A. H. BLAKE ET AL., APPELLANTS,
v.
FARRAND CORPORATION, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, AND MACKLE COMPANY, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, 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 tax assessor of Dade County appealed a trial court judgment reducing the 1973 ad valorem tax assessment of real property owned by Farrand Corporation and Mackle Company. The trial court found the original assessment of $3,067,519 was arbitrary and failed to consider statutory valuation factors, reducing the assessment to $1,840,511.40. The appellate court affirmed, holding that the trial judge properly exercised discretion in determining just valuation based on competent substantial evidence.
The trial court properly reduced the assessment to $1,840,511.40 based on competent substantial evidence demonstrating the original assessment was erroneous and arbitrary. Although no witness specifically testified to the reduced amount, the trial judge as trier of fact had authority to weigh expert testimony and fix a valuation supported by competent substantial evidence in the record.
[1] A tax assessment may be deemed arbitrary and invalid if made without consideration of statutory factors for property valuation.
[2] A trial court may reduce an erroneous tax assessment upon a finding that the assessor's valuation is arbitrary and not supported by competent substantial evidence.
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“The trial judge determined that the 1973 assessment was made arbitrarily and without consideration of the enumerated factors as set forth in § 193.011, Fla.Stat., F.S.A., and enjoined the defendant taxing authorities from assessing or collecting ad valorem taxes against plaintiffs' property upon the evaluation in excess of the total sum of $1,840,511.40.”
Establishes the trial court's finding of arbitrary assessment and the basis for the reduced valuation.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceFarrand Corporation and Mackle Company each owned three adjacent parcels of real property on Key Biscayne zoned for multi-residential/high-density use…
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 Just Valuation Of Property cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The tax assessor of Dade County takes this appeal to review a final judgment re- during the 1973 tax assessment against the real property of the plaintiffs.
Ferrand Corporation, Inc. and Mackle Company, Inc., plaintiff-appellees, each own three parcels of adjacent real property which is located on Key Biscayne and zoned for multi-residential or high density use. As of January 1, 1973, the taxing date, the land which was assessed for $3,067,519 was subject to a building moratorium precluding the use of the property under the high density zoning. Plaintiff taxpayers filed suit to challenge this assessment as being excessive.
At the trial, extensive testimony as to the value of the property, which ranged from $0.00 to $4,467,450, was offered by plaintiff taxpayers and the taxing authorities. The trial judge determined that the 1973 assessment was made arbitrarily and without consideration of the enumerated factors as set forth in § 193.011, Fla.Stat., F.S.A., and enjoined the defendant taxing authorities from assessing or collecting ad valorem taxes against plaintiffs’ property upon the evaluation in excess of the total sum of $1,840,511.40. The tax assessor appeals this reduced assessment. We affirm.
On appeal, defendant-appellants did not contest the finding of the trial judge that the subject assessment was arbitrary and made without consideration of the enumerated factors as set forth in § 193.011, Fla. Stat., but rather they argue the court cannot fix an assessment at a figure between the values which were testified to at trial.
The determination of the weight to be accorded to the expert testimony of the real estate appraisers rested upon the trial judge, as trier of the facts, and if competent substantial evidence is introduced demonstrating that the tax assessor’s assessment is erroneous, he may reduce that assessment. See Dade County v. Miami Herald Publishing Company, Fla.App.1973, 285 So. 2d 671 and Simpson v. Merrill, Fla.1970, 234 So. 2d 350, 352.
Although no one specifically testified that $1,840,511.40 represented the value of the property as of the tax date, we cannot say that the trial judge arbitrarily arrived at this figure inasmuch as there was competent substantial evidence presented to support his determination of the just valuation of the property.
Accordingly, the judgment appealed is affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Atl. Int'l Inv. Corp. v. Turner, 383 So. 2d 919 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980)…th respect to the subject property. We must affirm the trial judge unless the finding is manifestly unreasonable and clearly against the weight of the evidence. Dean v. Palm Beach Mall, Inc., 297 So. 2d 298 (Fla.1974); Blake v. Farrand Corp., Inc., 321 So. 2d 118 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975); Walker v. Connolly, 299 So. 2d 67 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974); Hill v. Coplan Pipe & Supply Co., Inc., 296 So. 2d 567 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974); Dade County v. Miami Herald Publishing Co., 285 So. 2d 671 (Fla. 3d DCA 1973); Alter v. Finesmith,…
-
Schultz v. TM Florida-Ohio Realty Ltd. P'ship, 553 So. 2d 1203 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989)…the property. Nonetheless, even if there were considered to be conflicting testimony as to a fair market value figure, the trial court was entitled to accept that of appellee’s expert under the circumstances of this case. See Blake v. Farrand Corp., 321 So. 2d 118, 119 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975), cert. den., 330 So. 2d 14 (1976) ("The determination of the weight to be accorded to the expert testimony of the real estate appraisers rested upon the trial judge, as trier of the facts, and if competent substantial evidenc…
-
Walker v. Trump, 549 So. 2d 1098 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989)…indicate a value lower than the assessment will not suffice to exclude “every reasonable hypothesis of legal assessment.” Finally, while the trial court may determine the weight to be accorded to the experts’ opinions, Blake v. Farrand Corp., Inc., 321 So. 2d 118 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975), where the evidence is undisputed it cannot be ignored. See Clements v. Plummer, 250 So. 2d 287 (Fla. 1st DCA 1971). In this case both appraisers testified that while the property was unique it did not defy conventional appraisal…
Authorities Cited
- Simpson v. Roxie H. Merrill, 234 So. 2d 350 (Fla. 1970)
- Shishman v. Gunilla Shishman, 285 So. 2d 671 (Fla. 3d DCA 1973)