(a) A taxpayer shall not contest the validity of any tax assessed against his or her person,
personal property, or real estate, nor the validity of the action of the listers or
selectboard in assessing such tax, nor the validity of any grand list, unless the
taxpayer filed his or her objections to the validity thereof, in the office of the
town clerk wherein the tax is assessed, within a period of two months from November
15 of each year in which the tax is assessed.
(b) If the taxpayer desires to object upon the ground that the notice he or she received,
although given in the manner prescribed by law, is based upon invalid or defective
proceedings in making up of the appraisal, grand list, or in the assessment thereof,
he or she shall file at the place and within the time prescribed by subsection (a)
of this section his or her specific objection that the notice received was so based. (Amended 1957, No. 219, § 2, eff. July 1, 1961; 1959, No. 218 § 3.)
Hojaboom v. Town of Swanton, 442 A.2d 1301 (Vt. 1982). · cites it 3דThe Town next claims that even if the Board’s findings are inadequate, reversal is nevertheless required because the plaintiffs failed to comply with the filing procedures of 32 V.S.A. § 5292. Under 32 V.S.A. § 5292(a) a taxpayer must file objections to the validity of the tax…”
City of Winooski v. Matte, 218 A.2d 458 (Vt. 1966). · cites it 6ד32 V.S.A. § 5292 provides: (a) A taxpayer shall not contest the validity of any tax assessed against his person, personal property or real estate nor the validity of the action of the listers or selectmen in assessing such tax nor the validity of any grand list unless the…”
Poulin v. Town of Danville, 260 A.2d 208 (Vt. 1969). · cites it 2ד§§ 4221-4222; and (4) filing an objection in the town clerk’s office under 32 V.S.A. § 5292. We cannot accede to this contention of the defendant.”
Brookside Memorials, Inc. v. Barre City, 702 A.2d 47 (Vt. 1997). “According to the City, even if we determine that plaintiff is entitled to a refund, the amount of the refund is limited by 32 VS.A. § 5292(a): A taxpayer shall not contest the validity of any tax assessed against his person, personal property or real estate nor the validity of…”
Vill. of Morrisville Water & Light Dep't v. Town of Hyde Park, 270 A.2d 584 (Vt. 1970). · cites it 3דBy its answer, the defendant alleges that the plaintiff has failed to comply with the applicable statutory provisions of the Vermont Statutes which Morrisville should have resorted to as an aggrieved taxpayer, The defendant relies on 32 V.S.A. § 5292 to defeat the plaintiff’s…”
Town of Bristol v. United States ex rel. Small Bus. Admin., 315 F. Supp. 908 (D. Vt. 1970). · cites it 2דIf it is anomalous that a mortgagor who redeems from an SBA mortgagee in possession would not be subject to taxes assessed during the possession, this is an anomaly which not only results from the historical division of law and equity in Vermont, but which the Vermont…”
Town of Williston v. Pine Ridge Sch., Inc., 321 A.2d 24 (Vt. 1974). “No exempt owner can be a “taxpayer” within 32 V.S.A. § 5292... Town of Bristol v. United States, 315 F.”
Rooney Vermont Assocs. v. Town of Pownal, 436 A.2d 733 (Vt. 1981). “Rooney also filed its objections to the validity of the taxes in accordance with 32 V.S.A. § 5292. On February 11, 1980, plaintiff voluntarily discontinued its appeal.”
Burton v. Town of Salisbury, 790 A.2d 394 (Vt. 2001). · cites it 3ד§ 213 makes clear, however, the legislature may not enact statutes that “affect a suit begun or pending at the time of their passage.”
— Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 32, § 5292(a) — 3 cases
Brookside Memorials, Inc. v. Barre City, 702 A.2d 47 (Vt. 1997). “According to the City, even if we determine that plaintiff is entitled to a refund, the amount of the refund is limited by 32 VS.A. § 5292(a): A taxpayer shall not contest the validity of any tax assessed against his person, personal property or real estate nor the validity of…”
Hojaboom v. Town of Swanton, 442 A.2d 1301 (Vt. 1982). “The Town next claims that even if the Board’s findings are inadequate, reversal is nevertheless required because the plaintiffs failed to comply with the filing procedures of 32 V.S.A. § 5292. Under 32 V.S.A. § 5292(a) a taxpayer must file objections to the validity of the tax…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.