Case Law Summaries

Trisun Corp. v. Town of West New York

• Opinion Date: June 29, 2001
• Real Property Law
• E-Mail

TAXES; MUNICIPALITIES; ENFORCEMENT—A court need not award financial sanctions against a municipality that wilfully refused to make timely court-ordered tax refunds.

Burdened by a large number of Tax Court judgments requiring it to make substantial refunds, a municipality failed to make timely payment. It made partial payments, but the taxpayers were required to make repeated efforts to obtain satisfaction. In response to those efforts, a Tax Court judge entered a series of orders directing payment by a certain date. When the municipality did not comply, the taxpayers sought sanctions. Although the Tax Court judge characterized the municipality’s failure to pay as “willful,” the judge declined to impose sanctions upon the municipality. Further, the judge did not award to taxpayers’ counsel the full measure of counsel fees sought. On appeal, the Appellate Division stated that it had “no doubt that the Tax Court is vested with full authority to impose sanctions in an appropriate case.” Balancing that authority, it also held that “[n]ot all power that is possessed must be exercised.” Under those guidelines, the Court declined to conclude that sanctions must be held against the municipality. One major factor was that the sanctions would ultimately have to be paid by the taxpayers, none of whom bore responsibility for the delay. Furthermore, the Court was concerned that sanctions would add to the municipality’s fiscal woes, making it difficult for it to bring its financial affairs into good order. Finally, it took notice that the payments had, in fact, been received and thought that “[a]n award of sanctions now would be in the nature of a punishment for past non-compliance and thus could not be considered as being in aid of litigant’s rights.” As to attorney’s fees, the Court held that “it is apparent that the Tax Court judge disregarded, apparently inadvertently,” the full measure of legal services. Therefore, it remanded the matter for a determination of that amount.

Copyright ©2003. Meislik & Meislik. All rights reserved.