# Ogunquit Falls Mgmt., LLC v. Town of Ogunquit > Superior Court of Maine · October 29, 2004 URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10807920 ## Case - **Court:** Superior Court of Maine - **Decided:** October 29, 2004 - **Precedential status:** Unpublished - **Opinion:** Opinion - **Judges:** Paul A. Fritzsche - **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library ## Citator (automated) - No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases. - Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10807920 ## Opinion text STATE OF MAINE SUPERIOR COURT CIVIL ACTION YORK, ss. DOCKET NO. AP-03-072 pas “YOR Te 39 bo OGUNQUIT FALLS MANAGEMENT, LLC, Plaintiff v. REMAND ORDER aaah Sean TOWN OF OGUNQUIT, Re ees Defendant nov @ =e The plaintiff is the owner of The Falls at Ogunquit which is a vacation resort property. A dispute arose regarding its 2002 property tax assessment. An abatement request was filed, a partial abatement was granted, and an appeal was taken to the Ogunquit Board of Assessment Review which denied the request for abatement. A further appeal was taken to the Superior Court. In a letter of January 29, 2004 the Board informed the plaintiff that its appeal had been denied and included brief findings of fact taken from its December 10, 2003 minutes. In a series of cases the Law Court stressed the importance of local boards making adequate findings to allow judicial review. See, among others, Christian Fellowship and Renewal Center v. Town of Limington, 2001 ME 16, 769 A.2d 834 and Chapel Road Associates, LLC. v. Town of Wells, 2001 ME 178, 787 A.2d 137. It is insufficient to simply state as a finding that a witness testified to a particular point, that a board member said something or, in a conclusory fashion, that certain requirements were or were not met. The Superior Court needs to know both what a board did and, at least briefly, why it did it. In this case the appeal will be remanded to the Ogunquit Board of Assessment Review. The Board is requested to indicate whether it found that an agreement was or was not reached between the assessor and the plaintiff, which granted a partial abatement in turn for not appealing to the Board for an additional abatement. The Board shall also indicate why it reached its conclusion on this point. The Board will also examine the evidence presented by the parties regarding valuation and indicate why it found the contract assessor’s valuation to be more persuasive than the evidence presented by the plaintiff. If this is done the Superior Court will know both that the request was denied and why it was. The entry is: Remanded to the Ogunquit Board of Assessment Review with jurisdiction retained by the Superior Court. Once the Board has submitted its additional findings to the Clerk of the Superior Court the Clerk shall issue a briefing schedule to allow for supplemental memoranda and oral argument. Dated: October 29, 2004 — Paul A. Fritzsche / Justice, Superior Court PLAINTIFF: DURWARD PARKINSON ESQ BERGEN & PARKINSON 62 PORTLAND RD KENNEBUNK ME 04043-6658 DEFENDANT: WILLIAM H DALE ESQ JENSEN BAIRD GARDNER & HENRY PO BOX 4510 PORTLAND ME 04112-4510 --- Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10807920. Public record. Not legal advice.