In this action contesting the assessments of various properties, respondent county moved to dismiss these property tax cases on the ground that petitioners failed to timely disclose income and expense information as required by Minn. Stat. § 278.05, subd. 6(a), Minnesota’s “mandatory-disclosure rule.” Petitioners did not file responses, nor did they appear at the hearing. The Tax Court granted the county’s motion.
55-CV-21-2394, 55-CV-21-2462, 55-CV-21-2378 Forsons Invs. LLC v. County of Olmsted
In this action in which petition filed a property tax petition as to property taxes payable in 2019, for the subject property located at 900 Second Avenue South in Minneapolis, petition moved the court: (1) to have the County’s proposed trial appraisal excluded from evidence in its entirety; (2) to exclude certain pages based on Minn. R. Evid. 702 and 705 and Minn. R. Civ. P. 26.01(b)(2) and failure to produce data in discovery and because such data is nonpublic under Minn. Stat. § 13.51; (3) authorizing amendment of the County’s expert report to allow for removal of references to nonpublic data; and (4) to exclude as confidential portions of proposed exhibits for failure to produce in discovery and on data practices grounds. The Tax Court granted petitioner’s motion in limine, and concluded that the parties were entitled to a modification of the scheduling order so the county’s expert witness could prepare an expert report that does not require the county to disseminate nonpublic data.
27-CV-19-06587 G&I IX OIC, LLC v. County of Hennepin