HARRIS GRAPHICS CORPORATION, APPELLANT,
v.
OFFICE OF THE COMPTROLLER OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, 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.
The court held that the State Comptroller lacked jurisdiction to dismiss the tax refund application for failure to join a necessary party, but affirmed the dismissal on the ground of lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
Appellant sought an intangible personal property tax refund, which was denied. The administrative hearing was stayed pending a related case. The heari…
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 Administrative Jurisdiction cases and more on FLexlaw
[*878] WIGGINTON, Judge.
Appellant appeals a final order of the State Comptroller dismissing appellant’s application for an intangible personal property tax refund. We affirm.
In July 1985, appellant filed its application for refund, alleging that it had mistakenly paid an excess tax in the amount of $64,846.86. Thereafter, it sought an administrative hearing to review the Comptroller’s denial of its application. The proceedings before the hearing officer were stayed pending the outcome of Florida Export Tobacco Co., Inc. v. Department of Revenue, 510 So. 2d 936 (Fla. 1st DCA), review denied, 519 So. 2d 986 (Fla.1987). In that case, this Court determined that the Department of Revenue is an essential party in a refund action. Thereupon, the hearing officer recommended dismissal and the State Comptroller dismissed appellant’s application for “failure to join a necessary party in the proceedings.”
While the Department of Revenue is a necessary party to this action according to Florida Export Tobacco, dismissal by the State Comptroller on that ground was beyond the State Comptroller’s jurisdiction because, pursuant to an in pari materia reading of sections 72.011 and 26.012(2)(e), Florida Statutes, the circuit court has exclusive original jurisdiction “in tax refund cases.” Id. at 954. Consequently, dismissal of appellant’s application for lack of subject matter jurisdiction is mandatory. Therefore, since the proper result was attained albeit for the wrong reason, we affirm the dismissal of the application, citing the proper ground therefor. See Welch v. State, 528 So. 2d 1236 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988) and Savage v. State, 156 So. 2d 566 (Fla. 1st DCA 1963).
AFFIRMED.
WENTWORTH and THOMPSON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Savage v. State, 156 So. 2d 566 (Fla. 1st DCA 1963)
- Fla. Exp. Tobacco Co., Inc. v. Dep't OF Revenue & Gerald Lewis, 510 So. 2d 936 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987)
- Leshan Welch v. State, 528 So. 2d 1236 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988)