ATHEISTS OF FLORIDA, INC., APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, 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.
Atheists of Florida appealed the denial of a sales tax exemption certificate, arguing that the Department of Revenue's implementation of the exemption statute violated their equal protection rights. The court affirmed the denial because the organization failed to present adequate evidence supporting its constitutional challenge.
The court affirmed the denial of the exemption certificate because the Atheists failed to present adequate evidence supporting their constitutional challenge. The court noted that while it did not foreclose the possibility of determining the constitutional question on a properly developed record, the evidence presented was wholly deficient and inadequate for meaningful consideration.
[1] An organization must demonstrate its entitlement to a sales tax exemption certificate by meeting the specific criteria set forth in the relevant statute.
[2] A constitutional challenge to the implementation of a statute must be supported by evidence and cannot be raised in a conclusory fashion.
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 organization presents us solely with its constitutional challenge to the Department's implementation of the statute. Based upon our review of the record, we too find the evidence presented in support of this constitutional challenge to be wholly deficient and inadequate for any meaningful consideration of this issue.”
Establishes the court's principal reason for affirming: the inadequacy of evidence supporting the constitutional claim.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAtheists of Florida applied for a consumer certificate of sales tax exemption under section 212.08(7), Florida Statutes. The organization conceded tha…
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 Constitutional Challenge cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This is an appeal from a final administrative order denying a consumer certificate of a sales tax exemption to the Atheists of Florida, Inc. (“Atheists”) pursuant to section 212.08(7), Florida Statutes (1993) after an administrative hearing.
At the hearing below, the Atheists maintained that its organization was entitled to a consumer’s certificate of exemption based upon the criteria set forth in section 212.08(7). Alternatively, the organization argued that the Department of Revenue’s (“Department”) implementation of section 212.08(7) is violative of its constitutional right to equal protection under the state and federal constitutions. The Department concluded that the organization had failed to demonstrate its entitlement to a certificate of exemption pursuant to the criteria listed in section 212.08(7). The Department further found that the Atheists had raised its constitutional challenge in a conclu-sory fashion without setting forth any supporting evidence.
Accordingly, the Department entered its final order denying the consumer’s certificate of exemption. This appeal followed.
The Atheists’ organization candidly (and we think appropriately), conceded that its activities do not fall within the criteria listed in section 212.08(7) for a certificate of exemption. On this appeal, the organization presents us solely with its constitutional challenge to the Department’s implementation of the statute. Based upon our review of the record, we too find the evidence presented in support of this constitutional challenge to be wholly deficient and inadequate for any meaningful consideration of this issue.
Thus, we must affirm the order under review. In affirming the order, we do not foreclose the possibility of making a determination on the constitutional question on a properly developed record wherein both sides have had an opportunity to present competing evidence before an impartial tribunal. See Laird v. State, 342 So. 2d 962, 965 (Fla.1977); see also Ward v. Leon County School Bd., 538 So. 2d 1307, 1310 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989); Rice v. Dep’t of Health and Rehabilitative Services, 386 So. 2d 844, 848 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980).
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Rice v. Dep't of Health & Rehabilitative Servs., 386 So. 2d 844 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980)
- Laird v. State, 342 So. 2d 962 (Fla. 1977)
- Ward v. Leon Cnty. Sch. Bd. & Royal Ins. Co., 538 So. 2d 1307 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989)