JOEL W. ROBBINS, ETC., APPELLANTS,
v.
CLIFFORD KORNFIELD, 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 Property Appraiser sought to place a back assessment on homestead property for a nine-year taxation error, but the trial court relied on Smith v. Welton to prohibit retroactive adjustment of the base year just value. The appellate court reversed, holding that a 2001 legislative amendment to Section 193.155 superseded Welton and authorized back assessments to correct erroneous just value calculations.
The property appraiser has authority to place a back assessment on homestead property to correct errors in the calculation of just value, as the 2001 amendment to Section 193.155(8)(a) superseded Smith v. Welton by explicitly authorizing recalculation of just value for erroneous assessments. The back assessment is limited to three years' arrears under Section 193.092.
[1] A property appraiser has the authority to place a back assessment on property that has escaped taxation due to errors in the calculation of its just value, as amended by…
[2] The Florida Supreme Court's holding in Smith v. …
Previewing 2 of 3 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“Clearly, the Legislature amended the section to allow for adjustments to be made to correct errors in the calculation of a property's just value. Therefore, Welton is superceded by the 2001 amendment to Section 193.155.”
Establishes the court's core holding that the legislative amendment superseded the prior Supreme Court precedent prohibiting retroactive just value adjustments.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe Kornfields owned a homestead residence in Miami-Dade County with an adjusted square footage of 2,306 square feet. In 1991, they added 1,610 square…
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 Just Value Assessment cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellants, Miami-Dade County Property Appraiser Joel W. Robbins and the Florida Department of Revenue (hereafter referred to as “Property Appraiser”), seek reversal of a trial court judgment in favor of appellees Clifford and Wendy Kornfield (“taxpayers”).
The taxpayers are the owners of a homestead residence located in Miami-Dade County, Florida. In 1991, the taxpayers built an addition to their 2,306 adjusted square foot homestead residence. This addition increased their home’s square footage by 1,610 square feet. However, due to an error on the part of the property appraiser, the addition escaped taxation for almost nine years.
In 1999, the property appraiser determined that the additional square footage was excluded in the calculation of the home’s just value. As a result, from 1991 until 2000, the taxpayers only paid taxes on the pre-improvement 2,306 square foot portion of the residence. To correct the error, the property appraiser placed a back assessment on the taxpayers’ homestead residence for the tax years 1998-2000.1
The taxpayers sued the property appraiser seeking to set aside the back assessment placed on their residence. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the taxpayers and held that both the Florida Constitution and the Florida Supreme Court decision in Smith v. Welton, 729 So. 2d 371 (Fla.1999), prohibited the property appraiser from reassessing the property’s just value. This appeal followed.
Section 193.155, Florida Statutes (2001), permits a property appraiser to correct erroneous assessments of homestead property. However, in Welton, the Florida Supreme Court held that property appraisers lacked authority under Section 193.155(8)(a), Florida Statutes (1995), to retroactively change the base year “just value” assessment of a homestead property. See Smith v. Welton, 729 So. 2d at 373.
In response to Welton, the Florida Legislature amended Section 193.155 in 2001. See Ch. 01-137, § 5, at 788, Laws of Fla. (amending § 193.155, Fla. Stat. (2000)). Prior to the amendment, § 193.155(8)(a) read, “(a) If errors are made in arriving at any annual assessment under this section due to a material mistake of fact concerning an essential characteristic of the property, the assessment must be recalculated for every such year.” § 193.155(8)(a), Florida Statutes, (2000). The 2001 version of Section 193.155(8)(a) deletes the word, “annual” and adds the words, “just value2.”
Clearly, the Legislature amended the section to allow for adjustments to be made to correct errors in the calculation of a property’s just value. Therefore, Welton is superceded by the 2001 amendment to Section 193.155. See Nicoll v. Baker, 668 So. 2d 989 (Fla.1996).
In accordance with the legislative intent, as evinced by the specific amendments made to Section 193.155(8)(a), we hold that the property appraiser has the authority to place a back assessment on the portion of the taxpayers’ property which has escaped taxation. See Ch. 01-137, Laws of Fla. This back assessment is limited to three years’ arrears, as directed by Section 193.092.
Reversed and remanded for calculation of the back assessment.
. Although the improvements escaped taxation for nine years, back assessments could only be made for three years, pursuant to Section 193.092, Florida Statutes (2001).
. Section 193.155(8)(a) now reads:
(a) If errors are made in arriving at any assessment under this section due to a material mistake of fact concerning an essential characteristic of the property, the just value and assessed value must be recalculated for every such year, including the year in which the mistake occurred.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Smith v. Krosschell, 937 So. 2d 658 (Fla. 2006)…S, C.J. We have for review the decision in Smith v. Krosschell, 892 So. 2d 1145 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005), in which the Second District Court of Appeal has certified conflict with the decision of the Third District Court of Appeal in Robbins v. Kornfield, 834 So. 2d 955 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003). We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const. For the reasons expressed below, we quash the decision in Krosschell and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS BELOW In 2000,…1 / 2
-
Smith v. Krosschell, 892 So. 2d 1145 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005)…hile necessary to the business of the sovereign, is still a duty of pure statutory creation and taxes may be collected only within the clear definite boundaries recited by statute. To the extent that our opinion conflicts with Robbins v. Kornfield, 834 So. 2d 955 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003), we certify conflict with Robbins. Affirmed. CASANUEVA and SILBERMAN, JJ., Concur. . Ch. 01-137, § 5 at 788, Laws of Fla.…
-
Defrances v. Furst, 267 So. 3d 525 (Fla. 2d DCA 2019)
Authorities Cited
- Nicoll v. Baker, 668 So. 2d 989 (Fla. 1996)
- Timothy "Pete" Smith v. Welton, 729 So. 2d 371 (Fla. 1999)