Opinion ID: 2399087
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Property Taxes on the Easement Area

Text: LCA asserts that the trial justice erred as a matter of law in ordering it to reimburse 360 Thames Street for the property taxes on the easement area. It contends that the language of the easement does not require reimbursement for taxes and the evidence shows, Rhode Island law mandates, and common law presumes that 360 Thames Street was in fact not taxed for the easement area. To support its assertion that the language of the easement does not require reimbursement of taxes, LCA refers to certain condominium documents filed with the city by 360 Thames Street on June 6, 1984. It contends that an exhibit to the condominium documents demonstrates that it is not required to reimburse any taxes because it merely states that [t]he Landing Condominium Association shall be responsible for all of the expenses of the operation, insurance, maintenance, and repair of said Level One parking area[.] That exhibit, which describes the two-story parking area at 360 Thames Street, also states that Level One shall be for the exclusive use of the Landing Condominium Association    set forth in that easement dated May 26, 1983 and recorded in the City of Newport   [,] and that on Level Two, one parking space should be set aside for the benefit of the Landing Condominium project as set forth in the aforesaid easement as amended or corrected from time to time. However, the May 26, 1983 easement, to which the exhibit refers, contains the following language: The expenses for the operation, maintenance, and repair of all parking areas provided for the LANDING CONDMINIUM on said lot    and all municipal taxes and assessments thereon, if any, shall be charged as a common expense of the LANDING CONDMINIUM ASSOCIATION as may be determined by the Management Committee of said [360 Thames Street] Association. (Emphasis added.) The trial justice rejected LCA's contention that the easement does not require it to reimburse any taxes assessed against 360 Thames Street. After reviewing the pertinent language of the recorded easement, and considering it in conjunction the language of 360 Thames Street's condominium filings with the city, we are satisfied that the trial justice was correct in rejecting LCA's contention. LCA further asserts that there is a presumption under taxation law that, absent positive proof that the tax collector has failed to perform his or her duty, an easement area is taxed to the dominant estate rather than to the servient estate. It maintains that plaintiff did not overcome this presumption and that the trial justice therefore erred in ordering LCA to reimburse any percentage of the taxes paid by the owners of 360 Thames Street. [5] We have stated previously that tax assessors are required to assess every person and all property liable to taxation. Van Alen v. Stein, 119 R.I. 347, 354, 376 A.2d 1383, 1387 (1977). Accordingly it is the right and duty of the assessors to proceed to ascertain the nature and extent of such persons' taxable property from the sources of information at their command and to place a valuation upon it according to their best judgment. Id. (quoting Stone v. Norris, 40 R.I. 477, 482, 101 A. 428, 429 (1917)). Absent evidence to the contrary, there is a presumption that this duty is performed by the assessor, and that the holder of an easement    is presumed to have paid a tax on the value of the easement inasmuch as that value was added to the value of the easement holder's dominant estate for tax assessment purposes. Arizona R.C.I.A. Lands, Inc., v. Ainsworth, 21 Ariz.App. 38, 515 P.2d 335, 338, 339 (1973). After hearing testimony and examining the evidence, the trial justice found LCA to be totally accountable for its fair share of the property taxes. LCA maintains that this was error because there is no evidence demonstrating that the tax assessor failed to take the recorded easement into account when assessing the taxes on 360 Thames Street, and that plaintiffs failure to show that the easement area was included in 360 Thames Street's tax assessments was fatal to its claim because it failed to prove that it had, in fact, paid taxes to the City of Newport on the parking spaces. We disagree. There is, however, evidence in the record revealing that the recorded easement was not taken into account in the calculation of 360 Thames Street's annual tax liability. The city tax assessor, Allan Booth, testified that the city annually collects taxes for the first level of the parking garage, but that those taxes are not assessed or collected separately from the other taxes assessed against 360 Thames Street. In addition, he said that the value or benefit of the easement was not identifiable as a part of LCA's tax assessment. From this evidence in the record it is clear that the trial justice found that 360 Thames Street had been assessed taxes for the parking easement, and from that finding she concluded that plaintiff was entitled to reimbursement from LCA for those taxes. We have reviewed the transcript and exhibits and conclude that this was not error because a fair reading of the record demonstrates that the owners of 360 Thames Street were, in fact, taxed upon the parking spaces in dispute.