STATE OF FLORIDA, ON THE RELATION OF HARDAWAY CONTRACTING COMPANY INC., A GEORGIA CORPORATION DULY AUTHORIZED TO DO BUSINESS IN FLORIDA,
v.
J. M. LEE, AS COMPTROLLER OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
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 held that a contractor who paid license taxes under an unconstitutional statute is entitled to a refund under a subsequently enacted refund statute, and the Comptroller has a clear duty to issue the refund by warrant drawn from the fund that received the original payment.
The Comptroller has a clear, plain, and positive duty to refund the license taxes paid under the unconstitutional Chapter 17178 pursuant to Chapter 22008. Mandamus is an appropriate remedy to compel the Comptroller to draw a warrant for the refund from the county school fund that received the original payment.
“Since Chapter 17178 was declared to be a nullity, relator may claim his refund under category b and c of Chapter 22008.”
Establishes that the relator qualifies for refund because the underlying tax statute is unconstitutional
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceIn 1935, Florida enacted a license tax statute (Chapter 17178) requiring a $1000 license tax on certain firms and corporations doing business in Flori…
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 Refund Of Taxes cases and more on FLexlaw
The Legislature of 1935 enacted Chapter 17178 imposing a license tax of $1000 on certain firms and corporations as a prerequisite to doing, business in Florida. In Lee, Comptroller v. Bigsby Electric Company, 136 Fla. 305, 186 So. 505, this Court held Chapter 17178 unconstitutional. The Legislature of 1943 enacted Chapter 22008 authorizing the Comptroller to make refund of moneys paid into the State treasury when no tax, license, or account is due or when any payment was made into the State treasury in error.
The relator having paid into the State treasury the sum of $4000 as license taxes under Chapter 17178, Acts of 1935, before it was declared invalid and considering that it was entitled to refund under Chapter 22008 brought this action in mandamus to require the Comptroller to draw his warrant to cover, such refund or to show cause why he refuses to do so. To the alternative writ, there was a return and motion to quash in which it is contended, (1) that no plain and positive duty is imposed on the Comptroller to perform the acts sought to be coerced, (2) Relator has another and more adequate remedy, (3) Relator has forfeited his right by laches, and (4) the Act sought to be coerced is not within the power of respondent to perform.
It is not denied that Relator paid the license tax to the State under Chapter 17178 which it claims should now be refunded under Chapter 22008; neither is there any question that the amount claimed was paid into the “county school fund” as provided by the former Act. We are of the view that relator’s application for refund was properly and timely made and that the allegations of the alternative writ bring him within the class entitled to refund under Chapter 22008.
*726Chapter 22008 provides for refunds in three different categories, to‘-wit: (a) In case of an overpayment of any tax, license, or account due,. (b) a payment when no tax, license, or account is due, and (c) any payment made into the State treasury in error, and appropriates “from the proper respective funds from time to time such sums as may be necessary for such refunds.” Since Chapter 17178 was declared to be a nullity, relator may claim his refund under category b and c of Chapter 22008.
The “County School Fund” into which the amount sought to be recovered was paid is defined by Section 9, Article XII of the Constitution. It is not necessary to recite here the . moneys that go into this fund. It is sufficient to say that it profited very materially under Chapter 17178, that large sums pass into this fund annually through the hands of the Comptroller and that it was the purpose of the Legislature that any- refunds allowed under Chapter 22008 be made by warrant of the Comptroller drawn on the fund benefitted by the original payment, in this case the County School Fund.
So the motion for peremptory writ, is granted notwithstanding the return.
It.is so ordered.
CHAPMAN, C. J., BUFORD and ADAMS, JJ„ concur. ■
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Sarnoff v. Fla. Dep't of Hwy. Safety & Motor Vehicles, 825 So. 2d 351 (Fla. 2002)…tatute. Section 215.26 provides the mechanism for receiving a refund from the State. The purpose of this statute is to allow the Comptroller to give refunds from the fund to which payment was made. See State ex. rel. Hardaway Contracting Co. v. Lee, 155 Fla. 724, 21 So. 2d 211, 212 (1945). Generally, an individual is required to request a refund under this statute before proceeding to circuit court. See Westring v. State Dep’t of Revenue, 682 So. 2d 171, 172 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996). Whenever a request for a refu…
-
State of Fla. ex rel. C. P. O. Mess (Open) v. Green, 174 So. 2d 546 (Fla. 1965)…ll be entitled to the relief sought. The money was collected by the state, when no taxes were due by the relators. Section 215.26, Florida Statutes, F.S.A., authorizes recovery under such circumstances. State ex rel. Hardaway Contracting Co. v. Lee, 155 Fla. 724, 21 So. 2d 211. The brief of respondent concedes that there is little real dispute between the parties regarding the actual amount of excise taxes paid. It is suggested that a mutual audit will eliminate any differences. Similarly, the respondent h…
-
Newsweek, Inc. v. Fla. Dep't of Revenue, 522 U.S. 442 (U.S. 1998)…emedy exists.” Id., at 111, 108. Under Florida law, there was a longstanding practice of permitting taxpayers to seek refunds under § 215.26 for taxes paid under an unconstitutional statute. See, e.g., State ex rel. Hardaway Contracting Co. v. Lee, 155 Fla. 724, 21 So. 2d 211 (1945). At Florida’s urging, federal courts have dismissed taxpayer challenges, including constitutional challenges, because §215.26 appeared to provide an adequate postpayment remedy for refunds. See Tax Injunction Act, 28 U. S. C. §…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Lee v. Bigby Elec. Co., Inc., 136 Fla. 305 (Fla. 1939)