SPIKE VON ZAMFT AND GMMR, INC., APPELLANTS,
v.
SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT, APPELLEE
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.
Von Zamft appealed a summary judgment that quieted title to land in the South Florida Water Management District, holding his tax deed void because taxes were erroneously assessed while the District owned the property. The court affirmed the judgment but remanded for clarification regarding the precise land descriptions in the competing deeds.
The tax deed issued to Von Zamft was properly voided because taxes were erroneously assessed against land owned by the District. However, on remand, the District's title should be quieted only with respect to land described in its deed, and Von Zamft's tax deed should be held void only to the extent it describes land within the District's deed description.
[1] A tax deed is void if the taxes were erroneously assessed against the land while it was owned by a governmental entity.
[2] Affidavits filed and served by mail on the Friday before a Monday hearing are untimely and need not be considered by the court.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“This is an appeal from a summary judgment quieting the title to certain land in appellee, South Florida Water Management District. Chains of title to the District and to appellant, Von Zamft, came from a common source, but the District's deed was executed and recorded prior in time.”
Establishes the basic factual and procedural context of the dispute
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceVon Zamft and the District claimed chains of title to the same land from a common source. The District's deed was executed and recorded before Von Zam…
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 Service By Mail cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This is an appeal from a summary judgment quieting the title to certain land in appellee, South Florida Water Management District. Chains of title to the District and to appellant, Von Zamft, came from a common source, but the District’s deed was executed and recorded prior in time. The court determined that the tax deed issued to Von Zamft was void because the taxes had been erroneously assessed against the land while it was owned by the District. We need not reach Von Zamft’s attack on the validity of the District’s deed. This issue was first raised by affidavits filed and served by mail on Friday before the Monday hearing on the motion for summary judgment and by additional affidavits filed and served at the hearing. These affidavits were untimely presented, and the court was not required to consider them. Henry Stiles, Inc. v. Evans, 206 So. 2d 65 (Fla. 4th DCA 1968). As the court stated in Stiles:
It is, therefore, our view and holding that the words, “[t]he adverse party pri-or to the day of hearing may serve opposing affidavits” found in F.R.C.P. 1.36(c) mean that such affidavits must be physically served or delivered to moving counsel prior to date of hearing. If service is to be effectuated via mail then the affidavits must be mailed sufficiently in advance so that the expiration of three days from mailing will still be prior to the day of hearing.
206 So. 2d at 67. As in Stiles, Von Zamft did not seek a continuance to permit additional time for the filing of affidavits.
Von Zamft also argues that the legal description in his tax deed encompasses a portion of land not within the legal description of the District’s deed. On this record, we cannot reconcile the two descriptions, and it may take surveyors to resolve the question. In view of the possibility that Von Zamft may be correct, we hereby remand the case with directions that the judgment be amended to quiet the District’s title only with respect to the land described in its deed and to hold the tax deed void only to the extent that it describes land within the description contained in the District’s deed.
In all other respects, the judgment is affirmed.
RYDER, C.J., and GRIMES and SCHEB, JJ., concur. . The mailing time has now been extended to five days. Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.090(e).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Darius DeMESME v. Sam E. Stephenson, Jr., M.D., 498 So. 2d 673 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986)…forward with countervailing facts. The trial court was not required to look at the documents submitted by DeMesme because (1) they were not timely filed in accordance with Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.510(c). Von Zamft v. South Florida Water Management District, 489 So. 2d 779 (Fla.2d DCa 1986); (2) they were not in the form of affidavits in violation of Rule 1.510(e); and (3) the documents did not specifically allege they were based on personal knowledge and in no way established that the persons speaking therein were co…
-
Davis v. Lyall & Lyall Veterinarians, P.A., 506 So. 2d 1072 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987)…h DC 1985); Stapleton v. State, 239 So. 2d 140, 141 (Fla. 1st DCA 1970). . Odham v. Foremost Dairies, Inc., 128 So. 2d 586 (Fla.1961); Axelrod v. Califano, 357 So. 2d 1048 (Fla. 1st DC 1978). . Von Zamft v. South Florida Water Management District, 489 So. 2d 779 (Fla. 2d DCA), review denied, 494 So. 2d 1153 (Fla.1986); Henry Stiles, Inc. v. Evans, 206 So. 2d 65 (Fla. 4th DCA 1968). .Von Zamft v. South Florida Water Management District, 489 So. 2d 779 (Fla. 2d DCA), review denied, 494 So. 2d 1153 (Fla.1986)…1 / 2
-
Charles E. Burkett & Assocs., Inc. v. Vick, 546 So. 2d 1190 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989)…correctly points out on motion for rehearing, this observation was premature in light of the reversal for trial, and must await disposition of this cause on the merits. . Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.510(c); Von Zamft v. South Florida Water Management District, 489 So. 2d 779 (Fla. 2d DCA), review denied, 494 So. 2d 1153 (Fla.1986).…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Henry Stiles, Inc. v. Evans, 206 So. 2d 65 (Fla. 4th DCA 1968)