STATE EX REL. H. R. P. MILLER, RELATOR,
v.
J. PHILIP DOSS, AS TAX ASSESSOR OF LAKE COUNTY, FLORIDA, RESPONDENT
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.
This mandamus action challenges a tax assessor's refusal to assess a mixed-use building owned by a nonprofit medical center. The Florida Supreme Court held that a state law exempting the property from taxation was unconstitutional because only the portions used exclusively for charitable purposes qualify for exemption under the state constitution, and rental income from commercial space to private parties constitutes too remote a use to qualify.
The court held that the statute is unconstitutional as applied to this property. The property is subject to taxation because the constitutional exemption requires actual, total, and immediate exclusive use for charitable purposes, and the use of the ground floor for renting to private persons in competition with taxpayers is too remote to qualify for exemption.
“The principle has been more than once affirmed in this State that the Constitution must be construed as a limitation upon the power of the Legislature to provide for the exemption from taxation of any classes of property except those particularly mentioned classes specified in the organic law itself.”
Establishes that constitutional exemptions limit legislative authority and may only extend to constitutionally-specified classes of property
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe property at issue is a four-story building owned by Lake County Medical Center, Inc., a nonprofit corporation. The three upper floors are used exc…
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 Constitutional Limitations On Legislative Power cases and more on FLexlaw
The purpose of this mandamus action is to coerce the defendant as tax assessor to assess certain real estate for the year 1938 and subsequent years. The case was before this Court once before wherein this Court held the alternative writ sufficient. See State ex rel. Miller v. Doss, 141 Fla. 233, 192 So. 870. Answer and agreed statement of facts were thereafter filed. From final judgment adverse to relator it comes here again.
The record presents the following material facts: that the property involved is a four-story building; it is owned by the Lake County Medical Center, Inc.,, a corporation not for profit. The three upper top floors are used exclusively by the Medical Center for charitable purposes. The first floor contains places of business rented to private persons. The rents are paid to the Medical Center and are used exclusively to operate the hospital.
The respondent claims the entire property exempt by virtue of Chapter 18312, laws of 1937, claiming that the major portion is used exclusively for a charitable purpose. The relator claims said chapter is unconstitutional in that it conflicts with Section 16 of Article XVI, Constitution of Florida, the material part of which provides that the property of all corporations shall be subject to taxation unless “such property be held and used exclusively for religious, scientific, municipal, educational, literary or charitable purposes.”
This Court held in Maxcy, Inc., v. Federal Land Bank of Columbia, 111 Florida 116, 150 So. 248, 151 So. 276: “The principle has been more than once affirmed in this State that the Constitution must be construed as a limitation upon the power of the Legislature to provide for the exemption from taxation of any classes of property except those particularly mentioned classes specified in the organic law itself.” To afford the exemption the Constitution con*754templates the actual, total and immediate use. l)he use by renting to persons in competition with tax payers and applying the rents to charity is too remote. 61 C. J. 461, 26 R. C. L. 325.
'Exemptions from taxation are special favors frowned upon by the courts. They invariably cast a greater burden on other tax payers. Statutes granting exemptions should be strictly construed. Lummus v. The Florida-Adirondack School, Inc., 123 Fla. 810, 168 So. 232; the Miami Battlecreek v. Lummus, 140 Fla. 718, 192 So. 211.
It is not the corporate character that determines the exemption but the use of the property upon which the exemption is claimed. The University Club v. Lanier, 119 Fla. 146, 161 So. 78.
We conclude that the property was subject to taxation under Section 16 of Article XVI, Florida Constitution. The judgment is reversed with directions to proceed further not inconsistent with this opinion.
Brown, C. J., Whitfield, Buford, Terrell, Chapman, and Thomas, J. J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (18 total)
-
Williams v. Jones, 326 So. 2d 425 (Fla. 1975)…is family, it was not exempt from taxation. To the same effect see Amos v. Jacksonville Realty and Mortgage Co., 77 Fla. 403, 81 So. 524; Orlando Utilities Commission v. Millican [Milligan] (DCA 4 1969), 229 So. 2d 262; State ex rel. Miller v. Doss, 146 Fla. 752, 2 So. 2d 303; State v. Town of North Miami (Fla.1952) 59 So. 2d 779, text 784; Ad [*433] ams v. Housing Authority of City of Daytona Beach (Fla.1952) 60 So. 2d 663 and Hillsborough County Aviation Authority v. Walden, supra [210 So. 2d 193].” The…
-
Straughn v. Lindley M. Camp, 293 So. 2d 689 (Fla. 1974)…idual and his family, it was not exempt from taxation. To the same effect see Amos v. Jacksonville Realty and Mortgage Co., 77 Fla. 403, 81 So. 524; Orlando Utilities Commission v. Millican (DCA 4 1969), 229 So. 2d 262; State ex rel. Miller v. Doss, 146 Fla. 752, 2 So. 2d 303; State v. Town of North Miami (Fla.1952) 59 So. 2d 779, text 784; Adams v. Housing Authority of City of Daytona Beach (Fla.1952) 60 So. 2d 663 and Hillsborough County Aviation Authority v. Walden, supra. It is our view that Chapter 71…
-
Hillsborough Cnty. Aviation Auth. v. Walden, 210 So. 2d 193 (Fla. 1968)…exempt property from taxation. E. g., L. Maxcy, Inc. vs. Federal Land Bank [of Columbia], 111 Fla. 116, 150 So. 248 [151 So. 276] (1953); State [ex rel. Burbridge] vs. St. John, 143 Fla. 544, 197 So. 131 (1940); and State [ex rel. Miller] vs. Doss, 146 Fla. 752, 2 So. 2d 303 (1941). Therefore, the special act exempting Aviation Authority property must be construed to afford such exemption only so long as the property is not being used for a predominantly private purpose; and Florida Statute 192.62(2) (c) (…
Previewing 3 of 18 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- L. Maxcy, Inc. v. Fed. Land Bank of Columbia, 111 Fla. 116 (Fla. 1933)
- Newton Lummus v. The Florida-Adirondack Sch., Inc., 123 Fla. 810 (Fla. 1934)
- The Miami Battlecreek v. Lummus, 140 Fla. 718 (Fla. 1939)
- The Univ. Club v. Lanier, 119 Fla. 146 (Fla. 1935)
- Webster v. 759 Riverside Ave., Inc., 113 Fla. 8 (Fla. 1933)
- State ex rel. H. R. P. Miller v. Doss, 141 Fla. 233 (Fla. 1940)