Airo Die Casting, Inc. v. Westmoreland County Board of Assessment Appeals

Citations: 706 A.2d 1279; 1998 Pa. Commw. LEXIS 75

Court: Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania; February 5, 1998; Pennsylvania; State Appellate Court

SummaryOriginalCytator Case TreatmentBackward CitatorAnalysis

EnglishEspañolSimplified EnglishEspañol Fácil

Airo Die Casting, Inc. and VSI Corp./DME Company (collectively, Taxpayers) appealed two orders from the Court of Common Pleas of Westmoreland County, which dismissed their appeals against the Board of Assessment Appeals (Board) based on motions for judgment on the pleadings. The Board contended that Taxpayers improperly served their appeals, arguing they failed to follow the requirement of serving original process by the sheriff as mandated by Rule 400(a) of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. Additionally, the Board claimed that Taxpayers did not serve notice of their appeals within the required thirty days, thus failing to toll the statute of limitations under section 5571(b) of the Judicial Code. The common pleas court upheld the Board's motions, determining that tax assessment appeals necessitate sheriff service. Taxpayers subsequently filed notices of appeal and a motion for reconsideration, which was denied due to lack of authority. The Board later moved to suppress Taxpayers' reply briefs, asserting non-compliance with Pa.R.A.P. 2113(a), which requires that reply briefs address new matters raised by the appellee. The court found Taxpayers' replies did not meet this standard, leading to the granting of the Board's suppression motions. The crucial issue is whether the appeal from the Board to the common pleas court is an original process requiring service by sheriff under the specified rule.

Taxpayers argue that their appeal to the common pleas court regarding a tax assessment does not necessitate personal service by the sheriff of Westmoreland County, a position that is affirmed. Their appeals were filed under section 752 of the Local Agency Law, which grants individuals with a direct interest in a local agency's adjudication the right to appeal to the appropriate court per Title 42. The common pleas court has jurisdiction over such appeals as established by section 933(a)(2) of the Judicial Code. Appeals must be lodged within thirty days following the mailing date of the Board's final assessment notice. Taxpayers’ appeals are categorized as statutory appeals rather than original processes, thus exempting them from the requirement for sheriff service under Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure (Pa.R.C.P. No. 400(a)). Statutory appeals are not subject to these rules but require reference to the Local Agency Law, state regulations, and local judicial rules for service guidance, which are silent on this matter. In the absence of specific provisions, precedent from McNeilis and Gilmore guides the determination of service methods for tax assessment appeals. The McNeilis case established that service on the relevant agency must occur at its stated address by providing a copy of the notice of appeal immediately after filing, preferably via certified mail with return receipt. Gilmore clarified that alternative effective service methods, such as personal delivery or acceptance by the defendant, are permissible as long as they adequately record the appeal process.

Methods of service established in McNeilis and Gilmore are deemed practical for appeals, as all parties are identifiable and aware of the legal issues involved. A petitioner can adequately notify the government agency of an appeal through certified mail, return receipt requested, without causing prejudice. Imposing a requirement for service via sheriff creates an unnecessary financial burden on citizens and misuses public resources. Accordingly, the principles from McNeilis and Gilmore are applied to statutory appeals under the Local Agency Law. Taxpayers properly notified the Board of their appeals by sending a petition copy via certified mail within thirty days of the Board's final notice. Consequently, the orders from the Court of Common Pleas of Westmoreland County are reversed, and the cases are remanded for trial court adjudication. Additionally, motions to suppress the Taxpayers' reply briefs filed by the Board are granted. Jurisdiction has been relinquished. 

The original process must be served by the sheriff as per Pa.R.C.P. No. 400(a). After an appeal is initiated, as stated in Pa.R.A.P. 1701(a), the trial court or government unit cannot proceed further. The court consolidated the Taxpayers' appeals, noting that their submissions were almost identical. Its review is limited to determining any abuse of discretion, legal error, or lack of substantial evidence, referencing Cedarbrook Realty, Inc. v. Cheltenham Township. 

The common pleas court and parties mistakenly referenced the Third Class County Assessment Code, which has had its provisions for appealing tax assessments and the associated 30-day statute of limitations repealed. The Local Agency Law was enacted simultaneously, defining adjudication and local agencies. Jurisdiction for appeals from final orders of government agencies falls under the common pleas court as per the Judicial Code. The scope of the common pleas court's review is outlined in the Local Agency Law.

The scope of judicial review hinges on the completeness of the record from the local agency. If the record is incomplete, the court conducts a de novo review; if complete, it reviews the certified record of the local agency. According to Article V, Section 9 of the Pennsylvania Constitution, there is a right of appeal from a non-record court to a record court, and from a record court to an administrative agency, with further rights of appeal as law may provide. The statute of limitations for appealing a tax assessment is outlined in 42 Pa.C.S. § 5571(b), requiring that appeals from government units or courts be initiated within 30 days following the relevant order. Rule 1514(c) of the Pennsylvania Rules of Appellate Procedure allows a petitioner to serve a petition for review on the government unit that made the decision via certified mail or in person, applicable only to appeals in the Supreme, Superior, and Commonwealth Courts. Nonetheless, this service method is deemed appropriate for statutory appeals from final orders of local government agencies to the common pleas court.