Olivia Medeiros

In a property assessment appeal for the 2019 taxation year, the Appellants sought to introduce late documents, which the Board denied due to lack of exceptional circumstances and prejudice to the other parties.

The Appellants' subsequent request for an adjournment to appeal this ruling was also denied.

MPAC then moved to dismiss the appeal, arguing that a settlement reached during the Request for Reconsideration process for the 2018 taxation year triggered issue estoppel.

The Board dismissed MPAC's motion, applying the Supreme Court's framework in Danyluk to hold that a settlement agreement is a contract between parties, not a judicial decision, and therefore cannot ground a claim of issue estoppel.

The appellant appealed the property assessment of a custom-built home on a 15.79-acre lot, arguing that the assessed value of $5,625,000 was too high because most of the land was located in a floodplain and not buildable.

The Assessment Review Board agreed with the appellant, finding that 13.7 acres were in the floodplain and should be valued at $18,000 per acre.

Using the direct sales comparison approach for the buildable portion, the Board determined the total current value of the property to be $4,933,000 and reduced the assessment accordingly.