Background
From 2009 to 2018, Blake International Rigs LLC owned drilling rigs and associated equipment in Terrebonne Parish, Louisiana, which were assessed for ad valorem tax purposes by Parish Assessor Loney Grabert. Sheriff Timothy Soignet, acting as ex officio tax collector, levied and collected those taxes annually. Blake International paid without protest and raised no exemption claims at the time of payment.
In April 2020, Blake International filed claims for refund under La. R.S. 47:2132 for tax years 2010 through 2018. The Louisiana Tax Commission granted refunds only for 2017 and 2018, rejecting the earlier years as untimely. Blake International did not appeal that denial. It nonetheless refiled claims for the earlier years in November 2022 and again in May 2024. On the third attempt, the tax commission approved refunds for all years 2009 through 2016, and on June 26, 2024, ordered Sheriff Soignet as tax collector to process a refund of $765,963.75 to Blake International.
Rather than comply with the order, Sheriff Soignet filed a petition with the Board of Tax Appeals (BTA) in March 2025, seeking to vacate the commission’s order and obtain declaratory relief on grounds including lack of authority, untimeliness, res judicata, and due process violations. Blake International responded with a peremptory exception of no right of action. The BTA sustained the exception and dismissed the petition. Sheriff Soignet appealed.
The Court’s Holding
The First Circuit affirmed in part and reversed in part. The court affirmed the BTA’s dismissal of Sheriff Soignet’s claims against Blake International, holding that the tax collector has no legally protectable interest in the taxpayer refund process under La. R.S. 47:2132 and therefore no right of action to challenge the tax commission’s decision to grant a refund. The statute assigns distinct roles to the assessor, the tax commission, and the tax collector — and the collector’s role is limited to executing the commission’s refund order after it is issued, not evaluating or contesting it.
The court also rejected Sheriff Soignet’s alternative argument that he held a right of action for declaratory judgment. Because he had no legally protectable interest at stake and was not adverse to Blake International or the tax commission in any cognizable legal sense, no justiciable controversy existed to support declaratory relief. The court further held that judicial review under the Administrative Procedure Act (La. R.S. 49:978.1) was unavailable because the tax commission’s refund process under La. R.S. 47:2132 does not require notice or a hearing — and thus does not constitute an “adjudication” within the meaning of the APA.
However, the court reversed the BTA’s dismissal of claims against the remaining defendants — Assessor Grabert, the Louisiana Tax Commission, and Chairman Roussel. The BTA’s judgment was silent as to those parties, which under Louisiana procedure operates as a denial of their exceptions rather than a grant. Because those claims remain pending, the court remanded for further proceedings as to those defendants.
Key Takeaways
- Under La. R.S. 47:2132, a parish tax collector’s statutory role is limited to carrying out a tax commission refund order — the collector has no seat at the table during the refund determination process and no standing to appeal or challenge an approved refund.
- A declaratory judgment action requires a justiciable controversy with real, adverse interests and a legally protectable stake; a tax collector’s mere disagreement with a refund decision does not satisfy this standard.
- The APA’s judicial review provision (La. R.S. 49:978.1) applies only to adjudications — agency proceedings requiring notice and a hearing by constitution or statute — and does not extend to the tax commission’s informal refund approval process.
- Silence in a BTA judgment as to particular parties’ exceptions is deemed a denial of those exceptions under Louisiana law, leaving those claims pending and subject to remand.
Why It Matters
This decision clarifies the boundaries of the tax collector’s role in Louisiana’s ad valorem tax refund scheme and forecloses a potential avenue for parish sheriffs to obstruct or delay tax refunds they disagree with. By holding that the collector’s function is purely ministerial once a refund is ordered, the court reinforces the separation of duties built into La. R.S. 47:2132 and removes the collector as a potential veto player in the refund process.
The opinion also has broader administrative law significance: it reaffirms that the APA’s judicial review provisions do not fill every gap left by specific agency statutes, and that legislative omissions — such as the failure to grant the tax collector any appeal right — are deliberate policy choices that courts will not override. If tax collectors wish to participate in the refund process or challenge commission decisions, the court explicitly directs them to seek relief from the legislature, not the courts.