Petitioners, V
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
No. 20- IN THE Supreme Court of the United States MARIA PAppAS, TREASURER AND EX-OFFICIO COLLEctOR OF COOK COUntY, ILLINOIS AND THE COUntY OF COOK, Petitioners, v. A.F. MOORE & ASSOCIATES, Inc., J. EmIL AnDERSON & SON, Inc., PRIME GROUP REALTY TRUST, AmERICAN AcADEMY OF ORTHOPAEDIC SURGEONS, ERLIng EIDE, FOX VALLEY/RIVER OAKS PARTNERSHIP, SIMON PROPERTY GROUP, INC. AND FRITZ KAEGI, ASSESSOR OF COOK COUNTY, Respondents. ON PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES CouRT OF AppEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRcuIT PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI CATHY MCNEIL STEIN KIMBERLY M. FOXX AssisTANT STATE’S ATTORNEY COOK COUNTY STATE’S ATTORNEY CHIEF, CIVIL ACTIONS BUREAU 500 Richard J. Daley Center Chicago, Illinois 60602 PAUL A. CASTIGLIONE* (312) 603-2350 ANTHONY M. O’BRIEN [email protected] AssisTANT STATE’S ATTORNEYS Of Counsel Counsel for Petitioners * Counsel of Record 297284 A (800) 274-3321 • (800) 359-6859 i QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Whether the Equal Protection Clause mandates that a real estate taxpayer seeking a refund based on an over assessment of real property be able to challenge the methodology that the assessing official used and to conduct discovery on such assessment methodology, where that methodology is not probative to the refund claim that State law provides and where State law provides a complete and adequate remedy in which all objections to taxes may be raised. 2. Whether the decision below improperly held that the Tax Injunction Act and the comity doctrine did not bar federal jurisdiction over Respondents’ equal protection and due process challenges to Illinois’ system for seeking real estate tax refunds based upon error in the assessment of real estate, where: (1) Illinois law provides an action based upon equal protection principles to re- cover overpaid real estate taxes and interest and (2) under Illinois law, the assessment of real property at or above its true fair market value warrants a refund based upon the Uniformity Clause in the Illinois Constitution, where assessing officials have systematically under-assessed other, similar properties in its class. ii LIST OF PARTIES The parties to the proceeding below were petitioners Maria Pappas, Treasurer and ex-officio Collector of Cook County, Illinois and the County of Cook (“Petitioners”) and respondents, A.F. Moore & Associates, Inc., J. Emil Anderson & Son, Inc., Prime Group Realty Trust, American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons, Erling Eide, Fox Valley/River Oaks Partnership and Simon Property Group, Inc. (“Respondents”), as well as respondent Fritz Kaegi, the Assessor of Cook County (the “Assessor”).1 1. The Assessor intends to separately file a petition for a writ of certiorari in this action. iii STATEMENT OF RELATED PROCEEDINGS Woodfield Realty Holding Company, LLC v. Pappas, No. 05 COTO 3938, Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois, County Department, County Division Case is pending; no judgment has been entered. In re Level of Assessment Litigation, 05 COTO 3938, et al., Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois, County Department, County Division Case is pending; no judgment has been entered. A.F. Moore & Associates v. Pappas, 10 COTO 4715, Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois, County Department, County Division Case is pending; no judgment has been entered. J. Emil Anderson & Son, Inc. v. Pappas, 10 COTO 4665, Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois, County Department, County Division Case is pending; no judgment has been entered. Prime Group Realty Trust Management Agent v. Pappas, 05 COTO 4016, Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois, County Department, County Division Case is pending; no judgment has been entered. iv American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons v. Pappas, 09 CO 6182, Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois, County Department, County Division Case is pending; no judgment has been entered. Eide v. Pappas, 05 COTO 3967, Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois, County Department, County Division Case is pending; no judgment has been entered. Property Tax Management, LLC, v. Pappas, 08 COTO 3814, Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois, County Department, County Division Case is pending; no judgment has been entered. A.F. Moore & Associates v. Pappas, 18 C 4888, United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois Judgment entered on April 19, 2019. A.F. Moore & Associates v. Pappas, 19-1971 consolidated with 19-1979, United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit Judgment entered on January 29, 2020, petition for rehearing denied on April 9, 2020. v TABLE OF CONTENTS Page QUESTIONS PRESENTED ......................i LIST OF PARTIES ............................. ii STATEMENT