Aida Renta Trust v. Maricopa County, 1 CA-CV 06-0434 (Ariz. App. 7/22/2009)
| Decision Date | 22 July 2009 |
| Docket Number | 1 CA-CV 06-0434 |
| Parties | AIDA RENTA TRUST; AKT JOINT VENTURE; ALCHEMEDES BOULDER CREEK LIMITED PARTNERSHIP; ALTA PLACE ARIZONA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP; ALTA VISTA APARTMENTS; AMERICA FIRST TAX EXEMPT MORTGAGE FUND 2 L.P.; AMIGON STRATEGIC INVESTMENTS; ANANCOSTA APARTMENTS, INC.; ANASAZI TERRACE CONDOMINIUMS U.S. LIMITED PARTNERSHIP; AP PEBBLE CREEK LIMITED PARTNERSHIP; ARABIAN TRAILS ASSOCIATES; ARABIAN TRAILS DEVELOPMENT PARTNERS; ARAM II INVESTMENT COMPANY; ARBOLEDA INVESTMENT L.L.C.; ARTHUR G. GRANDLICH; AUTUMN CREEK PROPERTY ASSOCIATES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP; AZ DEVELOPMENT PARTNERS '87, a Massachusetts Limited Partnership; AZ DEVLOPMENT PARTNERS, a Massachusetts Limited Partnership; BARNAR ASSOCIATES; BERTHA Z. POZEN; BETHANY APARTMENTS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP; BIGELOW ARIZONA CASA CARRANZA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY; BIGELOW ARIZONA CORPORATION; BIGELOW ARIZONA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY; BIGELOW ARIZONA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY II; BIGELOW ARIZONA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY III; BLM LLC; BRE PROPERTIES, INC.; BRUCE J. & SHELAGH M. CANN TRUST; C & LI, L.C.; CANBROOK LIMITED PARTNERSHIP; CASA BONITA INVESTMENTS LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY; CASABELLA ASSOCIATES, an Arizona joint venture partnership; CEDAR MEADOWS, INC.; CHRISTIAN RELIEF SERVICES, an Arizona affordable housing corporation; CIGNA INCOME REALTY — I LIMITED PARTNERSHIP; CLUSTER HOUSING PROPERTIES, a California limited partnership; CONCORD EQUITIES LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY; CONTESSA INVESTMENTS LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY; COUNTRY VILLAS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP; CPW PROPERTIES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP; CREEKWOOD SUMMIT LAKE LIMITED PARTNERSHIP; CS APARTMENTS L.L.C.; DAVID A. & PATRICIA M. ALDERDICE; DEL MAR TERRACE APARTMENTS; DESERT PINES INVESTMENT & ASSOCIATES; DEVELOPMENT PARTNERS II, a Massachusetts limited partnership; DOZIER, PREISSMAN; EL DORADO ARMS, INC.; EMPIRE PARTNERS, L.L.C.; EQR — ARIZONA, L.L.C.; EQR — BETHANY VILLAGE VISTAS, INC.; EQR — CAMELLERO VISTAS, INC.; ERP OPERATING LIMITED PARTNERSHIP; EVANS WITHYCOMBE FINANCE PARTNERSHIP, L.P.; EVANS WITHYCOMBE RESIDENTIAL, L.P.; FARMSTEAD MESA PROPERTY, LP; FIRST INTERSTATE BANK OF ARIZONA TRUST; FOOTHILLS SHADOWS ASSOCIATES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP; FRANK LANE ITALIANE; FSA II HACIENDA VERDE ASSOCIATES; FSF QUAIL POINT ASSOCIATES; GASSER REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST & MAXINE GASSER DECEDENT TRUST; GATEWAY INVESTMENTS LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY; GOOD FELLOW, INC.; H & H ENTERPRISES; H.C. PROPERTIES U.S.A., INC.; H.E. & LORAINE KNOWLES; H. EARLE & LORAINE KNOWLES TRUST; HACIENDA PROPERTIES, L.P.; HAMILTON AGNEW MATHER TRUST; HAYDEN PLACE L.L.C.; HEF DEVELOPMENT, INC.; ITT ML, INC.; JACQUES H. & FRANCES M. ROBINSON; JAMES T. SZYMANSKI and MARY ANN SZYMANSKI; JAMES EUGENE ALBERT; JAMES G. BOSWELL LIVING TRUST; JMB INSTITUTIONAL APARTMENT LIMITED PARTNERSHIP; JOHN & KAY YEE; JOHN HENRY & BRIGID R. RAGLAND CO-TRUSTEES OF THE RAGLAND REVOCABLE TRUST; JOSAM INVESTMENT COMPANY; JOSHUA TREE, a Washington limited partnership; JPI PARTNERS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP; LA