HARVEY W. SEEDS POST NO. 29, AMERICAN LEGION, DEPARTMENT OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA, A POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, 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 American Legion's post appealed a circuit court judgment denying its claim for tax-exempt status for 1967 property in Dade County. The court affirmed on the ground that the post failed to file its complaint within the statutory 60-day period after the assessment became final, lacking jurisdiction to hear the matter.
The court affirmed the circuit court's judgment, holding that the court lacked jurisdiction because the post failed to file its complaint within 60 days of the assessment becoming final as required by Florida Statutes Section 192.21. Additionally, the post was barred from relief by its failure to exhaust administrative remedies by appearing before the Board of Equalization.
[1] A court lacks jurisdiction over a tax assessment challenge when the complaint is not filed or service is not effected within sixty days of the assessment becoming final.
[2] Failure to exhaust administrative remedies before seeking judicial relief bars a plaintiff from asserting a right to tax exempt status.
Previewing 2 of 5 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“and no assessment shall be held invalid unless suit be instituted within sixty days from the time the assessment shall become final”
This statute establishes the jurisdictional deadline that the post failed to meet, forming the basis for the court's jurisdictional holding.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceHarvey W. Seeds Post No. 29 of the American Legion owned real property in Dade County, Florida (ten described lots in the Brickell Subdivision). The D…
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 Statutory Limitations Period cases and more on FLexlaw
This is an appeal by the plaintiff below from a final judgment in favor of the defendants. Appellant contended that it was entitled to tax exempt status for the year 1967, and presented its arguments to the Circuit Court, which entered its final judgment in favor of the appellees. The circuit judge found and adjudged as follows :
“This cause came on to be heard and considered by the Court on the plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment. At the beginning of the hearing counsel for all parties informed the Court that there were no areas of factual controversy involved in the cause. On their representation that the only issues were of a legal nature and on counsels’ joint invitation to the Court to determine the rights of the parties herein by a summary judgment in favor of whichever side prevailed, the Court has decided to wholly resolve this controversy by summary judgment.
“In making its determination the Court relied on the pleadings filed, which included the complaint, the answer and affirmative defenses of the defendants, the deposition of Joseph E. Creech and the exhibits contained therein, the affidavits attached to the Motion for Summary Judgment and the argument of counsel before the Court. The Court, being fully advised in the premises, hereby
“ORDERS AND ADJUDGES:
“1. The plaintiff’s prayer for tax exempt status for 1967 is denied and summary judgment is herewith granted in favor of the defendants.
“2. There is a lack of jurisdiction in the Court over the subject matter of this cause. This finding is based on the fact that the 1967 Dade County tax roll was approved and certified by the Board of County Commissioners of the said County on the first Monday in October, 1967, pursuant to the requirements of Section 193.29, Florida Statutes, and thus became final at that time. Section 192. 21, Florida Statutes, states:
“ * * * and no assessment shall be held invalid unless suit be instituted within sixty days from the time the assessment shall become final,. * * * ”
“It is clear to the Court from an examination of the Court file that the complaint was not filed nor was service effected until May of 1968, clearly more than sixty days from the 2nd day in October, 1967, when the assessment complained of became final. Such failure to file within the limitations period is fatal to the plaintiff’s case under the holding in Henry v. Dade County (1963, App. 3) 149 So.2d 89.
“3. The plaintiff failed to appear before the Board of County Commissioners of Dade County, Florida, sitting as a Board of Equalization, and assert any right to tax exempt status for 1967. The plaintiff is therefore barred from the relief it seeks by its failure to exhaust the administrative remedies provided by law before seeking judicial relief. See Attorney General Opinion No. 067-61 and Stiles v. Brown, [Fla.] 182 So.2d 612.
“4. Other points urged and argued by counsel for the parties herein are not decided by the Court at this time, since their determination is not necessary to this wholly dispositive ruling.
*698“5. Plaintiff’s are hereby required to pay the delinquent City of Miami and Dade County 1967 real property taxes on the basis of the assessments imposed on the following described realty:
“Lots 26, 27, 30, 31, 34, 35, 38, 39, 43, and 44, Plat Book 8, Page 11, Brickell Subdivision of the Public Records of Dade County, Florida
“Beginning 1064.7' N + 575.9' East of Southwest corner of Government Lot 5 then South 233' East 500' North 233' West 500' to POB all in Dade County, Florida,
together with such costs, charges and interest payments as are prescribed in Section 193.51, Florida Statutes.”
We must affirm the final judgment being appealed, and accept the trial judge’s basis for his decision, to-wit: lack of jurisdiction because of appellant’s failure to file complaint or effect service within 60 days of the assessment becoming final. Henry v. County of Dade, supra. See also City of Coral Gables v. Metropolitan Dade County, Fla.App. 1969, 221 So.2d 765.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Miller v. Nolte, 453 So. 2d 397 (Fla. 1984)…et, 124 So. 2d 1 (Fla.1960). The Third District Court of Appeal has consistently followed our interpretation. Henry v. County of Dade, 149 So. 2d 89 (Fla. 3d DCA), cert. denied, 155 So. 2d 549 (Fla. 1963); Harvey W. Seeds Post No. 29 v. Dade County, 230 So. 2d 696 (Fla. 3d DCA), cert. denied, 238 So. 2d 420 (Fla. 1970); Chaves Construction Co. v. Metropolitan Dade County, 256 So. 2d 545 (Fla. 3d DCA 1972); Blake v. R.M.S. Holding Corp., 341 So. 2d 795 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977). I find that the statute is a jurisdic…
-
Blake v. R. M. S. Holding Corp., 341 So. 2d 795 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977)…0 days after the certification of the assessment roll for collection. For that additional reason the defendants were entitled to judgment, and it was error to grant judgment for the plaintiff. Harvey Seeds Post No. 28 American Legion v. Dade County, 230 So. 2d 696 (Fla.3d DCA 1970); Askew v. MGIC Development Corporation of Florida, 262 So. 2d 227 (Fla.4th DCA 1972). In this instance the property was subject to the taxation and the tax imposed thereon for 1974 was authorized by law. The exception by which the…
-
COE v. ITT Cmty. Dev. Corp., 362 So. 2d 8 (Fla. 1978)…eet, 124 So. 2d 1 (Fla.1960). The Third District Court of Appeal has consistently followed our interpretation. Henry v. County of Dade, 149 So. 2d 89 (Fla. 3d DCA), cert. denied, 155 So. 2d 549 (Fla.1963); Harvey W. Seeds Post No. 29 v. Dade County, 230 So. 2d 696 (Fla. 3d DCA), cert. denied, 238 So. 2d 420 (Fla.1970); Chaves Construction Co. v. Metropolitan Dade County, 256 So. 2d 545 (Fla. 3d DCA 1972); Blake v. R. M. S. Holding Corp., 341 So. 2d 795 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977). Neither the district court below nor…
Previewing 3 of 10 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- In re Edward R. Rhynard. Petition for Reinstatement to The Florida Bar, 182 So. 2d 612 (Fla. 1966)
- Henry v. Cnty. OF Dade, 149 So. 2d 89 (Fla. 3d DCA 1963)
- City OF Coral Gables v. Metro. Dade Cnty., 221 So. 2d 765 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969)
- Shealor v. Ruud, 221 So. 2d 765 (Fla. 4th DCA 1969)