Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Plotkins v. Real Property Assessment Division

United States District Court, D. Hawaii

July 20, 2016

PIERRE A. PLOTKINS, Plaintiff,
v.
REAL PROPERTY ASSESSMENT DIVISION, DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE, COUNTY OF KAUAI, Defendant. v.

          ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS (ECF NO. 8) WITH PREJUDICE

          Helen Gillmor, United States District Judge.

         Plaintiff Pierre A. Plotkins has filed a Complaint against the Real Property Assessment Division of the Department of Finance for the County of Kauai. Plaintiff claims that the County of Kauai improperly denied his requests for a home exemption credit that resulted in him having to pay higher property taxes than he should owe.

         Plaintiff asserts the County initiated foreclosure procedures as a result of Plaintiff's failure to pay his property taxes. Plaintiff claims that the County took his property in violation of the Due Process Clause of the 5th and 14th Amendments to the United States Constitution.

         The County of Kauai has filed a Motion to Dismiss asserting that Plaintiff's Complaint is barred from being litigated in federal court because his claims were already adjudicated by Hawaii State Courts. The County asserts that Plaintiff already challenged the issues relating to the home exemption credit and the calculation of his property taxes before the Tax Appeal Court of the State of Hawaii in 2007 and 2011. The County states the Plaintiff also filed a proceeding in the Fifth Circuit Court of the State of Hawaii for removal of his property tax lien filed on April 4, 2012, which was denied and dismissed on December 27, 2012.

         The Court finds that it lacks subject-matter jurisdiction over Plaintiff's Complaint as his claims are barred by the Rooker-Feldman doctrine. Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co., 263 U.S. 413, 415-16 (1923); District of Columbia Court of Appeals v. Feldman, 460 U.S. 462, 482-86 (1983).

         Defendant's Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 8) is GRANTED.

         Plaintiff's Complaint (ECF No. 1) is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.

         PROCEDURAL HISTORY

         On April 15, 2016, Plaintiff filed a Complaint. (ECF No. 1).

         On May 9, 2016, Defendant filed DEFENDANT REAL PROPERTY ASSESSMENT DIVISION, DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE, COUNTY OF KAUAI'S MOTION TO DISMISS COMPLAINT FILED APRIL 15, 2016. (ECF No. 8).

         On May 10, 2016, the Court issued a briefing schedule indicating Plaintiff was to file his Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss on or before May 24, 2016. (ECF No. 9).

         On May 18, 2016, Defendant filed an Errata to its Motion to Dismiss. (ECF No. 11).

         On May 31, 2016, Plaintiff filed his Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss. (ECF No. 14).

         On the same date, Plaintiff filed a Request for an Extension of Time requesting the Court to accept the late filing of his Opposition. (ECF No. 14-6).

         On June 2, 2016, the Court issued a Minute Order granting Plaintiff's Request for an Extension of Time and accepted the late filing of Plaintiff's Opposition. (ECF No. 17). The Court also permitted Defendant additional time to file its Reply and continued the hearing. (Id.)

         On June 13, 2016, Plaintiff filed a document entitled, "PLAINTIFFS' PIERRE A PLOTKINS NON-HEARING MOTION FOR EXCUSE FOR ELECTRONIC SUBMITTAL AND DELAYED MAIL FILINGS FROM CANADA." (ECF No. 18).

         On June 22, 2016, the Court issued a Minute Order denying Plaintiff's Motion (ECF No. 18) as moot because Plaintiff's filing had already been accepted by the Court and Plaintiff did not have any other pending documents for the Court to review. (ECF No. 22).

         On July 12, 2016, Plaintiff filed a document entitled, "PLAINTIFF RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT MOTION TO DISMISS COMPLAINT ADDENDUM." (ECF No. 24).

         On July 20, 2016, the Court held a hearing on ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.