HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-8820J
Helen L. Uemmill (Pa. I.D. No. 60661)
MCNEES WALLACE & NURICK LLC
100 Pine Street
PO Box 1166
Harrisburg, PA 17108-1166
(717) 237-5273
`A1O?l 3 rAF10/?
? j C of U+t .
Counsel for Appellant/Petitioner
CPP Hess Holdings LP
In Re: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
Appeal of CPP Hess Holdings, LP CUMBERLAND COUNTY,
: PENNSYLVANIA
From The Decisions of the Tax Assessment Appeal
Cumberland County Board CIVIL ACTION - LAW
of Assessment Appeals
NO. 11- ?? a b CIVIL
PETITION FOR APPEAL
Appellant/Petitioner CPP Hess Holdings LP ("CPP Hess") hereby appeals from
the October 26, 2011 Decisions of the Cumberland County Board of Assessment
Appeals, and states as follows in support of the appeal:
1. CPP Hess is the owner of real property comprising two adjoining Tax
Parcels known as Tax Parcels 17-09-0543-001 and 17-09-0543-002 (the "Tax Parcels")
2. Tax Parcel 17-09-0543-001 ("Tax Parcel V) consists of approximately 80
acres of land and has a street address of 1017 S. Market Street, Mechanicsburg,
Pennsylvania.
3. Tax Parcel 17-09-0543-002 ("Tax Parcel 2") consists of approximately
104 acres of land and also has a street address of 1017 S. Market Street, Mechanicsburg,
Pennsylvania.
4. The Tax Parcels are currently used for agricultural purposes.
?? R a• d° Pa
? C K-?c?(vA l S
1 lW 211.-7-121 5
5. Tax Parcel 1 is assessed at $1,600,000.
6. Tax Parcel 2 is assessed at $2,091,800.
7. On August 31, 2011, CPP Hess filed timely appeals to the Cumberland
County Board of Assessment Appeals, challenging the assessments of the Tax Parcels.
8.. On October 25, 2011, the Cumberland County Board of Assessment heard
the appeals for both Tax Parcels.
9. On October 26, 2011, the Cumberland County Board of Assessment
Appeals rendered and mailed its decisions on the appeals (the "Decisions"). True and
correct copies of the Decisions are attached hereto as Exhibit A.
10. The Decisions state that the appeals were denied and reflect that no
changes were made in the assessed values of the Tax Parcels as a result of the appeals.
11. CPP Hess is aggrieved by the determinations of the Cumberland County
Board of Assessment Appeals in the Decisions, in that the assessments on the Tax Parcels
do not properly reflect the current fair market value of the tax parcels and in that the
assessment valuations are excessive.
12. The Decisions of the Cumberland County Board of Assessment Appeals
are in error, violate the doctrine of uniformity and are an abuse of discretion.
WHEREFORE, Appellant/Petitioner CPP Hess Holdings, LP respectfully
requests that this Honorable Court hear this appeal from the Decisions of the Cumberland
County Board of Assessment Appeals and the proofs of this case de novo, reverse the
decisions of the Board, order a reduction in the assessment for the Tax Parcels to reflect
2
the actual market value of the Tax Parcels having due regard to the valuation and the
applicable predetermined ratio or common level ratio, and make such further orders as
may be just and equitable.
Respectfully submitted,
MCNEES WALLACE & NURICK LLC
By: 41??= L • cc:- n----X!/
Helen L. Gemmill
Pa. I.D. No. 60661
100 Pine Street
PO Box 1166
Harrisburg, PA 17108-1166
(717) 237-5273
Counsel for Appellant/Petitioner
Dated: November 22, 2011 CPP Hess Holdings, LLP
VERIFICATION
Subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. §4904, relating to unsworn falsification to
authorities, I hereby certify that I am authorized to make this verification on behalf of CPP Hess
Holdings, LLP, I have reviewed the foregoing and that the facts set forth therein are true and
correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief.
By
Printed Name 1 4V 117
Title shu jle.S Lg2a?--
Dated: November 2011
rl
Cumberland County Tax Assessment
One Courthouse Square Room 107
Carlisle, PA 17013
(717) 240-6350
Hours: 8:00am to 4:30pm
Stephen D. Tiley, Assistant Solicitor
Bonnie M. Mahoney, Chief Assessor
CPP HESS HOLDINGS L P Parcel Identifier:
C/O TIMOTHY HORSTMANN, ESQUIRE 17-09-0543-001.
MCNEES WALLACE & NURICK LLC
100 PINE ST, PO BOX 1166 MAILING DATE: OCTOBER 26, 2011
HARRISBURG PA 17108-1166 APPEAL DEADLINE: NOVEMBER 25, 2011
BOARD OF ASSESSMENT APPEALS DECISION NOTICE - THIS IS NOT A TAX BILL
This is a notice of a change to the assessed valuation or status of this property
REASON FOR CHANGE: 04 - APPEAL BOARD DECISION (DENIED - NO CHANGE)
The Board of Assessment Appeals has issued this decision regarding your tax assessment
appeal. You may appeal this decision to the Court of Common Pleas by filing the
appropriate paperwork with the Prothonotary's office in accordance with local rules of
court.
FUTURE TAX BILLING BASIS
OLD NEW
ASSESSMENT
TAX STATUS 1,600,000
Taxable 1,600,000
Taxable
C&G STATUS Not Approved Not Approved
I MARKET-BASED ASSESSMENT
OLD NEW
(Land 1,600,000 1,600,000
'Improvements' 0 0
(TOTAL 1,600,000 1,600,000
1100% of Market Value at 2010 Base Year Rates.
CLEAN AND GREEN (C&G) ASSESSMENT
OLD NEW
Land 59,500 59,500
Improvements 0 0
TOTAL 59,500 59,500
Land value based on rates provided by the State.
