Northwestern Louisiana Cancer Center, Llc, Et Al. v. Louisiana Tax Commission, Et Al.

Supreme Court of Louisiana
November 05, 2025
Chief Deputy Clerk of Court
For the Court
The Supreme Court of the State of Louisiana
NORTHWESTERN LOUISIANA CANCER
CENTER, LLC, ET AL.
VS.
LOUISIANA TAX COMMISSION, ET AL.
No. 2025-C-00833
_ _
_ _ _ _
I
N RE: Yolanda Reed, in her official capacity as Assessor for Natchitoches Parish -
Applicant Other; Applying For Writ Of Certiorari, Board of Tax Appeal Number(s)
L01810, Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, Number(s) 24-512;
_ _ _ _ _ _
November 05, 2025
Writ application granted. See per curiam.
C
ole, J., recused.
JMG
JLW
JDH
WJC
JBM
PDG
11/05/2025 "See News Release 049 for any Concurrences and/or Dissents."

SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA
No. 2025-C-00833
NORTHWESTERN LOUISIANA CANCER CENTER, LLC, ET AL.
VS.
LOUISIANA TAX COMMISSION, ET AL.
On Writ of Certiorari to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit
PER CURIAM.
Writ granted. As this court held in Gisclair v. Louisiana Tax
Commission, 09-0007, p. 10 (La. 6/29/09), 16 So.3d 1132, 1139, to be a legality
challenge, plaintiff must seek to void the assessment, contesting the validity of
the ad valorem tax itself, or challenge the constitutionality of the tax provisions
or administration of the tax provisions. A challenge to the validity of a tax on
exempt property presents a legality issue that may be reviewed directly by the
district court. Triangle Marine, Inc. v. Savoie, 95-2873, p. 6 (La. 10/15/96), 681
So.2d 937, 941. The Louisiana Tax Commission has original jurisdiction over
a correctness challenge, while the district court has original jurisdiction over
legality challenges. Triangle Marine, 95-2873 at 4, 681 So.2d at 939; Gisclair,
09-0007 at 6, 16 So.3d 1136.
The plaintiffs here seek to void the tax assessment. We thus conclude
that plaintiffs’ claim constitutes a challenge to the legality of the taxes levied ,
over which the Louisiana Tax Commission lacks jurisdiction. We further find
that plaintiffs cannot recover under La. R.S. 47:2132(A) or La. R.S. 47:2132(D)
when they have failed to meet the requirements of La. R.S. 47:2134(C). The
court of appeal erred in holding to the contrary.

For the foregoing reasons, we reverse the judgment of the court of appeal
and enter a judgment dismissing plaintiff s’ claims against defendant on the
peremptory exception of lack of subject matter jurisdiction.