LES SAMPLES, ETC., ET AL., APPELLANTS,
v.
HERNANDO TAXPAYERS ASSOCIATION, ET AL., 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 Hernando County Tax Assessor appealed a trial court's order certifying a class action by property owners challenging allegedly discriminatory ad valorem tax assessments in the Timber Pines area. The appellate court affirmed the class certification, finding the trial court did not abuse its discretion in determining the class satisfied the statutory requirements.
The trial court did not abuse its discretion in certifying the class, as the plaintiff's class satisfied the requirements of numerosity, commonality, typicality, and adequacy under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.220(a). The court declined to address whether class actions challenging tax assessments are permitted as a matter of law, as that question was beyond the scope of appellate review limited to the certification order.
[1] A trial court's order certifying a class is subject to appellate review for abuse of discretion.
[2] Class certification requires satisfaction of numerosity, commonality, typicality, and adequacy requirements.
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“The requirements for certification of a class are numerosity, commonality, typicality and adequacy.”
Establishes the legal standard for class certification under Florida Rules of Civil Procedure
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceProperty owners in Timber Pines, a residential area of Hernando County, filed a class action complaint alleging the tax assessor used a different asse…
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 Class Action Certification cases and more on FLexlaw
ANTOON, Judge.
The Hernando County Tax Assessor appeals the trial court’s order certifying a class pursuant to rule 1.220(a) of the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure. We have jurisdiction to review the certification order pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130(a)(3)(C)(vii). We affirm.
The plaintiffs filed a class action complaint against the tax assessor challenging the ad valorem tax assessments of real property located in a residential area of Hernando County known as Timber Pines. The complaint alleged that the tax assessor discriminated against the property owners in Timber Pines by utilizing a different formula to assess their properties from that used to assess other similar residential properties in Her-nando County. According to the plaintiffs, application of this formula resulted in the Timber Pines properties being taxed at a higher proportion of the fair market value than other similarly situated properties. If true, this discriminatory scheme would constitute an aberration in the assessment process common to all members of the certified class. See Greens of Inverrary Condominium Association Phase I v. Johnson, 445 So. 2d 1096 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984).
The requirements for certification of a class are numerosity, commonality, typicality and adequacy. See Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.220(a)(l)-(4). The standard of review for certification of a class is whether the trial court abused its discretion. Ray v. United States Department of Justice, 908 F. 2d 1549 (11th Cir.1990), cert. granted in part, 499 U.S. 904, 111 S.Ct. 1104, 113 L.Ed.2d 212 (1991). The instant record demonstrates that the plaintiff’s class satisfies these criteria and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in certifying the class.
On appeal, the tax assessor argues that regardless of whether the subject class meets the prerequisites for certification, certification was improper because a challenge to ad valorem tax assessments may not be brought by a class action. In support of his argument, the tax assessor suggests that no common law right to challenge an ad valorem tax assessment exists and therefore, the taxpayers are limited to the remedies set out in Chapter 194, Florida Statutes.
The trial court properly focused on whether the requirements of rule 1.220 had been properly met and not on whether the plaintiffs had stated a cause of action or would prevail on the merits. See Eisen v. Carlisle & Jacquelin, 417 U.S. 156, 94 S.Ct. 2140, 40 L.Ed.2d 732 (1974).
Thus, we do not reach the question of whether as a matter of law the owners of real property are precluded from maintaining a class action challenging the assessment of ad valorem taxes.
Moreover, the issue of whether the trial court erred in failing to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a cause of action is not properly before this court. Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130(a)(3)(C)(vii) limits pur jurisdiction in this case strictly to review of the order of certification.
AFFIRMED.
PETERSON, C.J., and DAUKSCH, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (11 total)
-
Rollins, Inc. v. Butland, 951 So. 2d 860 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006)…tiary hearing to determine whether to certify a class, the trial court’s proper focus is on whether the requirements of rule 1.220 have been met and not on whether the moving party will prevail on the merits. See Samples v. Hernando Taxpayers Ass’n, 682 So. 2d 184, 185 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996) (citing Eisen v. Carlisle & Jacquelin, 417 U.S. 156, 94 S.Ct. 2140, 40 L.Ed.2d 732 (1974)).3 A “determination that a case meets the requirements of a class action is ... within the trial court’s discretion and will be rever…
-
Terry L. Braun, P.A. v. Campbell, 827 So. 2d 261 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002)…ss, and (4) the representative party can fairly and adequately protect and represent the interests of each member of the class. They are commonly referred to as nu-merosity, commonality, typicality and adequacy. Samples v. Hernando Taxpayers Ass’n, 682 So. 2d 184 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996); Cheatwood v. Barry University, Inc., 2002 WL 4629, No. C1001-3986 (Fla.Cir.Ct. Jan. 1, 2002). See also Amchem Products, Inc. v. Windsor, 521 U.S. 591, 117 S.Ct. 2231, 138 L.Ed.2d 689 (1997).4 1. Numerosity. Parties seeking cla…1 / 2
-
Courtesy Auto Grp., Inc. v. Garcia, 778 So. 2d 1000 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000)…Civil Procedure 1.220(b)(3), was met and that class representation in this case was superior to other available methods of adjudication. The issue before us is whether the trial court abused its discretion. See Samples v. Hernando Taxpayers Ass’n, 682 So. 2d 184 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996). A party seeking class certification has the burden of pleading and proving each and every element required by Rule 1.220 for certification of the class. See Execu-Tech Business Systems, Inc. v. Appleton Papers, Inc., 743 So. 2d…
Previewing 3 of 11 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Eisen v. Carlisle & Jacquelin, 417 U.S. 156 (U.S. 1974)
- RAY v. United States Dep't OF Just., 908 F.2d 1549 (11th Cir. 1990)
- The Greens OF Inverrary Condo. Ass'n Phase I, Inc. v. Johnson, 445 So. 2d 1096 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984)
- In re Bauer, 499 U.S. 904 (U.S. 1991)
- Doe v. Garrett, 499 U.S. 904 (U.S. 1991)