CHANGE OF TAX BASIS - NET CHANGE
COUNTY/MUNIC SCHOOL
Land 0 0
Improvements 0 0
TOTAL 0 0
Effects Future Billing Cycles Only
cc: CPP HESS HOLDINGS L P
[notc_al-L)
Cumberland County Board of Assessment Appeals
Lloyd W. Bucher
Albert Peterlin
Allen Shank
EFFECTIVE: 01/01/2012 for County/Manic
07/01/2012 for School
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
Munic.: 17 - MECHANICSBURG 2ND WRD
School: 6 - MECHANICSBURG SD
Control Number: 17000001
Property Location:
1017 S MARKET STREET
LAND APPROX 80 ACRES
Land Size: 80.00 acres
Property Type: VS
Vacant Land - Subdvsn Poten
Cumberland County Commissioners
Gary Eichelberger
Rick Rovegno
Barbara Cross
Dennis Marion, Chief Clerk
CC:
Cumberland County Tax Assessment
One Courthouse Square Room 107
Carlisle, PA 17013
(717) 240-6350
Hours: 8:00am to 4:30pm
Stephen D. Tiley, Assistant Solicitor
Bonnie M. Mahoney, Chief Assessor
CPP HESS HOLDINGS L P Parcel Identifier:
C/O TIMOTHY HORSTMANN, ESQUIRE 17-09-0543-002.
MCNEES WALLACE & NURICK, LLC
100 PINE ST, PO BOX 1166 MAILING DATE: OCTOBER 26, 2011
HARRISBURG PA 17108-1166 APPEAL DEADLINE: NOVEMBER 25, 2011
BOARD OF ASSESSMENT APPEALS DECISION NOTICE - THIS IS NOT A TAX BILL
This is a notice of a change to the assessed valuation or status of this property.
REASON FOR CHANGE: 04 - APPEAL BOARD DECISION (DENIED - NO CHANGE)
The Board of Assessment Appeals has issued this decision regarding your tax assessment
appeal. You may appeal this decision to the Court of Common Pleas by filing the
appropriate paperwork with the Prothonotary's office in accordance with local rules of
court.
FUTURE TAX BILLING BASIS
OLD NEW
ASSESSMENT
TAX STATUS 2,091,800
Taxable 2,091,800
Taxable
C&G STATUS Not Approved Not Approved
i
MARKET-BASED ASSESSMENT
OLD NEW
Land 2,091,800 2,091,800
Improvements 0 0
TOTAL 2,091,800 2,091,800
1000 of Market Value at 2010 Base Year Rates.
CLEAN AND GREEN (C&G) ASSESSMENT
OLD NEW
Land 77,100 77,100
Improvements 0 0
TOTAL 77,100 77,100
Land value based on rates provided by the State.
CHANGE OF TAX BASIS - NET CHANGE
COUNTY/MUNIC SCHOOL
Land 0 0
Improvements 0 0
TOTAL 0 0
Effects Future Billing Cycles Only
cc: CPP HESS HOLDINGS L P
[notc-a11L1
Cumberland County Board of Assessment Appeals
Lloyd W. Bucher
Albert Peterlin
Allen Shank
EFFECTIVE: 01/01/2012 for County/Munic
07/01/2012 for School
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
Munic.: 17 - MECHANICSBURG 2ND WRD
School: 6 - MECHANICSBURG SD
Control Number: 17000002
Property Location:
1017 RR S MARKET STREET
& ALLENDALE ROAD
LAND APPROX 99 ACRES
Land Size: 104.59 acres
Property Type: AS
Seasonal-Used < 50% Of Year
Cumberland County Commissioners
Gary Eichelberger
Rick Rovegno
Barbara Cross
Dennis Marion, Chief Clerk
CC:
t-Mlin I I in
Fill ED-OFFICE
THE PROTHONOTARY
2012 FEB -7 AM 1 I : 37
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA PENNSYLVANIA
IN RE: APPEAL OF CPP HESS HOLDINGS, L.P. CIVIL ACTION -- LAW
No. 11-8820- CIVIL TERM
FROM THE DECISION OF THE
CUMBERLAND COUNTY BOARD OF
ASSESSMENT APPEALS Tax Assessment Appeal
NOTICE OF INTERVENTION AND ENTRY OF APPEARANCE
TO THE PROTHONOTARY:
In accordance with the requirements of the Consolidated County Assessment Law, 53
Pa.C.S. §8801, et seq., the Mechanicsburg Area School District hereby intervenes as a party to
the tax assessment appeal taken by the above-named Appellant.
Please enter my appearance in this matter on behalf of Intervener, Mechanicsburg Area
School District.
Respectfully submitted,
Philip RFSpar6, Esquire
Supreme Court I.D. No. 65200
STOCK AND LEADER, P.C.
Susquehanna Commerce Center - East
221 West Philadelphia Street
Suite 600
York, PA 17401-2994
Tel: (717) 846-9800
Attorney for Mechanicsburg Area
School District
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
t?'
AND NOW, this LO day of F"-h , 2012, I, Philip H. Spare, Esquire, of
the firm of Stock and Leader, hereby certify that I have served the within Notice of Intervention
and Entry of Appearance by depositing same in the United States mail, postage prepaid, at
York, Pennsylvania, addressed as follows:
Helen L. Gemmill, Esquire
McNees Wallace & Nurick, LLC
100 Pine Street
PO Box 1166
Harrisburg, PA 17108
Counsel for Appellant/Petitioner
Stephen D. Tiley, Esq.
Frey & Tiley
5 S. Hanover Street
Carlisle, PA 17013
Counsel for
Cumberland County Board of Assessment Appeals
STOCK AND LEADER
By: ! 44Mt
Philip R. Sp e, Esquire
Supreme Court I.D. No. 65200
STOCK AND LEADER, P.C.
Susquehanna Commerce Center - East
221 West Philadelphia Street
Suite 600
York, PA 17401-2994
Tel: (717) 846-9800
Attorney for Mechanicsburg Area
School District
IN RE: APPEAL OF CPP HESS IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
HOLDINGS, L.P. CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
FROM THE DECISION OF THE
CUMBERLAND COUNTY BOARD OF
ASSESSMENT APPEALS No. 11-8820- CIVIL
ORDER OF COURT
_2 I/
AND NOW, this day of A41 2012, the hearing to be conducted on
the merits of the within appeal from an assessment is continued to 1:30 p.m., Thursday,
November 1, 2012, in Courtroom Number 1, Cumberland County Courthouse, Carlisle,
Pennsylvania.
