
The Commissioners raise several issues, which we consolidate and restate as whether the trial court properly found that the Indiana Public Lawsuit Statute was inapplicable to the Prather’s petition for judicial review. * * *
As in Buse, although some of the Prathers’ claims, such as the traffic issues, have public importance, the main basis of the Prathers’ action is the protection of their own private interests. We conclude that this action is more like the circumstances in Dible and Buse than those in Pepinsky. Consequently, the Public Lawsuit Statute is inapplicable, and the trial court properly denied the Commissioners’ motion for a bond.
Conclusion. The trial court properly denied the motion for a bond. We affirm and remand for further proceedings.
NFP juvenile and criminal decisions today (14):