A Taxing Exception: Southern Lng, Inc. v. Macginnitie's Narrow Interpretation of the Mandamus Exemption
| Citation | Vol. 66 No. 3 |
| Publication year | 2015 |
A Taxing Exception: Southern LNG, Inc. v. MacGinnitie's Narrow Interpretation of the Mandamus Exemption
Laura K. DiBiase
[Page 855]
At a quick glance, a writ of mandamus seems fairly straightforward: a court can compel a public official to perform a legal duty unless other specific legal remedies are available to enforce that legal right.1 Throughout the history of mandamus, courts have had to determine whether an alternative legal remedy is available, and if so, whether it would preclude a writ of mandamus.2 In particular, a long series of Georgia cases have addressed whether an appeal to a county's board of equalization (BOE) is an adequate alternative remedy.3 The recent Georgia Supreme Court case Southern LNG, Inc. v. MacGinnitie (Southern II)4 examined whether the existence of an alternative legal remedy precluded mandamus relief.5 For instance, if an alternative legal remedy is not "adequate," mandamus relief may still be available (the exception).6 Ultimately, the supreme court narrowly interpreted
[Page 856]
the exception to the preclusion of mandamus relief, holding that a taxpayer has standing to seek a writ of mandamus when a court determines that the alternative remedy is inadequate.7
In 1978, Southern Liquefied Natural Gas, Inc. (Southern), the plaintiff, began operation of a liquefied natural gas (LNG) storage business located in Chatham County.8 Southern imported LNG and held the gas in storage tanks. When there was a demand for gas the LNG was removed from the storage facilities, returned to a gaseous state, and delivered through intra- and inter-state pipelines.9 At the commencement of its business, Southern filed ad valorem property tax returns with Chatham County.10 Not long after, Southern ceased operations from the years 1982 to 2000.11
After the long hiatus, Southern reopened and asked the state revenue commissioner (the commissioner) whether its property tax returns could be filed with the commissioner rather than with Chatham County.12 When asked, the commissioner refused to recognize Southern as a "public utility" pursuant to the Official Code of Georgia Annotated (O.C.G.A.) section 48-1-2(21),13 and consequently refused to accept the
[Page 857]
tax returns.14 While Southern was seeking permission from the commissioner, Southern simultaneously appealed to the Chatham County BOE, claiming that the property tax assessments from 2003 to 2010 were incorrect and that the commissioner, rather than the county, should value the property. At the conclusion of the appeal, the BOE agreed that the tax values from 2003 to 2010 were not valued properly, but the BOE did not address the issue of whether the commissioner should value the property pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 48-1-2(21).15
In response, in 2010, Southern filed an action in superior court seeking a writ of mandamus to compel the commissioner to accept its ad valorem taxes and seeking a declaratory judgment regarding the statutory issue. In its declaratory judgment petition, Southern asked the trial court to recognize Southern as a gas company and a public utility under O.C.G.A. § 48-1-2(21), which would require the commissioner, rather than the county, to accept Southern's tax returns.16 However, the trial court determined that the entire action was barred due to sovereign immunity and granted the commissioner's motion to dismiss.17
On appeal, in Southern LNG, Inc. v. MacGinnitie (Southern I),18 the Georgia Supreme Court reversed the trial court's decision.19 The majority determined that if sovereign immunity barred the action for declaratory judgment, Southern would ultimately be left without adequate relief.20 If Southern were left without adequate relief, the action for the writ of mandamus would still be viable.21 However, the court did not address whether the declaratory judgment would be barred because, in either instance, the action for mandamus relief would not be precluded.22 On remand, the trial court granted the commissioner's summary judgment motion on the mandamus claim. The trial court held
[Page 858]
that a tax appeal to the Chatham County BOE was an adequate alternative remedy for Southern. As a result, Southern appealed to the Georgia Supreme Court for a second time.23
The supreme court vacated and remanded the trial court's decision, holding that a tax appeal to the BOE was not an adequate alternative remedy because the appeal was not "equally convenient, complete and beneficial" to the mandamus relief Southern sought.24 However, the supreme court did not address, and the parties did not brief, the issues of (1) whether the commissioner would be bound to the BOE judgment and (2) whether the commissioner could be made a party to the appeal.25 Because the supreme court lacked sufficient briefing on those issues, the court again remanded the case to the trial court for further proceedings.26
