W. M. COOEY, WALTER COOEY, AND MRS. MATTIE COOEY, APPELLANTS,
v.
J. W. JOHNSON, TAX COLLECTOR OF HOLMES COUNTY, 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 Florida Supreme Court reversed a lower court decision dismissing a bill of complaint challenging tax assessments of county school warrants. The court held that assessments made at the direction of county commissioners rather than through the tax assessor's independent judgment, combined with intentional discriminatory application against the complainants, violated statutory requirements and warranted injunctive relief.
The assessments were invalid and collection of the tax should be enjoined. Although county obligations may be taxable as debts under statutory policy, assessments must be made by the tax assessor in the exercise of his judgment, not at the direction of county commissioners. The intentional discriminatory application, where the complainants were singled out for assessment while similarly situated taxpayers were not assessed, violated statutory policy and intent.
“The authority of the county commissioners is to equalize assessments as made by the tax assessor.”
Establishes the limited scope of county commissioners' authority in the assessment process
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe county tax assessor initially failed to assess county school warrants. When tax rolls were presented to county commissioners for equalization, the…
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.
Per Curiam.
This appeal is from a decree dissolving a temporary injunction and dismissing a bill of complaint brought to have decreed to be invalid an assessment of county school warrants for State and county taxes for the year 1924, and to enjoin the collection of the tax..
It appears that the county tax assessor had not assessed the county school warrants, and when the tax rolls were presented to the county commissioners for equalizing purposes the county commissioners instructed the tax assessor to make the particular assessments of county school warrants against the complainants below. The complainants applied to the county commissioners for relief which was denied. The authority of the county commissioners is to equalize assessments as made by the tax assessor. The existing statutes require assessments of personal property to include ‘ ‘ goods and chattels, moneys and effects * * * all debts due or to become due from solvent debtors, whether on account, contract, note or otherwise. ’ ’ The assessments in this case of county school warrants as to amount and value were made at the direction of the county commissioners and not by the Tax Assessor in the exercise of his judgment as the law contemplates; and even if it is the policy of the law and the intent of the statute that county obligations should be taxed as debts due or to become due on contract, note or otherwise, thereby making it necessary for counties to pay a higher rate of interest for money borrowed, the record in this case shows an intentional unjust discrimination against the complainant in that practically no other similar or other evidences of indebtedness are assessed in the county, and that the complainants were singled out of a class who hold evidences of debts but who are not assessed on them, and specific assessments were made against complainants in the manner here indicated. This is clearly contrary to the policy and intent of the statutes and such assessments are invalid and a collection of the tax should be enjoined.
Reversed.
Whitfield, P. J., and Terrell and Buford, J. J., concur. Ellis, C. J., and Strum and Brown, J. J., concur in the opinion and judgment.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
W. Va. Hotel Corp. v. W. C. Foster Co., 132 So. 842 (Fla. 1931)
-
Hinton Folsom as Tax Collector v. Bank of Greenwood, 97 Fla. 426 (Fla. 1929)…ivided profits of a state bank, to be invalid and enjoining the sale of the property for the tax, the ground being that large volumes of other like property subject to the tax was not assessed at all. Injunction is a proper remedy. Cooey v. Johnson, 95 Fla. 946, 117 So. R. 111; Camp Phosphate Company v. Allen, 77 Fla. 341, 81 So. R. 503. The constitution secures to “every person” judicial “remedy by due process of law,” “for any injury done” to property rights. Sec. 4, Dec. Rights. This organic security h…1 / 3
-
Louisville & Nashville R.R. Co. v. Amos, 98 Fla. 350 (Fla. 1929)…ed the demurrer, it was not error. Injunction is a proper remedy in a case of this kind. The rule is, that where an intentional, unjust discrimination is shown in the assessment of taxes, the collection of the tax may be enjoined. Cooey v. Johnson, 95 Fla. 946, 117 [*359] So. R. 111; Camp Phosphate Co. v. Allen, supra. And injunctive relief may be available as a remedy against such discrimination, even though the bill contains no allegation of “protest against valuation of property at the time the assessm…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence