The opinion
Franklin County Bd. of Educ. v. N.C. Dep’t of Revenue, 2010 NCBC 12.
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA IN THE GENERAL COURT OF JUSTICE
SUPERIOR COURT DIVISION
WAKE COUNTY 09-CV-20861
FRANKLIN COUNTY BOARD OF
EDUCATION,
Petitioner,
v. ORDER ON PETITIONER’S OBJECTION
TO BUSINESS COURT FILING FEE
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT
OF REVENUE,
Respondent.
THIS MATTER comes before the Court on Petitioner’s Objection and Motion
in the Cause Regarding Business Court Filing Fee. Petitioner contends that the
additional one thousand dollar filing fee for cases assigned to the Business Court
should not be assessed in cases where an aggrieved taxpayer seeks judicial review
of a final agency decision in a contested tax case under section 105-241.16 of the
North Carolina General Statutes. Petitioner emphasized the distinction between
cases where a party voluntarily chooses to designate an action as a mandatory
complex business case and cases where filing a Notice of Designation is the party’s
only option. Respondent, the North Carolina Department of Revenue, declined to
file a response to Petitioner’s objection, and the time for doing so has expired.
Section 105-241.16 provides that “a petition for judicial review must be filed
in the Superior Court of Wake County and in accordance with the procedures for a
mandatory business case set forth in G.S. 7A-45.4(b) through (f).” N.C. Gen. Stat.
§ 105-241.16. Section 7A-45.4(b) requires an aggrieved taxpayer seeking judicial
review to designate its petition as a mandatory complex business case by filing a
Notice of Designation. N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7A-45.4(b). Once the case “is assigned to a
special superior court judge as a complex business case,” a one thousand dollar filing
fee is assessed on the party who filed the Notice of Designation. See N.C. Gen. Stat.
§§ 7A-305(a)(2), (c). The plain language of the “cost” statute makes no provision that
would exclude aggrieved taxpayers seeking judicial review from its reach. If the
Legislature had intended to exempt petitions for judicial review from the one
thousand dollar filing fee, then it could have provided for such.
Based on the foregoing, Petitioner’s Motion is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED, this 28th day of June, 2010.