A. The Meaning of Mandamus and the Exception
A writ of mandamus is an extraordinary remedy.27 As an extraordinary remedy, mandamus relief should be granted with caution.28 As a result, mandamus will not be granted for fruitless or nugatory claims.29 When a court issues a writ of mandamus, the writ compels public officials to perform a particular duty.30 In addition to performing particular duties, all public officials must also perform those duties faithfully.31 Pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 9-6-20,32 when a public official's duty is not performed faithfully or the duty is not performed at all, a
[Page 859]
writ of mandamus may be issued to compel the public official to perform.33 Issuance of mandamus relief requires a finding that a public official failed to perform a duty, that the complainant has a legal right to the service the public official failed to perform, and that there is no alternative legal remedy available to remedy the legal issue.34 Of these elements, the one contested most frequently in the courts is the availability of potential alternative remedies.35
When alternative remedies are available to a party, mandamus relief is unavailable.36 For example, in Vann v. Dekalb County Board of Tax Assessors,37 a taxpayer brought an action challenging the method of an appraisal of his property.38 The Georgia Court of Appeals held that because an alternative remedy was available to the taxpayer, equitable or injunctive relief was unavailable.39 In addition to barring equitable relief, the court concluded that an alternative remedy barred declaratory judgment and mandamus as well.40 The court reasoned that a BOE appeal was a practical and efficient alternative, and thus, an adequate legal remedy, precluding extraordinary remedies such as mandamus.41
[Page 860]
While mandamus relief is typically precluded if there is an alternative remedy, a taxpayer may still have standing for mandamus action if the alternative remedy is inadequate.42 Pursuant to the exception, courts allow a party to pursue mandamus relief when an alternative remedy is inadequate.43 An alternative remedy is considered an "adequate" legal remedy when that remedy is as "equally convenient, complete and beneficial" as mandamus relief.44 When the alternative remedy is not adequate, a taxpayer will have standing to seek mandamus relief.45 For example, in North Fulton Medical Center, Inc. v. Roach,46 the medical center sought a writ of mandamus while the opposing party claimed that a declaratory judgment action was available.47 However, the supreme court explained that an alternative remedy is "adequate" only when that alternative remedy is "equally convenient, complete and beneficial."48 In addition, the supreme court noted that the alternative legal remedy had to exist at the time the mandamus relief was sought.49 Therefore, if the alternative legal remedy was not available at the time mandamus was sought, the alternative remedy could not preclude mandamus relief.50
[Page 861]
B. Alternative Remedy: The Benefits of the Board of Equalization
Generally, taxpayers file ad valorem taxes with either a county or the state commissioner.51 While taxpayers file taxes with either the county or the state, the majority of actions seeking a writ of mandamus are against the board of tax assessors for a particular county.52 Even though these mandamus actions exist, few courts have compelled a public official to act due to the strict requirements for issuing mandamus.53 O.C.G.A. § 48-5-311(e)54 affects how the courts issue mandamus relief in the state of Georgia because it minimizes the quantity of mandamus relief awarded.55 This statute allows taxpayers to appeal most ad valorem tax issues to a county's BOE.56 As early as 1975, the Georgia Supreme Court held that the BOE has the authority to address "matters of taxability, uniformity of assessment, and value in the manner herein provided."57 For decades, Georgia courts have consistently viewed this statute as a remedy for taxpayers—appeals to the BOE are an alternative to bringing a lawsuit in the trial courts.58 The supreme court reasoned that the Georgia General Assembly intended to provide a system to exclusively handle these tax issues.59 As a result, the supreme court recognized that an appeal to the BOE was an adequate alternative remedy.60
[Page 862]
In Vann, the court of appeals explained the reason for the long tradition of precluding mandamus relief when a BOE appeal is available as an alternative legal remedy.61 By the time the case was decided in 1988, Georgia courts had established that O.C.G.A. § 48-5-31162 provided an adequate alternative remedy to preclude a taxpayer from seeking extraordinary relief, particularly a writ of mandamus.63 Specifically, the court of appeals stated that an alternative remedy that is plain, adequate, and does not deprive an individual of due process will preclude extraordinary relief.64 When a remedy is as practical and...
To continue reading
Request your trial