By the Court,
Albert H. Masland, J.
c
V Helen L. Gemmill, Esquire, 100 Pine Street, Harrisburg, PA 17108-1166 rn
For Petitioner
-, *,
--`
? Stephen D. Tiley, Esquire, 5 South Hanover Street, Carlisle, PA 17013-3385 `'
For Cumberland County Board of Assessment Appeals x•
>
V Philip H. Spare, Susquehanna Commerce Center - East, 221 West Philadelphia qtr t
Suite 600, York, PA 17401-2994 ,
For Mechanicsburg Area School District
(?7P; F'S yrs. r'a°d ??30? ?
'ek'
IN RE: APPEAL OF CPP HESS IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
HOLDINGS , L.P. OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY,
PENNSYLVANIA
FROM THE DECISION OF THE
CUMBERLAND COUNTY BOARD OF
ASSESSMENT APPEALS No. 11-8820- CIVIL
PRAECIPE FOR DISCONTINUANCE
TO THE PROTHONOTARY:
Please mark the above-captioned action as discontinued and ended.
MCNEES WALLACE&NURICK LLC
Helen L. Gemmill
Pa. I.D. No. 60661
100 Pine Street
PO Box 1166
Harrisburg, PA 17108-1166
(717) 237-5273
Counsel for Appellant/Petitioner
Dated: October 30, 2013 CPP Hess Holdings, LLP
s.
.y CD CD -:
cl
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I certify that on this date a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was served by
first class United States mail, postage prepaid, upon the following:
Stephen D. Tiley, Esquire
5 South Hanover Street
Carlisle, PA 17013-3385
Counsel for Cumberland County Board of Assessment Appeals
Philip H. Spare, Esquire
STOCK AND LEADER, P.C.
Susquehanna Commerce Center—East, Suite 600
221 West Philadelphia Street
York, PA 17401-2994
Counsel for Mechanicsburg Area School District
Lisa Marie Coyne, Esquire
COYNE & COYNE PC
3901 Market Street
Camp Hill, PA 17011-4227
Counsel for Mechanicsburg Borough
Helen L. Gemmill
Dated: October 30, 2013
IN RE: APPEAL OF CPP HESS : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS c;
HOLDINGS, L.P. OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY,
: PENNSYLVANIA C"
r71 x- Fri '
FROM THE DECISION OF THE
CUMBERLAND COUNTY BOARD OF : c�,`r
ASSESSMENT APPEALS NO. 11-8820-CIVIL
MOTION TO STRIKE PRAECIPE FOR DISCONTINUANCE
AND REINSTATE CASE
AND NOW, comes the Mechanicsburg Area School District by and through its
solicitor, Stock and Leader, LLP and moves this Honorable Court as follows:
1. The property owner CPP Hess Farms. L.P. ("Hess Farms"), initiated this
tax assessment appeal before the Cumberland County Board of Assessment Appeals in
2011.
2. The Board of Assessment Appeals issued a decision on October 26, 2011.
3. Hess Farms appealed from the decision of the Board of Assessment
Appeals by filing a Petition for Appeal in this Court on November 23, 2011.
4. The property at issue consists of two separate tax parcels identified as
17-09-0543-01 and 17-09-0543-002, consisting of a total of approximately 184 acres.
5. Tax parcel ending 001 is assessed at $1,600,000 and tax parcel ending in
002 is assessed at $2.091,800. for a total assessment of$3.691,800.
6. On February 7, 2013, the Mechanicsburg Area School District formally
intervened as a party in this case.
0115845.
7. During the pendency of this case, Hess Farms and the District, through their
respective counsel, attempted to amicably resolve the case. Those settlement negotiations were
ultimately unsuccessful.
8. It is a matter of public record in Cumberland County that the two tax parcels at
issue sold to a new owner by deed dated May 24, 2013 (recorded June 6, 2013) for a total
consideration of$5,000,000 indicated on the Statement of Value.
9. Following the recording of the deed, additional attempts were made to resolve the
case, which again proved unsuccessful.
10. Counsel for Hess Farms unilaterally filed a Praecipe for Discontinuance on
October 30, 2013.
11. A property owner may not unilaterally discontinue a case without the consent of
intervening taxing bodies such as a school district. (See, e.g. In re Appeal of Gateway School
District, 124 Pa. Cmwlth. 463, 556 A.2d 924 (1989))
12. The Mechanicsburg Area School District objects to the attempt to unilaterally
discontinue this matter.
13. Counsel for the property owner does not concur with this Motion.
WHEREFORE, Movant, the Mechanicsburg Area School District, respectfully requests
your Honorable Court to issue a Rule to Show Cause why the relief should not be granted and to
strike the Praecipe for Discontinuance, reinstate the case, and give the parties an opportunity to
establish the appropriate fair market value and assessed value of the tax parcels in question.
0115845-
Respectfully submitted,
STOCK AND LEADER
Date: Mov�robtr �� * G 3
r
By:
Phi ip . Spare, Esquire
Supreme Court I.D. No. 65200
Susquehanna Commerce Center East
Suite 600
221 West Philadelphia Street
York, PA 17401
Telephone: (717) 846-9800
Facsimile: (717) 843-6134
0115845-
IN RE: APPEAL OF CPP HESS : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
HOLDINGS, L.P. : OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY,
: PENNSYLVANIA
FROM THE DECISION OF THE
•
CUMBERLAND COUNTY BOARD OF
ASSESSMENT APPEALS : NO. 11-8820-CIVIL
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the Motion to Strike Praecipe for
Discontinuance and to Reinstate Case has been served upon counsel via First Class, postage-
prepaid U.S. Mail this t.7'day of November, 2013, at the following address:
John G. French, Esquire Helen L. Gemmill, Esquire
1304 Oak Lane McNees Wallace &Nurick, LLC
New Cumberland, PA 17040 100 Pine Street
P.O. Box 1166
Counsel for Cumberland County Harrisburg, PA 17108-1166
Board of Assessment Appeals
Counsel,for CPP Hess Holdings, LLP
Lisa Marie Coyne, Esquire
Coyne & Coyne, P.C.
