City of Chicago v. Sommerfeld

City determined that corporation (Mid-City) and its president and responsible officer (Summerfeld) had failed to collect and remit parking tax on funds it received from valet parking services, restaurants, and other entities that used space in its 2 parking lots. Administrative law officer (ALO) and director of Department of Administrative Hearings affirmed tax assessment, but circuit court reversed decision.  ALO's decision was not clearly erroneous because City established its prima facie case that Mid-City was a parking lot "operator" within the meaning of the Parking Tax Ordinances, by introducing into evidence the assessment showing Mid-City's liability, and Mid-City failed to rebut it with documentary evidence. The Uniform Revenue Procedures Ordinances does not require that liability must first be found against the operator or collector, or that an action against the tax collector must be fully litigated, before an officer or employee can be held personally liable for taxes owed. The ALO's decision as to Sommerfeld was clearly erroneous to extent that it required City to use certified mail to send notice and considered the misspelling of Sommerfeld's name, when he testified that he knew that the notice was for him. It was reasonable for City to send notice to Sommerfeld to Mid-City's business address. (FITZGERALD SMITH and PUCINSKI, concurring.)