Ramsay v. Town of Southington, No. Cv 96-0473690s (Aug. 13, 1996)
Opinion of the Court
General Statutes §
The parties have stipulated as to the material facts. Plaintiff Matthew Stewart Ramsay was the owner of two parcels of land situated in the Town of Southington. One parcel denoted as the "Flanders Road parcel" consisted of 101.79 acres. The other, denoted as the "Meriden Avenue parcel," consisted of 26.23 acres. Plaintiff inherited these parcels by will from his wife, who deceased on September 20, 1990. The Certificate of Devise issued on April 9, 1992 and was recorded in the Southington land records on April 13, 1992.1
In 1980, pursuant to the application of Plaintiff's deceased wife, the then owner, these parcels were classified as farm land under §
Both the Plaintiff and the Defendants have moved for summary judgment, each relying on a statutory provision. Summary judgment "shall be rendered forthwith if the pleadings, affidavits and any other proof submitted show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law." Practice Book § 384; Suarez v.Dickmont Plastics Corp.,
The Plaintiff relies on General Statutes §
Sec.
12-504c . Excepted transfers. The provisions of section12-504a shall not be applicable to the following: . . .(k) property transferred as a result of death by devise or otherwise and in such transfer the date of acquisition or classification of land for purposes of sections
12-504a to12-504f , inclusive, whichever is earlier, shall be the date of acquisition or classification by the decedent;
Therefore, according to Plaintiff, the ten-year recapture period commenced no later than the date in 1980 when the parcels were classified as farm land pursuant to the application of Plaintiff's deceased wife, and had expired prior to the 1995 transfer in issue.
The Defendants rely on General Statutes §
Any such classification of land shall be deemed personal to the particular owner who requests such classification and shall not run with the land.
Therefore, according to the Defendants, the subject 1995 transfer occurred within the ten-year recapture period, which under their view commenced no earlier than the time of the 1992 issuance and recording of the Certificate of Devise.
The Court concurs with the Plaintiff. The legislature is presumed to have acted with knowledge of existing law and with intent to create one consistent body of law. Zachs v. Groppo,
to prevent the forced conversion of farm land . . . to more intensive uses as the result of economic pressures caused by the assessment thereof for purposes of property taxation at values incompatible with [its] CT Page 5855 preservation as such farm land . . . .
General Statutes §
Section
The Court further notes that §
(e) deeds between husband and wife and parent and child when no consideration is received, except that a subsequent non; exempt transfer by the grantee in such cases shall be subject to the provisions of Section
12-504a as it would be if the grantor were making such nonexempt transfer.
This provision makes clear that in the case of an intervivos transfer between husband and wife for no consideration, the §
It is also a rule of statutory construction that those who promulgate CT Page 5856 statutes or rules do not intend to promulgate states or rules that lead to absurd consequences or bizarre results.
State v. Stevens,
The Defendant's motion for summary judgment is denied. The Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment, together with the relief therein requested, is granted. No conveyance tax on §
Judgment shall enter accordingly for the Plaintiff.
DAVID L. FINEBERG JUDGE, SUPERIOR COURT
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.