3901 Market Street
Camp Hill, PA 17011-4227
Counsel for Mechanicsburg Borough
Respectfully submitted,
STOCK AND LEADER
By:
Philip I- . Spare, Esquire
Supreme Court I.D. No. 65200
Susquehanna Commerce Center East
Suite 600
221 West Philadelphia Street
York, PA 17401
Telephone: (717) 846-9800
Facsimile: (717) 843-6134
0115845-
IN RE: APPEAL OF CPP HESS IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
HOLDINGS, L.P. OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY,
PENNSYLVANIA
FROM THE DECISION OF THE
CUMBERLAND COUNTY BOARD OF
ASSESSMENT APPEALS NO. 11-8820-CIVIL
RULE TO SHOW CAUSE,
AND NOW, this 5 day of 20 upon consideration of the
Motion to Strike Praecipe for Discontinuance and Reinstate Case tiled on behall'ofthe
Mechanicsburg Area School District, a Rule is issued upon CCP Hess Holdings, L.P., to show
cause why the requested relief should not be granted. Rule returnable by the 3 day of
G'vk(A A.✓ , 20
BY THE COURT,
A44� J
�d
_C'w
.J
�11l845-
Ciit pENNSYLVANIA CiCRLA, D COUNTY
IN RE: APPEAL OF CPP HESS : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
HOLDINGS , LP : OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY,
: PENNSYLVANIA
FROM THE DECISION OF THE •
CUMBERLAND COUNTY BOARD OF :
ASSESSMENT APPEALS : No. 11-8820- CIVIL
ANSWER TO MOTION TO STRIKE PRAECIPE
FOR DISCONTINUANCE AND REINSTATE CASE
In accordance with the Court's Rule to Show Cause docketed December 4, 2013,
Appellant CPP Hess Holdings, LP ("CPP Hess Holdings") hereby answers the Motion to Strike
Praecipe for Discontinuance and Reinstate Case filed by the Mechanicsburg Area School
District (the "School District"). For the reasons stated herein in response to the numbered
paragraphs of the School District's Motion, the Motion should be denied.
1. Admitted in part and denied in part. CPP Hess Holdings admits that the property
owner filed a tax assessment appeal before the Cumberland County Board of Assessment
Appeals in 2011. CPP Hess Holdings denies that the property owner was an entity named "CPP
Hess Farms, L.P. (`Hess Farms')." Rather, CPP Hess Holdings was the property owner at the
time that CPP Hess Holdings filed the tax assessment appeal before the Board.
2. Admitted. CPP Hess Holdings admits that the Board of Assessment Appeals
issued a decision on October 26, 2011.
3. Admitted in part and denied in part. CPP Hess Holdings admits that it filed an
appeal in this Court on November 23, 2011 from the decision of the Board of Assessment
Appeals. CPP Hess Holdings denies that an entity named "CPP Hess Farms, L.P. (`Hess
Farms')" filed any appeal.
4. Admitted. CPP Hess Holdings admits that the property at issue comprises two tax
parcels, 17-09-0543-01 and 17-09-0543-002, that together total approximately 184 acres.
5. Admitted. CPP Hess Holdings admits that tax parcel 17-09-0543-01 is assessed
at $1,600,000 and tax parcel 17-09-0543-002 is assessed at $2,091,800, for a total assessment of
$3,691,800.
6. Admitted with qualification. CPP Hess Holdings admits that on February 7,
2013, the School District intervened as a party in this tax assessment appeal by filing a Notice of
Intervention. Further answering, the School District's filing did not assert any claim for
affirmative relief, did not assert any counterclaim, did not assert any new matter, did not assert
any cross appeal and did not challenge the assessment.
7. Admitted in part and denied in part. CPP Hess Holdings admits that CPP Hess
Holdings and the School District engaged in settlement discussions. CPP Hess Holdings denies
that an entity named "CPP Hess Farms, L.P. (`Hess Farms')" engaged in settlement discussions.
CPP Hess Holdings denies that the settlement negotiations were unsuccessful. The parties
reached a settlement agreement, which the School District refused to honor.
8. Admitted. CPP Hess Holdings admits that it sold the properties at issue in this
appeal by deed dated May 24, 2013, recorded June 6, 2013, for a total consideration of
$5,000,000.
2
9. Admitted in part and denied in part. CPP Hess Holdings admits that CPP Hess
Holdings and the School District had discussions after June 6, 2013. CPP Hess Holdings denies
that the prior discussions were unsuccessful, as the parties had previously reached a settlement
agreement that the School District refused to honor. Further answering, the discussions after
June 6, 2013 concerned efforts to resolve both the pending tax assessment appeal and the dispute
as to whether a settlement was previously reached.
10. Admitted in part and denied in part. CPP Hess Holdings admits that its counsel
filed a Praecipe for Discontinuance on October 30, 2013. Further answering, for the reasons set
forth below in ¶ 11, CPP Hess Holdings had the legal right to discontinue this tax assessment
appeal without the consent of the Board of Assessment Appeals or any of the taxing authorities.
CPP Hess Holdings denies that an entity named "CPP Hess Farms, L.P. (`Hess Farms')" filed the
discontinuance.
11. Denied. For tax assessment appeals pending in the Court of Common Pleas of
Cumberland County, there is no prohibition against the appellant discontinuing the appeal
without the consent of the other parties. The case cited by the School District for the proposition
that a property owner cannot discontinue an appeal, In re Appeal of Gateway School District,
556 A.2d 924 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1989), is inapplicable to the instant appeal. The Gateway School
District case involved, and was decided under, a particular local rule of the Allegheny County
Court governing discontinuances in tax assessment appeals. That Allegheny County local rule of
court (Local Rule 502H) specifically required the consent of all parties to any discontinuance
filed more than 30 days after the conciliation meeting held in the appeal.
