NHCaseLaw.com

DUGGAN, J. The defendant, City of Rochester (city), appeals a decision of the Superior Court (Morrill, J.) ruling that the city’s taxation of the plaintiff, Verizon New England, Inc. (Verizon), for its use and occupation of public property violated Verizon’s equal protection rights. We affirm.

Per Curiam. The State appeals orders of the Superior Court (Galway, J.) granting the plaintiffs’ declaratory judgment petition, finding the statewide property tax unconstitutional as applied, and requiring the State to repay the $880 million collected under the tax to date. We reverse.

GALWAY, J. The plaintiff, North Country Environmental Services (NCES), appeals an order of the Superior Court (Lynn, C.J.) ruling in favor of the defendant, State of New Hampshire (State), on the parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment. We affirm.

This case has a lengthy and well-litigated history. See Verizon New England, Inc. v. City of Rochester, 151 N.H. 263 (2004); New England Tel. & Tel. Co. v. City of Rochester, 144 N.H. 118 (1999); New England Tel. & Tel. Co. v. City of Franklin, 141 N.H. 449 (1996). To summarize briefly for purposes of this order, Rochester seeks to impose real estate taxes on Verizon for the public property used and occupied by its poles and wires. RSA 72:23, I. Verizon contends that Rochester’s selective imposition of the tax against Verizon alone violates its equal protection rights. Alternatively, if the application of the tax is ruled constitutional, Verizon seeks abatement. The trial of this matter took place from September 18 through September 21, 2006.

The petitioners request that this Court clarify its Order dated January 17, 2001, in which the Court ruled that the statewide property tax in HB 999 was unconstitutional as applied, and ordered the State to "reimburse all towns for the tax dollars paid and collected since the enactment of HB 999."

The petitioners are property owners from three different New Hampshire municipalities seeking equitable relief from the statewide education property tax. They filed this Petition for a Declaratory Judgment and for Injunctive Relief requesting that this Court declare the tax unconstitutional, enjoin the State from collecting and distributing this tax, and order the reimbursement of tax dollars already paid and collected under this taxation scheme.