FRANK BYSTROM, ETC., ET AL., APPELLANTS,
v.
HOTELERAMA ASSOCIATES, LTD., ETC., APPELLEES
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court affirmed the trial court's judgment that the property appraiser failed to substantially comply with Florida's valuation statute by not obtaining available actual income data, and that the taxpayer's evidence supported a just valuation of $37,500,000.
A property appraiser's presumed validity of assessment is overcome when the appraiser fails to obtain available actual income data required by Florida Statutes Section 193.011(7) when using the income approach to valuation.
[1] A property appraiser's presumed validity of assessment is overcome when the appraiser fails to obtain available actual income data required by statute when utilizing the…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceHotelerama Associates, Ltd., a taxpayer, challenged a property assessment made by Frank Bystrom, the property appraiser, regarding the valuation of su…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Income Approach cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The final judgment under review is affirmed upon a holding that: (1) the presumed validity of the property assessment in this case was overcome below when it was shown, without dispute, that the defendant property appraiser [Frank Bys-trom]: (a) failed to obtain, although availa ble, the actual income data on the subject property from the plaintiff taxpayer [Ho-telerama Associates, Ltd.] when utilizing the income approach to valuation herein [and did not by alternative methods make up for said deficiency]; and (b) thereby failed to substantially comply with Section 193.011(7), Florida Statutes (1981), in assessing the subject property in this case. Palm Corporation v. Homer, 261 So. 2d 822 (Fla.1972); Bystrom v. Equitable Life Assurance Society, 416 So. 2d 1133, 1145-47 (Fla.1982) (Pearson, Daniel, J. and Hubbart, C.J., concurring); (2) the plaintiff taxpayer [Hotelerama Associates, Ltd.] produced substantial, competent evidence below upon which a trier of fact could conclude, as it did, that by the greater weight of the evidence the just valuation of the subject property was $37,500,000, Bystrom v. Equitable Life Assurance Society, supra; see also Shaw v. Shaw, 334 So. 2d 13, 16 (Fla. 1976); and (3) the remaining points urged herein are insufficient to upset the judgment appealed from.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Fla. E. Coast Ry. Co. v. Dep't OF Revenue, 620 So. 2d 1051 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993)…no error in the trial court’s ruling on this point. FEC’s contention that the property appraiser must use actual income of the property for the year of the assessment is not borne out by the case law cited. In Bystrom v. Hotelerama Associates Ltd., 431 So. 2d 176 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983), the court affirmed the trial judge’s ruling that the presumption of validity of the assessment was overcome when the property owner proved that the taxing authority failed to obtain, although available, actual income data on the…
-
Schultz v. TM Florida-Ohio Realty Ltd. P'ship, 553 So. 2d 1203 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989)…la. 3d DCA 1971), quashed, 261 So. 2d 822 (1972). That presumption and principle, relied upon by the dissenting opinion and by the property appraiser in this case, also do not require a reversal here. See also Bystrom v. Hotelerama Associates, Ltd., 431 So. 2d 176 (Fla. 3d DCA), rev. denied, 441 So. 2d 631 (1983); Bystrom v. Equitable Life Assurance Society, 416 So. 2d 1133, 1138 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982), rev. denied, 429 So. 2d 5 (1983) (“As substantive evidence, the actual income of the [shopping center-hotel com…
-
Ernie Mastrqianni v. Barnett Banks, Inc., 664 So. 2d 284 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995)…condition of the property factor,” citing Muckenfuss v. Miller, 421 So. 2d 170 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982), pet. for review denied, 430 So. 2d 451 (Fla.1983), and “failed to legally consider the income factor,” citing Bystrom v. Hotelerama Associates, Ltd., 431 So. 2d 176 (Fla. 3d DCA), pet. for review denied, 441 So. 2d 631 (Fla.1983), when he chose to ignore the actual levels of occupancy in the building. Finally, the trial court concluded that even if the presumption of correctness had been applicable to the 1992…
Authorities Cited
- Shaw v. Shaw, 334 So. 2d 13 (Fla. 1976)
- Bystrom v. Equitable Life Assurance Soc'y OF the United States, 416 So. 2d 1133 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982)
- Palm Corp. v. Porter W. Homer, 261 So. 2d 822 (Fla. 1972)