Here, however, there is no local rule of the Cumberland County Court of Common Pleas
that requires the consent of other parties for the discontinuance of a tax assessment appeal.
3
Indeed, unlike in the Allegheny County Court, here there are no local court rules governing the
procedure in tax assessment appeals. And of course, the Allegheny County Court rules do not
govern cases pending in the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County. Accordingly, there
is no applicable rule, or any other governing law, that prevents discontinuance by the appellant.
CPP Hess Holdings was not barred from discontinuing the appeal that it brought.
Notably, the School District did not cross appeal or assert any claims, counterclaims, new
matter or request any affirmative relief. Therefore, the only claims in this action were the claims
of CPP Hess Holdings. There is no prohibition on CPP Hess Holdings discontinuing its own
claims, which were the sole claims present in the appeal.
Moreover, even though the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure do not apply to tax
assessment appeals (see Appeal of Borough of Churchill, 525 Pa. 80, 575 A.2d 550 (1990)) and
have not been adopted by this Court for use in tax assessment appeals, in the absence of an
applicable local Cumberland County Rule of Court, the Pennsylvania Rules are instructive.
Under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure, consent of other parties or court approval of a
discontinuance is required only if the discontinuance is entered as to less than all defendants (Pa.
R. Civ. P. 229), a minor is a party to the action (Pa. R. Civ. P. 2039), a minor is beneficially
interested in a wrongful death action (Pa. R. Civ. P. 2206), an incapacitated person is a party (Pa.
R. Civ. P. 2064) or the action is a class action (Pa. R. Civ. P. 1714). None of these situations
limiting a discontinuance are relevant here. Therefore, even if the Pennsylvania Rules applied or
if the Court chose to be guided by the Pennsylvania Rules, the discontinuance by CPP Hess
Holdings would be proper.
12. Admitted in part and denied in part. CPP Hess Holdings admits that the School
District objects to the discontinuance of this appeal. For the reasons set forth in¶ 11 above, CPP
4
Hess Holdings denies that the School District's objection is valid. CPP Hess Holdings also
denies the characterization of the discontinuance as an"attempt." CPP Hess Holdings properly
and fully effected a discontinuance of this appeal. The discontinuance should not be disturbed.
13. Admitted. Counsel for CPP Hess Holdings does not concur in the School
District's Motion.
WHEREFORE, the School District's Motion to Strike Praecipe for Discontinuance and
Reinstate Case should be denied.
Respectfully submitted,
MCNEES WALLACE&NURICK LLC
By: t.
Helen L. Gemmill
Pa. I.D. No. 60661
100 Pine Street
PO Box 1166
Harrisburg, PA 17108-1166
(717) 237-5273
Counsel for Appellant/Petitioner
Dated: December 31, 2013 CPP Hess Holdings, LP
5
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I certify that on this date a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was served by
first class United States mail, postage prepaid, upon the following:
Stephen D. Tiley, Esquire
5 South Hanover Street
Carlisle, PA 17013-3385
Counsel of Record for Cumberland County Board of Assessment Appeals
John G. French, Esquire
1304 Oak Lane
New Cumberland, PA 17040
Counsel for Cumberland County Board of Assessment Appeals
Philip H. Spare, Esquire
STOCK AND LEADER, P.C.
Susquehanna Commerce Center—East, Suite 600
221 West Philadelphia Street
York, PA 17401-2994
Counsel for Mechanicsburg Area School District
Lisa Marie Coyne, Esquire
COYNE & COYNE PC
3901 Market Street
Camp Hill, PA 17011-4227
Counsel for Mechanicsburg Borough
Helen L. Gemmill
Dated: December 31, 2013
IN RE: APPEAL OF CPP HESS : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
HOLDINGS, LP : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
FROM THE DECISION OF THE
CUMBERLAND COUNTY BOARD
OF ASSESSMENT APPEALS
/r
AND NOW, this "if day of March, 2014, upon consideration of the Motion
: 11 -8820 CIVIL TERM
ORDER OF COURT
to Strike Praecipe for Discontinuance and Reinstate Case filed on behalf of the
Mechanicsburg Area School District and the response filed by CPP Hess
Holdings, LP, thereto, that motion is GRANTED and the Praecipe for
Discontinuance is STRICKEN. Section 4.03 of the Rules and Regulations
Governing Real Estate Assessment and Appeals Before the Board of
Assessment Appeals In and For Cumberland County states: [a]fter a petition to
intervene has been allowed by the Board, no withdrawal or abandonment of the
appeal by the primary appellant shall terminate the appeal, but the Board shall
proceed to hear and determine the appeal and make such order or determination
as shall be proper and in accordance with the law." Accordingly, Appellant's
unilateral discontinuance of the appeal was impermissible. See also In re Appeal
of the Municipality of Penn Hills, 546 A.2d 50 (Pa. 1988) (finding intervenor's
ability to participate in litigation of assessment appeal not dependent upon status
of the original appellant).
V J
cn,L0
By the Court,
Albert H. Mas and, J.
11 -8820 CIVIL TERM
hilip.H. Spare, Esquire
Susquehanna Commerce Center East
Suite 600
221 West Philadelphia Street
York, PA 17401
elen L. Gemmill, Esquire
100 Pine Street
P.O. Box 1166
Harrisburg, PA 17108 -1166
isa Marie Coyne, Esquire
3901 Market Street
Camp Hill, PA 1 701 1 -4227
hn G. French, Esquire
1304 Oak Lane
New Cumberland, PA 17040
sal
.3 al/1z(
IN RE: APPEAL OF CPP HESS
HOLDINGS, LP
"LPRojii0 -Of
Jy j�1C
CUMBERLAND COUNI I
PENNSYLVANIA
: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
: OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY,
: PENNSYLVANIA
FROM THE DECISION OF THE
CUMBERLAND COUNTY BOARD OF :
ASSESSMENT APPEALS : No. 11 -8820- CIVIL
MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF ORDER OF COURT
STRIKING DISCONTINUANCE AND REINSTATING CASE
Appellant CPP Hess Holdings, LP ( "CPP Hess Holdings ") respectfully requests that the
Court reconsider its Order of March 21, 2014 (Albert H. Masland, J.). In support of this Motion
for Reconsideration, CPP Hess Holdings states as follows:
1. On October 30, 2013, CPP Hess filed a Praecipe for Discontinuance of this tax
assessment appeal.