CORRIDA APARTMENTS, LIMITED PARTNERSHIP; LA SERENA PARTNERS I LIMITED PARTNERSHIP; LAKESIDE VILLAGE APARTMENTS L.P.; LAKME PARTNERSHIP; LAS BRISAS ASSOCIATES; LAWRENCE B. & GERALDINE S. MILLER; LINCOLN ARIZONA ASSOCIATES; LINCOLN BROADWAY VILLAGE LIMITED; LOS VERDES L.L.C.; LUKE PARK DEVELOPMENT; LUKE PARK DEVELOPMENT PHASE II; MAGELLAN DOBSON SPRINGS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP; MAGELLAN EMPARRADO LIMITED PARTNERSHIP; MAGELLAN LAS PALMAS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP; MARQUES PROPERTIES L.L.C.; MAURICE TEITELBAUM; MEADOW GLEN LIMITED PARTNERSHIP; MELVYN L. & LARAINE S. MARCUS; MESA HIDDEN VILLAGE; MIRADA DEVELOPMENT CORP.; MOUNTAIN VISTA PARTNERSHIP; NORMAN KING FAMILY TRUST; NORTHERN GREEN ASSOCIATES; OLIVE SQUARE LIMITED PARTNERSHIP; ORANGETREE, INC.; OSAGE L.L.C.; PAPAGO VISTA APARTMENTS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP; PARADISE TRAILS ASSOCIATES; PARKLANE ASSOCIATES, L.P.; PAUL V and ANGELINE A. BAKER; PEBBLE CREEK/MESA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY; PEORIA GARDENS APARTMENTS, INC.; PGP ARIZONA, INC.; PHOENIX CROSSROADS APARTMENTS LIMITED; PIMESA PROPERTY L.P.; PINNACLE HOLDINGS, INC.; PLACE II PROPERTIES; PRESIDIO JOINT VENTURE; PRIME MFP LIMITED PARTNERSHIP; PROPERTY TRUST OF AMERICA; QUAIL HOLDINGS, L.L.C.; RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY INVESTORS L.P.; RICHARD B. and SUSAN M. DARBY; RICHARD N. MILLS; ROBERT S. & KAREN WALKER TRUST/GERALD R. NEVA; RONALD TATE TRUST; ROSCREA ASSOCIATES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP; S W P PROPERTIES I LIMITED PARTNERSHIP; SALADO SPRINGS ASSOCIATION LIMITED PARTNERSHIP; SANTA FE & EL SEGUNDO; SCOTTSDALE FOOTHILLS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP; SCOTTSDALE PARK TERRACE; SECURITY CAPITAL PACIFIC TRUST; SHADOW CREEK LIMITED PARTNERSHIP; SHADOW RUN APARTMENTS, INC.; SIEGFIRED C. RINGWALD or MESA SUMMIT INC.; SOFISTAR II LIMITED PARTNERSHIP; SUN LAKES MARKETING LIMITED PARTNERSHIP; SUNSCAPE APARTMENTS, a California limited partnership; SUNSET SHADOWS APARTMENTS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP; SYCAMORE PROPERTIES, L.L.C.; TED N. PRICE, SR.; THE ANGELO CO.; THE DAMM PARTNERSHIP; THE NADLER COMPANY; THE S DEVELOPMENT COMPANY; THEODORE T. and MARIE SMITH; THUNDERBIRD GARDENS RESORT, L.L.C.; THUNDERBIRD MANAGEMENT LIMITED PARTNERSHIP; TOLTEC APARTMENTS; TOWNE CENTER LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, a Washington Limited Partnership; UNUM LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA; VECWEST TATUM LIMITED PARTNERSHIP; VILLAGE AT NORTH PARK ASSOCIATES; VILLAGES APARTMENTS INC.; VISTA DEL LAGOS JOINT VENTURE; WELLSFORD RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY TRUST; WESTSIDE APARTMENTS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP; WILLIAM A. MEAD TRUST; YF PARTNERS EASTRIDGE LIMITED PARTNERS; YF PARTNERS LA ESTANCIA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP; YF PARTNERS RANCHO SIERRA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP; 324 SOUTH HORNE STREET ASSOCIATES L.P.; 777 INVESTMENTS, INC., Plaintiffs/Appellees-Cross Appellants, v. MARICOPA COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Arizona; DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA, Defendants/Appellants-Cross Appellees. |
| Court | Arizona Court of Appeals |
Appeal from the Superior Court in Maricopa County, Cause Nos. CV 1996-016474, CV 1996-016838, CV 1996-018279, Arizona Tax Court No. TX 1996-000677 (Consolidated) The Honorable Janet E. Barton, Judge.
