ISADORE HECHT, SIDNEY LEFCOURT, DAVID HECHT AND FLORENCE HECHT, GENERAL PARTNERS IN A LIMITED PARTNERSHIP KNOWN AS WEST FLAGLER ASSOCIATES, LTD., APPELLANTS,
v.
DADE COUNTY, A POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, PORTER HOMER, COUNTY MANAGER OF DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA, R. K. OVERSTREET, TAX COLLECTOR OF DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA, AND FRED O. DICKINSON, JR., COMPTROLLER OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, 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.
Property owners of a dog racing track challenged their 1967 real property tax assessment as unjust and discriminatory. The court affirmed the trial court's judgment for the taxing authorities, holding that the assessment did not exceed fair market value and that the income method of appraisal was properly applied with consideration of the pari-mutuel license.
The income method of appraisal is permissible when applied in conjunction with other criteria in section 193.021, Fla. Stat., and when proper allowance is made for the separately taxed pari-mutuel license. Evidence of assessments from prior or subsequent years is not admissible in challenging a specific year's assessment, which must stand on its own validity.
[1] The income method of appraisal may not be the primary basis for determining the fair market value of real property used for pari-mutuel wagering, as a significant portion…
[2] Tax assessments are presumed to be correct, and taxpayers challenging an assessment bear the burden of presenting proof that excludes every reasonable hypothesis of a leg…
Previewing 2 of 4 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“income from a business of this nature cannot be the primary basis for the value of the land used. This is true because a substantial portion of the income produced upon the real property flows from the pari-mutuel license, which is separately taxed.”
Establishes the controlling principle that pari-mutuel license income cannot be the primary basis for land valuation due to separate taxation.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellants owned the West Flagler Kennel Club, a dog racing track in Miami. The 1967 real property assessment was challenged as unjust, discriminatory…
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 Double Taxation cases and more on FLexlaw
The appellants, who are the owners of the West Flagler Kennel Club in Miami, Florida, brought an action in the circuit court alleging that the 1967 real property assessment of their dog racing track was unjust, discriminatory, and unlawful. After trial the court entered judgment for the taxing authorities, holding:
“Not only did plaintiff fail to demonstrate the fair market value of the property, but the defendant taxing authorities demonstrated that the assessment valuation is not in excess of the fair market value * * * and the Court being satisfied that the assessment challenged herein does not exceed such value, it is therefore ORDERED [that] [t]he relief requested by the plaintiff is denied and the complaint dismissed with prejudice.”
Appellants’ first point urges: “The use of the income method of appraisal in arriving at the fair market value of a parimutuel wagering plant is erroneous.” We have recently had occasion to consider the application of the income method of assessment to a pari-mutuel race track. See Metropolitan Dade County v. Tropical Park, Inc., Fla.App.1970, 231 So.2d 243. In that case we affirmed the holding of the trial judge that “Tropical’s property was overvalued because it operates a horse race track and holds a highly valued racing permit”. 231 So.2d 245. We agreed with the trial court that income from a business of this nature cannot be the primary basis for the value of the land used. This is true because a substantial portion of the income produced upon the real property flows from the pari-mutuel license, which is separately taxed.
There is no evidence in this record of such double taxation. The testimony of the appellees’ expert witness was that while the income approach was considered, an allowance for the value of the license to conduct pari-mutuel wagering was made. The controlling principle that all of the criteria set forth in § 193.021, Fla.Stat., F.S.A., should be taken into account (not just one) is stated in St. Joe Paper Company v. Brown, Fla.App.1968, 210 So.2d 725, and approved by the Supreme Court of Florida in its opinion at 223 So.2d 311. The tax assessment is presumed to be correct, and, in order to sustain its burden of proof in challenging a tax assessment, the taxpayer must present proof which excludes every reasonable hypothesis of a legal assessment. Homer v. Dadeland Shopping Center, Inc., Fla.1970, 229 So.2d 834, 837. Appellants failed to show in the trial court that the tax assessor had improperly applied the income criterion and have thus failed to show error under this point.
Appellants’ second point urges error upon the court’s ruling sustaining appel-lees’ objection to the admission into evidence of proof of the amount of the 1968 tax assessment upon appellants’ property. Appellants’ attack on the 1967 assessment must stand or fall upon its own validity unconnected with the assessment of any prior or subsequent year. Keith Investments, Inc. v. James, Fla.App.1969, 220 So.2d 695.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
W.R. (Ray) Daniel, Jr. v. Canterbury Towers, Inc., 462 So. 2d 497 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984)…73); Tampa Coca-Cola Bottling Co. v. Walden, 230 So. 2d 52 (Fla. 2d DCA 1969); Harbond, Inc. v. Anderson, 134 So. 2d 816 (Fla. 2d DCA 1961); Atlantic International Investment Corp. v. Turner, 383 So. 2d 919 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980); Hecht v. Dade County, 234 So. 2d 709 (Fla. 3d DCA 1970); Keith Investments, Inc. v. James, 220 So. 2d 695 (Fla. 4th DCA 1969); Florida East Coast Ry. v. Green, 178 So. 2d 355 (Fla. 1st DCA 1965). It seems in most cases, as here, that the principal argument between the taxpayer and the…
-
Calder Race Course, Inc. v. Overstreet, 363 So. 2d 631 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978)…4) rev’d on other grounds, 340 A. 2d 837 (Del.1975). It is also permissible to follow the income approach as urged by Calder providing a deduction is made for the value of the race track license to conduct pari-mutuel wagering. Hecht v. Dade County, 234 So. 2d 709 (Fla. 3d DCA 1970). Where such a deduction has not been made, however, the income approach has been disapproved. Homer v. Hialeah Race Course, Inc., 249 So. 2d 491 (Fla. 3d DCA 1970); Metropolitan Dade County v. Tropical Park, Inc., 231 So. 2d 243 (…
-
Container Corp. OF Am. v. Long, 274 So. 2d 571 (Fla. 1st DCA 1973)…v. Kelly (Fla.1969), 223 So. 2d 305. . Keith Investments, Inc. v. James (Fla. App.1969), 220 So. 2d 695. . Merrill v. Simpson (Fla.App.1969), 220 So. 2d 33. . Simpson v. Merrill (Fla.1970), 234 So. 2d 350. . Hecht v. Dade County (Fla.App.1970), 234 So. 2d 709. . Homer v. Hialeah Race Course, Inc. (Fla. App.1971), 249 So. 2d 491. . Metropolitan Dade County v. Tropical Park, Inc. (Fla.App.1971), 251 So. 2d 551. . § 192.31(7), F.S. . Powell v. Kelly, supra note 1. . Burns v. Butscher (Fla.1966), 187 So…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Porter W. Homer v. Dadeland Shopping Ctr., Inc., 229 So. 2d 834 (Fla. 1969)
- Keith Invs., Inc. v. James, 220 So. 2d 695 (Fla. 4th DCA 1969)
- Metro. Dade Cnty. v. Tropical Park, Inc., 231 So. 2d 243 (Fla. 3d DCA 1970)
- ST. JOE Paper Co. v. Brown, 223 So. 2d 311 (Fla. 1969)
- ST. JOE Paper Co. v. Brown, 210 So. 2d 725 (Fla. 1st DCA 1968)
- United Bonding Ins. Co. v. Miller Indus., Inc., 210 So. 2d 725 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968)