2. On November 26, 2013, the Mechanicsburg Area School District (the "School
District ") filed a Motion to Strike Praecipe for Discontinuance and Reinstate Case ( "Motion to
Strike Discontinuance ").
3. On December 13, 2013, the Court issued a rule to show cause with respect to the
Motion to Strike Discontinuance.
4. On January 2, 2014, CPP Hess Holdings filed its answer to the Motion to Strike
Discontinuance.
5. On March 21, 2014, the Court entered an Order granting the Motion to Strike
Discontinuance.
6. In its Order, the Court cited § 4.03 of the Rules and Regulations Governing Real
Estate Assessment and Appeals Before the Board of Assessment Appeals In and For Cumberland
County (the "Board Rules "). Section 4.03 of the Board Rules states:
After a petition to intervene has been allowed by the Board, no withdrawal or
abandonment of the appeal by the primary appellant shall terminate the appeal,
but the Board shall proceed to hear and determine the appeal and make such order
or determination as shall be proper and in accordance with the law.
7. Neither the School District nor CPP Hess Holdings cited § 4.03 of the Board
Rules in their respective Motion to Strike Discontinuance or answer to the motion.
8. The Court's reliance in its Order on § 4.03 is misplaced for two reasons: (1) the
School District did not file a petition to intervene with the Board and (2) the Board Rules are
inapplicable to the proceedings in this Court.
9. First, the School District did not file a petition to intervene with the Board of
Assessment Appeals, and consequently no petition to intervene was allowed by the Board. If the
School District had desired to intervene before the Board, the School District was required to
follow § 4.01 of the Board Rules, which governs the form and contents of a petition to intervene,
including the requirement that the petition for intervention be served on the property owner.
10. Because the School District did not petition to intervene before the Board, the
School District's participation in the proceedings before the Board was as a non -party pursuant
to § 4.04 of the Board Rules, which provides:
Effect of Non - Intervention. Nothing in these Rules or Regulation shall limit or
prohibit any taxing district (the County, municipality, or school district) from
appearing at the Hearing, questioning the petitioner, and giving non -expert oral
testimony, as to the value of any property. However, a taxing district which
does not formally intervene is not a "party" for purposes of these Rules.
2
Board Rules, § 4.04 (emphasis added).
11. The School District only filed a petition to intervene in this Court, after the appeal
from the Board's decision was pending in this Court. Because no petition to intervene was filed
before the Board, § 4.03 of the Board Rules governing the process after the allowance of
intervention by the Board is factually and legally inapplicable to the proceedings before the
Board and before this Court and the continuation of this tax assessment appeal.
12. Second, even if the School District had filed a petition to intervene with the
Board, the Board Rules are applicable only to tax assessment appeals while an appeal is pending
before the Board. A tax assessment appeal filed in a court of common pleas is a de novo appeal,
such that the proceedings below are treated as if they had not been held. Green v. Schuylkill
Cnty. Bd. of Assessment Appeals, 565 Pa. 185, 195, 772 A.2d 419, 425 (2001) ( "In an assessment
appeal, the matter before the trial court is heard de novo. ").
13. Thus, had the School District intervened before the Board in accordance with the
Board Rules, and had CPP Hess Holdings abandoned its appeal while the matter was still before
the Board, then Board would have been obligated to continue to determine the appeal before it.
But any obligation under the Board Rules for the Board to continue an appeal does not apply to
this Court in a de novo appeal where the Board Rules and procedures do not govern.
14. Notably, this Court has not adopted the Board Rules as part of this Court's Local
Rules. As a result, there is no rule of this Court that would prevent CPP Hess Holdings from
unilaterally discontinuing its tax assessment appeal.
15. Accordingly, § 4.03 of the Board Rules provides no authority for the Court to
strike CPP Hess Holdings' discontinuance.
3
16. In its Order of May 21, 2014, the Court also cited In re Appeal of the Municipality
of Penn Hills, 546 A.2d 50 (Pa. 1988). Neither the School District nor CPP Hess Holdings cited
Penn Hills in their respective Motion to Strike Discontinuance or answer to the motion.
17. In Penn Hills, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court addressed whether the rules of the
Allegheny County board of property assessment enabled an intervenor to continue an appeal
pending before the board after the original appellant withdrew. Id. at 52. In deciding whether
the intervenor could continue the appeal before the Board, the Supreme Court in Penn Hills
looked at the rules of the Allegheny board. Id. at 52 -53. The Supreme Court found that the
Allegheny board rules allowed a person to intervene "as a party" by filing a notice with the board
of this intention. Because the intervenor had filed the notice, the Supreme Court ruled that under
the board rules the intervenor was a party and entitled to continue the appeal before the board.
Id. at 52.
18. The Supreme Court stressed, however, that it was deciding Penn Hills only under
the Allegheny board rules. The Supreme Court noted that "[o]ur reference here to the rules of
procedure are by way of analogy only. They are not controlling since the instant appeal fell
within the scope of the Board's local rules on intervention." Id. at 52 n.1. The Supreme Court
repeated that it was constrained by the board rules in addressing whether issues were waived by
the intervenor before the Board:
This argument has some surface appeal, and if we were presented with a judicial
case where the normal rules of waiver apply, we would be inclined to accept it.
However, under the unique facts of this case, where we are ruling on the
intervention practices relative to an administrative proceeding, we must refer to
the controlling administrative rules, as well as the enabling legislation, to
determine what if anything was waived at the time this intervenor was admitted to
participate in the appeal.
