Dade County v. Morton, 68--850

• Decision Date: 20 May 1969
• Docket Number: No. 68--850,68--850
• Citation: 223 So.2d 116
• Parties: DADE COUNTY, Florida, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, et al., Appellants, v. Emil MORTON, as Trustee, Lawrence Morton, James Morton, Alan Morton, et al., d/b/a Morton Towers, Appellees.
• Court: Florida District Court of Appeals

Page 116

223 So.2d 116

DADE COUNTY, Florida, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, et al., Appellants, v. Emil MORTON, as Trustee, Lawrence Morton, James Morton, Alan Morton, et al., d/b/a Morton Towers, Appellees.

No. 68--850.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

May 20, 1969.

Thomas C. Britton, County Atty., and Stuart L. Simon, Asst. County Atty., for appellants.

Pallot, Silver, Pallot, Stern & Proby, Miami, and Earl G. Kehoe, Coral Gables, for appellees.

Before CHARLES CARROLL, C.J., and HENDRY and SWANN, JJ.

SWANN, Judge.

Dade County appeals from a final judgment for the plaintiffs below.

The final judgment affected the 1963 and 1966 tax assessments on the real property and improvements know as the Morton Towers complex.

The record reflects that in 1964 and 1965 the tax assessment on the land in question was $907,380.00 and the tax assessment on the improvements thereon was $9,765,020.00. The 1966 tax assessments were increased to $1,814,020.00 on the land and $10,512,680.00 on the improvements thereon.

It is conceded that the trial judge accepted the 1966 tax assessment placed on the improvements by the tax assessor as correctly reflecting the fair market value. He would not accept as correct the doubling of the tax assessment on the land from $907,380.00 in 1964 and 1965 to $1,814,020.00 in 1966.

Although there was conflicting evidence in the record, we find sufficient, competent and substantial evidence in the record on appeal to affirm the final judgment concerning the 1966 tax assessment. See Metropolitan Dade County v. Adler Built Industries, Inc., 3 D.C.A., 222 So.2d 264, Opinion filed April 29, 1969. We affirm this part of the final judgment.

The parties entered into and filed a written stipulation in the trial court. It provided, in pertinent part:

'STIPULATED that upon the conclusion of the instant two cases now pending in this Court, That the assessment ascertained by the Chancellor will be used in settling the case now pending for the 1963 taxes, Case No. 63C 12901, by applying 50% Of said assessment determined by the Chancellor in the two cases before this Court, it being agreed that the 1963 tax computation shall be at 1963 millage, but in no event shall the assessment for 1963 exceed that already determined by the Assessor for the year 1963.'

The tax assessment for 1966 was ascertained by the chancellor. The chancellor, on the basis of his findings concerning the 1966 assessment, followed the written stipulation in determining the 1963 assessment. Under these...