TOWN OF POLK CITY
v.
BLOCK TWENTY (20), TOWN OF POLK CITY, ACCORDING TO PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF POLK CITY, FLORIDA, AND AGAINST OTHER LANDS AS HEREAFTER DESCRIBED, TO-WIT; CERTAIN LANDS UPON WHICH TAXES ARE DELINQUENT
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 dismissal of a tax enforcement suit. The court found the issues raised were identical to those previously decided in a similar case.
No, the issues raised were not materially different from those previously adjudicated by this court.
“This is a suit to enforce the payment of taxes' for the year 1937, and previous years on lands excluded from the Town of Polk City in the manner provided by Sections 3149 and 3150, Compiled General Laws of 1927.”
Describes the nature of the lawsuit filed by the Town of Polk City.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe Town of Polk City filed a suit to enforce tax payments for 1937 and prior years on lands that had been excluded from the town. A motion to dismiss…
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.
This is a suit to enforce the payment of taxes’ for the year 1937, and previous years on lands excluded from the Town of Polk City in the manner provided by Sections 3149 and 3150, Compiled General Laws of 1927. A motion to dismiss the bill of complaint was granted and this appeal was prosecuted.
The record and the briefs have been examined. The questions raised are not materially different from those raised and adjudicated in Albert G. Durham, as Mayor of the Town of Lake Maitland, et al., v. Pentucket Groves, decided June 2, 1939, 138 Fla. 386, 198 So. 428.
The judgment below is therefore affirmed on authority of the last cited case.
Affirmed.
Buford and Thomas, J. J., concur.
Whitfield, J., concurs in opinion and judgment.
Justices Brown and Chapman not participating as authorized by Section 4687, Compiled General Laws of 1927, and Rule 21-A of the Rules of this Court.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Town OF Medley v. Seminole Rock Prods., Inc., 138 So. 2d 534 (Fla. 3d DCA 1962)…distance or other cause be virtually and commensurately excluded from the benefits of such municipal organization, * * * Section 171.02, Fla.Stat., F.S.A. See: Durham v. Pentucket Graves, 138 Fla. 386, 189 So. 428; Town of Polk City v. Block Twenty, 138 Fla. 609, 189 So. 927; Town of Eagle Lake v. Adams, 146 Fla. 165, 200 So. 367. The chancellor, having heard and received the evidence of the respective parties, made a finding in his final decree that the appellee’s lands were virtually and commensurately ex…
-
McCOMBS v. West, 155 F.2d 601 (5th Cir. 1946)…ed or in the remaining district, and all rights and franchises belonging to such city or town at the time of exclusion, shall remain and be the property of such city or town.” The Pentucket Groves case was followed in Town of Polk City v. Block 20, 138 Fla. 609, 189 So. 927. and Town of Eagle Lake v. Adams, 146 Fla. 165, 200 So. 367, in the application of the statute and exclusion decrees as between the property owners and their town.…
Authorities Cited
- Durham v. Pentucket Groves, Inc., 138 Fla. 386 (Fla. 1939)