Id. at 52 -53.
4
19. Consequently, the ruling in Penn Hills is not relevant or applicable to the CPP
Hess Holdings appeal. The issue here is whether CPP Hess Holdings is barred from
discontinuing the appeal under the rules applicable to this Court, not under the rules applicable to
the Cumberland County Board of Assessment Appeals. There is no rule in this Court that
prevents CPP Hess Holdings from discontinuing its appeal.
20. Moreover, unlike in Penn Hills, here the School District did not intervene before
the Cumberland Board in accordance with the Board Rules. As discussed above, under the
Board Rules the School District was required to file a petition to intervene to gain party status,
which the School District did not do. Accordingly, the Penn Hills ruling, allowing an intervenor
to continue an appeal before a tax assessment board if the intervenor obtained party status in
accordance with the board rules, has no applicability here where the School District did not
intervene before the Board and was not a party under the Board Rules.
21. Counsel for CPP Hess Holdings sought the concurrence of counsel for the School
District in this Motion for Reconsideration. Concurrence was denied.
WHEREFORE, for the reasons set forth above and in CPP Hess Holdings' answer to the
Motion to Strike Discontinuance, CPP Hess Holdings respectfully requests that this Court grant
this Motion for Reconsideration and enter an order denying the Motion to Strike Discontinuance.
Respectfully submitted,
MCNEES WALLACE & NURICK LLC
Dated: April 17, 2014
By:
/ L.
Helen L. Gemmill
Pa. I.D. No. 60661
100 Pine Street, PO Box 1166
Harrisburg, PA 17108 -1166
(717) 237 -5273
Counsel for CPP Hess Holdings, LP
5
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I certify that on this date a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was served by
first class United States mail, postage prepaid, upon the following:
Stephen D. Tiley, Esquire
5 South Hanover Street
Carlisle, PA 17013-3385
Counsel of Record for Cumberland County Board of Assessment Appeals
John G. French, Esquire
1304 Oak Lane
New Cumberland, PA 17040
Counsel for Cumberland County Board of Assessment Appeals
Philip H. Spare, Esquire
STOCK AND LEADER, P.C.
Susquehanna Commerce Center — East, Suite 600
221 West Philadelphia Street
York, PA 17401-2994
Counsel for Mechanicsburg Area School District
Lisa Marie Coyne, Esquire
COYNE & COYNE PC
3901 Market Street
Camp Hill, PA 17011-4227
Counsel for Mechanicsburg Borough
Dated: April 17, 2014
IN RE: APPEAL OF CPP HESS : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
HOLDINGS, LP : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
FROM THE DECISION OF THE
CUMBERLAND COUNTY BOARD
OF ASSESSMENT APPEALS
: 11-8820 CIVIL TERM
ORDER OF COURT
AND NOW, this 'day of May, 2014, upon consideration of the Motion
for Reconsideration of Order of Court Striking Discontinuance and Reinstating
Case filed by CPP Hess Holdings, LP, that motion is DENIED.'
By the Court,
Philip H. Spare, Esquire
Susquehanna Commerce Center East
Suite 600
221 West Philadelphia Street
York, PA 17401
-lelen L. Gemmill, Esquire
100 Pine Street
P.O. Box 1166
Harrisburg, PA 17108-1166
Lisa Marie Coyne, Esquire
3901 Market Street
Camp Hill, PA 17011-4227
G. French, Esquire
1304 Oak Lane
New Cumberland, PA 17040
Albert H. Maslan
CaPp P2b;tccL
stijiy
1 The court notes that we may have erred in characterizing the Board Rules as binding on the
instant proceeding, but absent Local Rules to guide us, the reference to the Board Rules should
be considered by way of analogy only and we still reach the same conclusion as before. An
"intervenor's right to participate in an appeal is not contingent upon the continued participation of
the original appellant." In re Appeal of the Municipality of Penn Hills, 546 A.2d 50, 52 (Pa. 1988).
cy
77.17
•
11-8820 CIVIL TERM
Stephen D. Tiley, Esquire
5 South Hanover Street
Carlisle, PA 17013
sal
-2-
In.
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
IN RE: APPEAL OF CPP HESS HOLDINGS, L.P.
FROM THE DECISION OF THE
CUMBERLAND COUNTY BOARD OF
ASSESSMENT APPEALS
: CIVIL ACTION — LAW
: Tax Assessment Appeal
: No. 11 -8820 -CIVIL TERM
STIPULATION AND JOINT MOTION FOR AGREED ORDER
AND NOW, this 1 lth day of November, 2014, it is hereby Agreed and Stipulated by and
between the Appellant, CPP Hess Holdings, L.P., by its attorney, Helen L. Gemmill, Esquire,
McNees Wallace & Nurick LLC; Cumberland County Board of Assessment Appeals and County
of Cumberland by John G. French, Esquire; Borough of Mechanicsburg by Lisa Marie Coyne,
Esquire, Coyne & Coyne, P.C.; and Mechanicsburg Area School District by Gareth D. Pahowka,
Esquire, Stock and Leader, LLP; as follows:
1. On November 23, 2011, Appellant CPP Hess Holdings, L.P. filed a Petition For
Appeal for Tax Parcel Nos. 17-09-0543-001 and 17-09-0543-002 containing a total of
approximately 184 acres with a street address of 1017 S. Market Street, Mechanicsburg,
Pennsylvania ("Property").
2. The parties stipulate that the total assessed value of the Property shall be:
a. $3,500,000 for 2012 (effective January 1, 2012);
b. $4,350,000 for 2013 (effective January 1, 2013); and,
0195208-
c. $5,000,000 for 2014 (effective January 1, 2014) and continuing for
subsequent years until changed as provided by law.
3. The total assessed value of the Property shall be allocated forty-three percent
(43%) to the Tax Parcel ending in 001 and fifty-seven percent (57%) to the Tax Parcel ending in
002.