OF RELATED PROCEEDINGS ....iii TABLE OF CONTENTS..........................v TABLE OF APPENDICES ..................... vii TABLE OF CITED AUTHORITIES ..............ix OPINIONS BELOW..............................1 STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION ................1 CONSTITUTIONAL AND STATUTORY PROVISIONS INVOLVED .....................2 STATEMENT ...................................2 I. Applicable Illinois Law ......................3 II. The Federal Litigation And Related State Litigation.................................12 REASONS FOR GRANTING THE WRIT .........18 vi Table of Contents Page I. THE PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI SHOULD BE ALLOWED BECAUSE THE DECISION BELOW CONFLICTS WITH THE DECISIONS OF OTHER UNITED STATES COURTS OF APPEALS AND THIS COURT .........19 A. The Decision Below Conflicts With The Second Circuit’s Decision In Long Island Lighting Co . .20 B. The Decision Below Conflicts With The Decisions Of This Court, The Illinois Supreme Court, The Third Circuit And Various Other Circuit Courts .......22 C. The Decision Below Would Federalize Illinois SPO’s And Would Countermand Illinois Policy For Collecting Real Estate Tax Revenue And For Providing A Full And Complete Remedy For Refund Actions Based Upon Alleged Overassessment Of Real Property .......28 CONCLUSION .................................31 vii TABLE OF APPENDICES Page AppENDIX A — oPINION OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF AppEALS FOR THE SEVEntH CIRCUIT, DATED JANUARY 29, 2020 ...........................1a APPENDIX B — MEMORANDUM OPINION OF UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS, EASTERN DIVISION, FILED APRIL 30, 2019..............................16a AppENDIX C — dENIAL OF REHEARIng OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF AppEALS FOR THE SEVEntH CIRCUIT, FILED APRIL 9, 2020 .......................31a AppENDIX D — RELEVANT CONSTITUTIONAL AND STATUTORY PROVISIONS ...............................33a AppENDIX E — AmENDED ORDER OF CONSOLIDATION FOR CERTAIN DISCO VERY PURPOSES, IN R E LEvel of AssessmenT Litigation, 05COTO3938, 07COTO1618, 07COTO0779, 08COTO5700, 09COTO6258, Circuit COURT OF COOK COUntY, ILLINOIS, COUntY DEPARtmEnt, COUntY DIVISION, ISSUED JANUARY 22, 2013 . .41a viii Table of Appendices Page APPENDIX F — MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS COUNTY DEPARTMENT, COUNTY DIVISION, DATED JULY 19, 2011 .......................59a APPENDIX G — MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS, COUNTY DEPARTMENT, COUNTY DIVISION, DATED JUNE 2, 2011........................78a AppENDIX H — REPORT OF THE TASK FORCE ON REFORM OF THE COOK COUntY TAX AppEALS PROCESS AS REVISED AND ADOptED BY THE REAL ESTATE TAX COmmIttEE OF THE CHICAGO BAR ASSOCIATION DATED February 22, 1995, as adopted by THE CHICAGO BAR ASSOCIATION REAL ESTATE COmmIttEE ON MARCH 2, 1995 ..150a ix TABLE OF CITED AUTHORITIES Page CASES Allegheny Pittsburgh Coal Co. v. County Commission, 488 U.S. 336 (1989).......................passim A.F. Moore & Associates v. Pappas, 385 F. Supp. 3d 591 (N.D. Ill. 2019) ...........13, 17 A.F. Moore & Associates v. Pappas, 948 F.3d 889 (7th Cir. 2020) ...............passim Aluminum Co. of America v. Department of Treasury, 522 F.2d 1120 (6th Cir. 1975)....................19 Arkansas v. Farm Credit Services, 520 U.S. 821 (1997).........................19, 22 Ayers v. Polk County, 697 F.2d 1375 (11th Cir. 1983) ...................19 Balazik v. County of Dauphin, 44 F.3d 209 (3d Cir. 1995) ......................19 Bank of new England Old Colony, n.A. v. Clark, 986 F.2d 600 (1st Cir. 1993).....................19 Brooks v. nance, 801 F.2d 1237 (10th Cir. 1986)...................19 x Cited Authorities Page Burris v. Little Rock, 941 F.2d 717 (8th Cir. 1991) .....................19 California v. Grace Brethren Church, 457 U.S. 393 (1982)............................19 Caperton v. A. T. Massey Coal Co., 556 U.S. 868 (2009)............................18 Coors Brewing Co. v. Méndez-Torres, 678 F.3d 15 (1st Cir. 2012) . .20 County Collector v. Ford Motor Co., 131 Ill. 2d 541 (1989)...........................10 Fair Assessment in Real Estate Ass’n v. Mcnary, 454 U.S. 100 (1981) ............................19 Garrett v. Bamford, 582 F.2d 810 (3d Cir. 1978) ..................11, 22 Gass v. County of Allegheny, 371 F.3d 134 (3d Cir. 2004) .....................19 Gee v. Planned Parenthood of Gulf Coast, Inc., 139 S. Ct. 408 (2018)...........................18 Givot v. Orr, 321 Ill. App. 3d 78 (1st Dist. 2001) ................5 xi Cited Authorities Page Henderson v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 1780 (2015)..........................21 Jerron West, Inc. v. California State Bd. of Equalization, 129 F.3d 1334 (9th Cir. 1997) ...................19 Jorgensen v. Berrios, 2020 IL App (1st) 191133.......................29 Kraebel v. new York City Dep’t of Housing Preservation & Dev., 959 F.2d 395 (2d Cir. 1992) .....................19