Opinion
No. MMX CV 10-6003248-S
June 22, 2011
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION
I. Procedural History
The plaintiff Evergreen Associates LLC "Evergreen" commenced a civil action against the defendant Town of Clinton and the tax collector Melanie Yanus. The July 30, 2010 complaint alleges that Evergreen paid Clinton $4,596.06 in property taxes under protest on July 23, 2007. The plaintiff contends that it was not lawfully obligated to pay the taxes and has demanded a refund which has not been paid.
In a pleading dated September 9, 2010 the defendant responded to the complaint through its answer and special defense. In the special defense the defendant maintains that Evergreen may only seek a refund of the taxes paid pursuant to General Statutes § 12-129. The defendant contends that this statute contains a three-year statute of limitation, which time period has expired.
The trial was held on May 19, 2011. The parties introduced testimony and a number of exhibits. Thereafter the parties filed post-trial briefs.
II. Discussion
From the credible evidence presented at trial and the parties' stipulations, the court finds the following relevant facts.
Evergreen is the owner and operator of a mobile home park known as Evergreen Park which is located in Clinton, Connecticut. The Town of Clinton is a municipality chartered under the laws of the State of Connecticut. Defendant Melanie Yanus was at all relevant times the Tax Collector for the Town.
During a period of time prior to November 2003 a mobile home owned by a third party whose last name is Deming was located on Lot 15 at Evergreen. In the fall of 2003 Deming was evicted from Evergreen. Thereafter the mobile home was demolished. Deming was responsible to pay taxes on the mobile home to the town. Evergreen was responsible for the payment of taxes on the real property. Deming was delinquent in tax payments. Specifically, monies were owed for taxes based on the grand lists of October 1, 2002, October 1, 2003, and October 1, 2004. The last due date for taxes on these grand lists was January 1, 2006. The total amount due was $4,596.06.
The Town of Clinton has adopted an ordinance which provides in relevant part that [t]he Building Official shall not approve an application for a building permit nor issue said permit for any property for which real estate taxes are delinquent, unless and until said taxes and all outstanding interest and fees are paid in full . . ." (Plaintiff's Exhibit 16.) This ordinance was promulgated pursuant to General Statutes § 7-148(c)(2)(B).
In May 2007, Evergreen sought a building permit for Lot No. 15. The building official declined to issue a permit for the lot because Deming owed back taxes on the mobile home in the amount previously discussed. (Plaintiff's Exhibit 5.) In order to obtain the building permit Evergreen paid the taxes in the amount of $4,596.06 on or about July 23, 2007. (Plaintiff's Exhibit 6.) Thereafter a building permit was issued.
The plaintiff acting through its attorney in a letter dated March 11, 2010 made written demand of the Town for a refund of the $4,596.06 paid as taxes on the mobile home. (Plaintiff's Exhibit 10.) Clinton has not refunded these monies. Clinton has taken the position that it lacks the authority to return the monies even though Evergreen was under no obligation to make the payment. This position is asserted in the special defense.
Initially the Court notes that "a municipality, as a creation of the state, has no inherent powers of its own, and has only those powers expressly granted to it by the state or that are necessary for it to discharge its duties and carry out its purposes." Wellswood Columbia, LLC v. Hebron, 295 Conn. 802, 814 (2010).
General Statutes § 12-129 provides in relevant part; "[a]ny person . . . who pays a tax from which the payor is by statute exempt and entitled to an abatement . . . may make application in writing to the collector of taxes for a refund of such amount. Such application shall be made not later than (1) three years from the date such tax was due or (2) such extended deadline as the municipality may, by ordinance, establish."
The Town of Clinton does not have an ordinance extending the three-year period.
In National CSS, Inc. v. City of Stamford, 195 Conn. 587, 597-98 (1985), the Court articulated the public policy for the statute of limitations. "Public policy requires, furthermore, that this court not permit taxes collected or paid to be the subject of perpetual litigation, at any time, to suit convenience of the taxpayer. A taxpayer who has not sought redress in an appropriate manner is foreclosed from continuing litigation outside these statutes." (Internal citation omitted.)
In this case the last date the taxes were due was January 1, 2006. The first written application made to the tax collector for a refund was in a letter dated March 11, 2010. (Plaintiff's 10.) This written application is four years, two months and eleven days after the taxes were last due. Accordingly, a claim for refund of taxes under General Statutes § 12-129 is barred.
The plaintiff contends that the aforementioned statute of limitation does not bar its claim because General Statutes § 12-129 is not applicable to the present situation. However the plaintiff has neglected to cite any legal authority authorizing the town to grant the relief requested.
The Town of Clinton does not have powers not expressly granted to it by the state.
Accordingly, the Court finds that plaintiff has failed to sustain his burden of proof. Further, the Court finds that the defendants have sustained their burden of proof on the special defense. Therefore judgment shall enter in favor of the defendants.
III. Conclusion
Judgment shall enter in favor of the defendants.
SO ORDERED.