ORDERS:
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
This matter is before the Administrative Law Court (“ALC” or “Court”) pursuant to a request
for a contested case hearing filed by the Petitioner on September 16, 2004 in which she challenges
the valuation of her property located at 3202 Hartnett Boulevard, Isle of Palms, for the 2002 tax year.
The Petitioner’s request for a hearing follows the final decision of the Charleston County Board of
Assessment Appeals (Board) issued on June 17, 2003.
Because the Board’s decision was dated June 17, 2003 and the Petitioner did not file her case
with the ALC until September 16, 2004, the Court ordered both parties to submit written responses
on the timeliness of the appeal in order to help it determine how to proceed in this matter. The
Petitioner’s response was filed on October 12, 2004. The Respondent filed a Motion to Dismiss on
October 13, 2004 arguing that this matter should be dismissed for Petitioner’s failure to file her
request for a contested case hearing within thirty (30) days of the Board’s final decision. No reply
to the Motion to Dismiss was filed by the Petitioner.
“Subject matter jurisdiction of a court depends upon the authority granted to the court by the
constitution and laws of the state.” Paschal v. Causey, 309 S.C. 206, 209, 420 S.E.2d 863, 865
(Ct.App.1992). It “refers to [the] court’s power to hear and determine cases of the general class or
category to which [the] proceedings in question belong . . . .” Black's Law Dictionary 1425 (6th ed.
1990). Pursuant to S.C. Code Ann. § 12-60-2540 (Supp. 2003), the ALC has subject matter
jurisdiction over contested cases arising from appeals of property tax assessments made by the board
and, therefore, over this case. Therefore, since the ALC has subject matter jurisdiction to hear this
contested case, the Respondent must be contending that the ALC’s jurisdiction to hear this case is
divested by the Petitioner’s belated filing.
Respondent Rule 11 of the Rules of Procedure for the Administrative Law Court requires
that, “[i]n county tax matters...the request for a contested case hearing shall be filed with the clerk
of the Court within thirty (30) days after the date of the written decision unless otherwise provided
by statute.” Furthermore, S.C. Code Ann. § 12-60-2540(A) (Supp. 2003) provides:
(a) Within thirty days after the date of the board’s written decision, a property
taxpayer or county assessor may appeal a property tax assessment made by
the board by requesting a contested case hearing before the Administrative
Law [Court] in accordance with the rules of the Administrative Law [Court].
Though the ALC is not divested of subject matter jurisdiction in this case, the Petitioner’s
remedy to seek a contested case before this Court is foreclosed. The Petitioner should have filed her
request for a contested case hearing with thirty (30) days of the final decision of the Charleston
County Board of Assessment Appeals dated June 17, 2003. However, the Petitioner did not file a
request for a hearing until September 16, 2004. This court has no authority to expand the time in
which the request for a hearing must be filed. See Mears v. Mears, 287 S.C. 168, 337 S.E.2d 206
(1985). Accordingly, I conclude that the Motion to Dismiss must be granted; and
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Respondent’s Motion to Dismiss is granted and this case
is dismissed with prejudice.
AND IT IS SO ORDERED.
__________________________________
MARVIN F. KITTRELL
Chief Administrative Law Judge
October 27, 2004
Columbia, South Carolina |
