CITY OF TAMPA AND MELVIN B. SMITH, AS TREASURER PRO TEM. OF THE CITY OF TAMPA, APPELLANTS,
v.
G. T. E. AUTOMATIC ELECTRIC INCORPORATED, A FOREIGN CORPORATION, APPELLEE
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 court held that the supreme court's decision in City of Tampa v. Birdsong Motors, Inc. was prospective only and did not apply to taxes previously paid by parties not involved in a judicial attack on the ordinance.
Appellee corporation sought a refund of license taxes paid under protest, based on a prior supreme court decision declaring the taxing ordinance uncon…
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 Unconstitutional Ordinance cases and more on FLexlaw
to which appellee corporation was not a party.
The trial court rejected appellants’ contention that Birdsong, supra, by its own terms, was prospective in effect only and he entered final summary judgment in favor of appellee. We think he erred.
The language in Birdsong is clear and unmistakable. The court expressly held:2
“This decision is prospective only, is not retroactive and affords no remedy for taxes previously paid by persons not making a judicial attack on the ordinance.”
That the court is empowered to make a decision prospective in effect only cannot be denied.3 It did so here; and appellee’s argument, agreed to by the trial court, that the aforequoted language was intended only to cut out those taxpayers who do not by a judicial proceeding seek a refund within the statute of limitations is untenable. That result would necessarily follow if the court said nothing about prospectivity. Obviously, we can’t ascribe a useless purpose to the court’s expression. Appellee’s action is barred.
In view whereof, the final summary judgment appealed from should be, and it is hereby, reversed; and the cause is remanded for the entry of a final judgment in favor of appellants.
McNULTY, C. J., GRIMES, J., and SCHWARTZ, ALAN R., Associate Judge, concur. . (Fla. 1972), 261 So. 2d 1.
. Id. at p. 7.
. See The Deltona Corporation v. Bailey (Fla.1976), 336 So. 2d 1163.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- The Deltona Corp. v. Bailey, 336 So. 2d 1163 (Fla. 1976)
- City OF Tampa v. Birdsong Motors, Inc., 261 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 1972)