AFFIRMED IN PART, VACATED IN PART AND REMANDED
Mooney, Wright & Moore, P.L.L.C., Phoenix, By: Paul J. Mooney, Jim L. Wright, Paul Moore and Nearhood Law Offices, P.L.C., Scottsdale, By: Richard D. Nearhood, James R. Nearhood, Attorneys for Plaintiffs/Appellees/Cross-Appellants.
Helm & Kyle, Ltd., Tempe, By: Roberta S. Livesay, Attorneys for Defendant/Appellant/Cross-Appellee Maricopa County.
Terry Goddard, Attorney General, Phoenix, By: Frank Boucek, III, Assistant Attorney General, Attorneys for Defendant/Appellant/Cross-Appellee Arizona Department of Revenue
¶ 1 Maricopa County ("County") appeals the summary judgment determination that it had engaged in tax valuation discrimination. The Appellees ("Taxpayers") challenge the trial court's order awarding limited attorneys' fees and costs. For the following reasons, we affirm the trial court's judgment but vacate and remand the costs award for further proceedings.
¶ 2 Taxpayers sued the County for property tax discrimination in violation of the Uniformity Clause of the Arizona Constitution. See Ariz. Const. art. 9, § 1 (). Taxpayers
alleged that, for the 1995-1996 tax period,1 the County discriminatorily valued their apartment buildings at 100% of their full cash value while rolling over valuations on similar properties, which resulted in valuations of less than full cash value.
¶ 3 Taxpayers successfully moved for summary judgment in 1997 because the County had settled similar claims with other taxpayers. We reversed the judgment in part because the County was allowed to settle other tax discrimination suits. Aida Renta Trust v. Ariz. Dep't of Revenue, 197 Ariz. 222, 238, ¶ 51, 3 P.3d 1142, 1158 (App. 2000). On remand, the trial court again granted Taxpayers summary judgment. We reversed that decision and remanded the matter for a trial in Aileen H. Char Life Interest v. Maricopa County, 1 CA-TX 02-0003, 1 CA-TX 02-0013 (consolidated) (Ariz. App. Sept. 2, 2003) (mem. decision).
¶ 4 The parties stipulated to postpone the second remand until after the Arizona Supreme Court acted on our decision. After our decision was vacated in Aileen H. Char Life Interest v. Maricopa County, 208 Ariz. 286, 93 P.3d 486 (2004), the Taxpayers
again prevailed on summary judgment when the trial court held that the County engaged in deliberate and systematic conduct that resulted in greatly disproportionate tax treatment. The court awarded Taxpayers $1748.90 in costs and $30,000.00 in attorneys' fees.2 The County, the Arizona Department of Revenue ("ADOR"), and Taxpayers timely appealed, and we have jurisdiction pursuant to Arizona Revised Statutes ("A.R.S.") section 12-2101(B) (2003).
¶ 5 The County argues that it did not violate the Uniformity Clause when it valued Taxpayers' properties and that summary judgment was inappropriate. We review a summary judgment de novo to determine if there were any genuine issues of material fact and if the trial court correctly applied the law. Guo v. Maricopa County Med. Ctr., 196 Ariz. 11, 15, ¶ 16, 992 P.2d 11, 15 (App. 1999). We view the facts in the light most favorable to the party against whom summary judgment was entered and may affirm "even if the trial court reached the right result for the wrong reason." Id.
¶ 6 Arizona's Uniformity Clause mandates that "all taxes shall be uniform upon the same class of property within the territorial limits of the authority levying the tax." Ariz.
Const. art. 9, § 1. The Uniformity Clause prohibits discriminatory valuation among "similarly situated properties"3 causing some properties "to...
To continue reading
Request your trial