DADE COUNTY, ETC., ET AL., PETITIONERS,
v.
MARINE EXHIBITION CORP., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, 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.
Dade County challenged a Third District Court of Appeal decision denying tax exemption for Marine Exhibition Corp.'s leasehold interest in county-leased property. The Florida Supreme Court held that whether the lessee's use qualifies as a 'public purpose' is a factual question that precludes summary judgment, requiring remand for trial.
Whether respondent's use of property qualifies as 'public use' is a question of fact, not law. The tax assessor's affidavit was sufficient to raise a genuine issue of material fact and preclude summary judgment disposition on the pleadings.
[1] A factual question, not a question of law, determines whether property leased from a political subdivision is used for a "public purpose" such that it is eligible for tax…
[2] An affidavit from a tax assessor stating that leased property was used for a non-public, profit-making purpose is sufficient to raise a factual issue and preclude summary…
Previewing 2 of 3 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“Respondent's eligibility for tax exemption on the basis of a 'public' use of property leased from a political subdivision of the state is an issue of fact, not law.”
Establishes the controlling legal principle that public use determinations are factual questions, not legal determinations
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceMarine Exhibition Corp. leased land from Dade County and sought tax exemption on its leasehold interest based on alleged public use. Dade County's tax…
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.
ENGLAND, Justice.
This cause is before us on a petition for rehearing, the Court having denied a petition for a writ of certiorari on December 4, 1974. The basis of the original petition was a direct conflict between the decision of the Third District Court of Appeal below, reported at 296 So. 2d 652, and two prior decisions of this Court.1 The peti tion for rehearing alleges conflict with a third decision which was published shortly after the petition was filed.2 Our independent review of the controversy reveals that direct conflict now exists with Williams v. Jones, 326 So. 2d 425 (Fla.1975). We have jurisdiction under Article V, § 3(b)(3) of the Florida Constitution.
The simple issue decided below was whether a factual question is presented, so as to overcome summary final judgment on the pleadings, as to whether on January 1, 1972 respondent used land which it leased from Dade County for a “public purpose” so as to be liable for tax on the leasehold interest. Petitioner contends that a fact question exists on the basis of an affidavit of the Dade County tax assessor stating that respondent’s use served a non-public, profit-making purpose.
Respondent’s eligibility for tax exemption on the basis of a “public” use of property leased from a political subdivision of the state is an issue of fact, not law.3 The tax assessor’s affidavit, filed in response to respondent’s motion for summary judgment, was sufficient to raise an issue of fact and preclude disposition on the pleadings.
The decision of the district court is quashed and the cause is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this decision.
OVERTON, C. J., and SUNDBERG and HATCHETT, JJ., concur. ROBERTS and ADKINS, JJ., dissent.
. Shevin v. Kahn, 273 So. 2d 72 (Fla.1973) ; Juarrero v. McNayr, 157 So. 2d 79 (Fla. 1963).
. Straughn v. Camp, 203 So. 2d 689 (Fla. 1974).
. Williams v. Jones, 326 So. 2d 426 (Fla.1975) ; Straughn v. Camp, 293 So. 2d 689 (Fla.1974) ; Hillsborough County Aviation Auth. v. Walden, 210 So. 2d 193, 196 (Fla.1968) ; Gamma Phi Chapter of Sigma Chi Bldg. Fund Corp. v. Hade County, 199 So. 2d 717, 718 (Fla. 1967) (dictum). See also Walden v. Hertz Corp., 320 So. 2d 385, 386 (Fla.1975) (dissent) .
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Dade Cnty. v. Marine Exhibition Corp., 335 So. 2d 369 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976)…1974 (296 So. 2d 652) affirming the summary final judgment of the Circuit Court for Dade County, Florida, and WHEREAS, on review of this court’s judgment, by certiorari, the Supreme Court of Florida by its opinion and judgment filed April 7, 1976, 330 So. 2d 459 and mandate now lodged in this court quashed this court’s judgment and remanded the cause for further proceedings; IT IS ORDERED that the mandate of this court heretofore issued in this cause on July 11,1974 is withdrawn, the judgment of this court…
Authorities Cited
- Williams v. Jones, 326 So. 2d 425 (Fla. 1975)
- Straughn v. Lindley M. Camp, 293 So. 2d 689 (Fla. 1974)
- Hillsborough Cnty. Aviation Auth. v. Walden, 210 So. 2d 193 (Fla. 1968)
- Juarrero v. Juarrero, 157 So. 2d 79 (Fla. 1963)
- Shevin v. Mel Kahn, 273 So. 2d 72 (Fla. 1973)
- Gamma PHI Chapter OF Sigma CHI Bldg. Fund Corp. v. Dade Cnty., 199 So. 2d 717 (Fla. 1967)
- Dade Cnty. v. Marine Exhibition Corp., 296 So. 2d 652 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974)