4. The stipulated assessments shall be implemented beginning with the year 2012
county and municipal taxes and with the 2012-2013 school taxes and shall continue as stated
above.
5. The Cumberland County Assessment Office shall promptly notify the appropriate
taxing bodies of the change in assessment, and instruct the taxing bodies to make any refunds
due, which shall be paid within 90 days of the date of the final Order implementing this
Stipulation.
6. Each party to this appeal shall bear its own costs.
7. The Court is requested to enter the proposed Order attached hereto.
8. The undersigned Attorneys have specific authorization to enter into this
settlement Stipulation by her/his client(s).
0195208- 2
Respectfully submitted,
By: / -e,- L . (12( ---
Helen L. Gemmill, Esquire
Attorney I.D. No. 60661
McNees Wallace & Nurick LLC
100 Pine Street
P.O. Box 1166
Harrisburg, PA 17108-1166
Counsel for CPP Hess Holdings, L.P.
By:
John G. French, Esquire
1304 Oak Lane
New Cumberland, PA 17040
Solicitor for Cumberland County Board of
Assessment Appeals
By:
Lisa Marie Coyne, Esquire
Coyne & Coyne, P.C.
3901 Market Street
Camp Hill, PA 17011-4227
Solicitor for Mechanicsburg Borough
By:
Gareth D. Pahowka, Esquire
Stock and Leader, LLP
221 W. Philadelphia Street
Suite 600
York, PA 17401
Attorney for Mechanicsburg Area School District
0195208- 3
Respectfully submitted,
By:
Helen L. Gemmill, Esquire
Attorney I.D. No. 60661
McNees Wallace & Nurick LLC
100 Pine Street
P.O. Box 1166
Harrisburg, PA 17108-1166
Counsel for CPP Hess Holdings, L.P.
Bv:
ohn G. French, Esquire
1304 Oak Lane
New Cumberland, PA 17040
Solicitor for Cumberland County Board of
Assessment Appeals
By:
Lisa Marie Coyne, Esquire
Coyne & Coyne, P.C.
3901 Market Street
Camp Hill, PA 17011-4227
Solicitor for Mechanicsburg Borough
By:
Gareth D. Pahowka, Esquire
Stock and Leader, LLP
221 W. Philadelphia Street
Suite 600
York, PA 17401
Attorney for Mechanicsburg Area School District
0195208- 3
Respectfully submitted,
By:
Helen L. Gemmill, Esquire
Attorney I.D. No. 60661
McNees Wallace & Nurick LLC
100 Pine Street
P.O. Box 1166
Harrisburg, PA 17108-1166
Counsel for CPP Hess Holdings, L.P.
By:
John G. French, Esquire
1304 Oak Lane
New Cumberland, PA 17040
Solicitor for Cumberland County Board of
Assessment Appeals
By.
Marie Coyne, E:uire //2/2-0//
ne & Coyne, P.C,
3901 Market Street
Camp Hill, PA 17011-4227
Solicitor for Mechanicsburg Borough
By:
Gareth D. Pahowka, Esquire
Stock and Leader, LLP
221 W. Philadelphia Street
Suite 600
York, PA 17401
Attorney for Mechanicsburg Area School District
0195208- 3
Respectfully submitted,
By:
Helen L. Gemmill, Esquire
Attorney I.D. No. 60661
McNees Wallace & Nurick LLC
100 Pine Street
P.O. Box 1166
Harrisburg, PA 17108-1166
Counsel for CPP Hess Holdings, L.P.
By:
John G. French, Esquire
1304 Oak Lane
New Cumberland, PA 17040
Solicitor for Cumberland County Board of
Assessment Appeals
By:
Lisa Marie Coyne, Esquire
Coyne & Coyne, P.C.
3901 Market Street
Camp Hill, PA 17011-4227
Solicitor : chanicsbur : s rough
epi
By.
tor D. Pahowka, 'quire
ck and Leader, LLP
221 W. Philadelphia Street
Suite 600
York, PA 17401
Attorney for Mechanicsburg Area School District
0195208- 3
t
2.0 i DEC 23 PM 4: !
CUMBERLAND COUNTY
PENNSYLVANIA
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
IN RE: APPEAL OF CPP HESS HOLDINGS, L.P.
FROM THE DECISION OF THE
CUMBERLAND COUNTY BOARD OF
ASSESSMENT APPEALS
ORDER
: CIVIL ACTION — LAW
: Tax Assessment Appeal
: No. 11 -8820 -CIVIL TERM
AND NOW, thi§23 day of,4(52e, 2014, upon consideration of the
Stipulation and Joint Motion for Agreed Order, said Stipulation is accepted and adopted as an
Order of this Court as follows:
1. Tax Parcel Nos. 17-09-0543-001 and 17-09-0543-002 containing a total of
approximately 184 acres with a street address of 1017 S. Market Street, Mechanicsburg,
Pennsylvania ("Property") shall have a total assessed value of:
a. $3,500,000 for 2012 (effective January 1, 2012);
b. $4,350,000 for 2013 (effective January 1, 2013); and,
c. $5,000,000 for 2014 ((effective January 1, 2014) and continuing for
subsequent years until changed as provided by law.
2. The total assessment for the Property shall be allocated forty-three percent (43%)
to the Tax Parcel ending in 001 and fifty-seven percent (57%) to the Tax Parcel ending in 002.
0195208-
3. The stipulated assessments shall be implemented beginning with the year 2012
county and municipal taxes and with the 2012-2013 school taxes and shall continue as stated
above.
4. The Cumberland County Assessment Office shall promptly notify the appropriate
taxing bodies of the change in assessment, and instruct the taxing bodies to make any refunds
due, which shall be paid within 90 days of the date of the final Order implementing this
Stipulation.
5. Each party to this appeal shall bear its own costs.
eien L . 6' arnrm 11, acL
t.chn C3. Franck►, v l
Lisa Marie 0,09,16 ,
v g".a. TPahowka sy_
By the Court,
Albert H. Masland, J.
pig
0195208- 2