Title: Gordon v. Board of Civil Authority for Town of Morristown

State: vermont

Issuer: Vermont Supreme Court

Document:

Gordon v. Board of Civil Authority for Town of Morristown (2005-245); 180 Vt. 299;
910 A.2d 836

2006 VT 94

[Filed 01-Sep-2006]


       NOTICE:  This opinion is subject to motions for reargument under
  V.R.A.P. 40 as well as formal revision before publication in the Vermont
  Reports.  Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of Decisions,
  Vermont Supreme Court, 109 State Street, Montpelier, Vermont 05609-0801 of
  any errors in order that corrections may be made before this opinion goes
  to press.


                                 2006 VT 94

                                No. 2005-245


  William Gordon                                 Supreme Court

                                                 On Appeal from
       v.                                        Lamoille Superior Court


  Board of Civil Authority for                   May Term, 2006
  Town of Morristown


  Howard E. Van Benthuysen, J.

  Ronald I. Merelman, Stowe, for Plaintiff-Appellee. 

  Shapleigh Smith, Jr. and Douglas D. Le Brun of Dinse, Knapp & McAndrew,
    P.C., Burlington, and Richard C. Sargent, Morrisville, for
    Defendant-Appellant.

  William H. Sorrell, Attorney General, and Charles L. Merriman, Special
    Assistant Attorney General, Montpelier, for Amicus Curiae State of Vermont.


  PRESENT:  Reiber, C.J., Dooley, Johnson, Skoglund and Burgess, JJ.

        
       ¶  1.  BURGESS, J.   This case arises out of the Town of
  Morristown's assessment of real estate property taxes against an airplane
  hangar owned by William Gordon.  The property on which the hangar sits is
  leased to Gordon by the State, which owns the land.  Gordon challenged the
  tax assessment in Lamoille Superior Court, which held that the hangar was
  personalty, therefore not taxable as real property, and granted summary
  judgment in favor of Gordon.  The Town appeals.  Because we conclude that
  the superior court erred in concluding that the hangar was not taxable real
  property assessed to Gordon under 32 V.S.A. § 3608, we reverse.

       ¶  2.  The hangar is a bare, non-insulated wood frame structure with
  an aluminum roof and electric power.  Gordon purchased the hangar from
  Elizabeth Darden on July 19, 2001.  Four days later, with the State's
  consent as lessor, Darden assigned to Gordon the lease for the underlying
  land.  The lease began in 1993 and is currently in its third five-year
  renewable term.  

       ¶  3.  The lease called for the construction of the hangar within the
  first year of the lease and provides that the lessee retains title to all
  improvements constructed or installed on the leased premises.  The lease
  also provides that upon termination, the State, as lessor, may require the
  lessee to remove or relocate the hangar, or to relinquish title of the
  hangar to the State.  Gordon agreed in the lease to pay all taxes assessed
  on the premises, and on any buildings, structures, betterments, or other
  improvements.  The lease contains restrictions on Gordon's use of the
  premises, ability to improve the premises, and ability to transfer the
  lease.  The State reserved the right to terminate the lease with thirty
  days notice. 

       ¶  4.  Gordon appealed the assessment of the hangar to the Morristown
  Board of Listers, which affirmed the assessment, and then to the Morristown
  Board of Civil Authority, which also affirmed.  Gordon then appealed to the
  Lamoille Superior Court, where the parties filed cross motions for summary
  judgment; Gordon's was granted.  We review a decision on a motion for
  summary judgment de novo, employing the same standard as the trial court. 
  Hardwick Recycling & Salvage, Inc. v. Acadia Ins. Co., 2004 VT 124, ¶ 14,
  177 Vt. 421,