COIN MACHINE ACCEPTANCE CORPORATION, APPELLANT,
v.
NORMAN MORGENSTERN, 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.
A tax sale purchaser acquired tangible personal property free of a secured creditor's perfected security interest. The secured creditor challenged the tax statute as unconstitutional for failing to allow apportionment of taxes to encumbered property, but the court upheld the statute as a necessary and valid exercise of taxing authority.
The statute does not violate due process. While the statute does not allow apportionment, the omission does not affect its validity because the tax lien must be superior to other liens for effective tax administration. A secured creditor is entitled to recover reasonable expenditures incurred to protect its security by paying or redeeming the taxes.
[1] A tax lien on a taxpayer's tangible personal property is superior to all other liens, except liens for other taxes.
[2] A purchaser at a tax sale takes the property free of prior encumbrances, including perfected security interests.
Previewing 2 of 6 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 statutory provision that the lien for taxes shall be superior to other liens, appears necessary for the effective administration of the taxation.”
Establishes the court's rationale for upholding the statute—that tax liens must be superior to ensure effective tax collection.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceA taxpayer's tangible personal property, on which Coin Machine held a perfected security interest, was sold at public sale under a tax warrant for del…
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 Redemption Of Property cases and more on FLexlaw
A taxpayer’s tangible personal property, on a portion of which the appellant held a perfected security interest, was sold at a noticed public sale, under a tax warrant for delinquent ad valorem taxes thereon, and was purchased by the appellee at such sale. Thereafter, the appellee filed this suit against the appellant to quiet his title thereto. The trial court held that the purchaser at the sale under the tax warrant took free of the encumbrance, and entered judgment quieting title.
On this appeal therefrom the appellant contends that if given such application and effect the statute (§ 200.02 Fla.Stat., *424F.S.A.)1 violates the due process clauses of the federal and state constitutions for failure to make provision whereby one having a perfected security interest on part of the tangible personal property of a taxpayer can legally require apportionment of the total tax to the part so encumbered, in order that the lienholder may redeem that part of the property from the tax, rather than be required to pay or redeem the tax on all of the tangible personal property owned by the taxpayer, in order to protect the security.
The trial court’s judgment correctly applied the cited statute. The omission in the statute to which the appellant refers, in our opinion is not such as to affect its validity. The statutory provision that the lien for taxes shall be superior to other liens, appears necessary for the effective administration of the taxation. Because of the many and varied items of personal property of a taxpayer which may be covered by the ad valorem tax assessment thereon, it would be impracticable for a tax assessor to make and record separate valuations for tax purposes on each of the items of personal property owned by the taxpayer.
A holder of a security interest on the tangible personal property of a taxpayer, or on a portion thereof, is not without due process, in that he is entitled to reimbursement for reasonable expenditures incurred to protect his security. An amount necessarily expended by such a holder of a perfected security interest on personal property, in payment or redemption of taxes to protect his security interest from loss which would result from a delinquent tax sale, is recoverable as an addition to the indebtedness covered by the security interest involved, or by separate action against the owner-taxpayer. See 29 Fla.Jur., Secured Transactions, § 129. Compare § 702.05 Fla.Stat., F.S.A., and 22 Fla.Jur. Mortgages, §§ 199 and 202.
Moreover, it was disclosed that by a practice employed by the county taxing officials, apportionment of the taxes to the personal property which is subject to a perfected security interest may be obtained, on timely application therefor by a lienholder, but that no such application was made in this instance.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Gen. Motors Acceptance Corp. v. TOM Norton Motor Co., 366 So. 2d 131 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979)