NEWTON LUMMUS, COUNTY TAX ASSESSOR, BOB SIMPSON, COUNTY TAX COLLECTOR, ERNEST AMOS, COMPTROLLER OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, AND E. B. LEATHERMAN, CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT,
v.
MRS. ALICE RUTH RANSOM, A WIDOW, DOING BUSINESS UNDER THE FIRM NAME OF ADIRONDACK-FLORIDA SCHOOL
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 affirmed a lower court's decree due to an equal division among the justices, establishing that an equally divided court results in an affirmation of the lower court's decision.
When the Supreme Court is equally divided and there is no prospect of change in the court's personnel, the decree of the lower court is affirmed.
“When the members of the Supreme Court, sitting six members in a body and after full consultation, it appears that the members of the Court are permanently and equally divided in opinion as to whether the decree should be affirmed or reversed, and there is no prospect of an immediate change in the personnel of the Court, the decree should be affirmed”
This quote explains the rule for affirming a decree when the court is equally divided.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe case involved an appeal where the six justices of the Florida Supreme Court were equally divided on whether to affirm or reverse the Circuit Court…
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.
In this cause Mr. Chief Justice Davis, Mr. Justice Whitfield, and Mr. Justice Buford are of the opinion that the decree of the Circuit Court should be reversed while Mr. Justice Ellis, Mr. Justice Terrell and Mr. Justice Brown are of the opinion that the said decree should be affirmed. When the members of the Supreme Court, sitting six members in a body and after full consultation, it appears that the members of the Court are permanently and equally divided in opinion as to whether the decree should be affirmed or reversed, and there is no pros*831pect of an immediate change in the personnel of the Court, the decree should be affirmed; therefore it is considered, ordered and adjudged under the authority of State, ex rel. Hampton v. McClung, 47 Fla. 224, 37 So. R. 51, that the decree of the Circuit Court in this cause be and the same is hereby affirmed.
Affirmed.
Davis, C. J., and Whitfield, Ellis, Terrell, Brown and Buford, J. J., concur.
On Rehearing.
This is a companion case to that of Lummus, et al., v. Florida Adirondack School, Inc.
The tax assessment involved in the case here was for the year prior to the year of the acquisition of the property from Mrs. Ransom by the corporation Florida-Adirondack School, Inc.
On authority of the opinion and judgment in the companion case, the decree appealed from in this case should be affirmed.
It is so ordered.
Affirmed.
Whitfield, C. J., and Brown, Buford, and Davis, J. J., concur.
Terrell, J., agrees to the conclusion.
Ellis, P. J., not participating.
On Rehearing. Per Curiam. This is a companion case to that of Lummus, et al., v. Florida Adirondack School, Inc. The tax assessment involved in the case here was for the year prior to the year of the acquisition of the property from Mrs. Ransom by the corporation Florida-Adirondack School, Inc. On authority of the opinion and judgment in the companion case, the decree appealed from in this case should be affirmed. It is so ordered. Affirmed. Whitfield, C. J., and Brown, Buford, and Davis, J. J., concur. Terrell, J., agrees to the conclusion. Ellis, P. J., not participating.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State of Fla. & the taxpayers v. Inter-American Ctr. Auth., 84 So. 2d 9 (Fla. 1955)…ptions being in the nature of special privileges should he strictly construed against the claimant and m favor of the taxing power. Lummus v. Florida-Adirondack School, 123 Fla. 810, 168 So. 232; Lummus v. Miami Military Academy, Inc., 123 Fla. 832, 168 So. 241; Steuart v. State ex rel. Dolcimascolo, 119 Fla. 117, 161 So. 378. The exemption in this case was in behalf of the Inter-American Cultural and Trade Center. The legislature found that its properties came within the terms of the Constitution and pro…
-
The Miami Battlecreek v. Lummus, 140 Fla. 718 (Fla. 1939)…well defined therein. See Rast v. Hulvey, 77 Fla. 74, 80 Sou. Rep. 750; University Club v. Lanier, 119 Fla. 146, 161 Sou. Rep. 78; Lummus v. Florida Adirondack School, 123 Fla. 810, 168 Sou. Rep. 232; Lummus v. Miami Military Academy, 123 Fla. 832, 168 Sou. Rep. 241. The exemption herein claimed is by virtue of and under Section 1 of Article IX and Section 16 of Article XVI, of the Constitution of the State of Florida, and Section 897 of the Compiled General Laws of Florida of 1927. The exemptions here claimed…
-
Hisgen v. Rileigh, 115 So. 2d 715 (Fla. 2d DCA 1959)…al act creating the Town of Bellair Shore can look to the historical background to determine the cause and intent of such enactment. Lummus v. Florida-Adirondack School, 123 Fla. 810, 168 So. 232; also Lummus v. Miami Military Academy, 123 Fla. 832, 168 So. 241. The provisions of Section 7(e) of the charter is significant in ascertaining the legislative intent because of the unusual qualifications of the type of freehold one must possess in order to entitle him to vote. The unusual provisions of Section 7…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- The State of Fla. ex rel. Hiram J. Hampton v. McClung, 47 Fla. 224 (Fla. 1904)