Sherwood Park, Limited v. Meeks, 69--487
Decision Date | 20 March 1970 |
Docket Number | No. 69--487,69--487 |
Citation | 234 So.2d 702 |
Parties | SHERWOOD PARK, LTD., INC., a Florida corporation, and Sherwood Forest, Ltd., Inc. of Hollywood, a Florida corporation, Appellants, v. W. H. MEEKS, Jr., Tax Collector for Broward County, et al., Appellees. |
Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Jack F. Weins, of Abrams, Anton, Robbins, Resnick & Burke, Hollywood, for appellants.
Gaylord A. Wood, Jr., of Rogers, Morris & Ziegler, Fort Lauderdale, and R. Regis Reasbeck, of Reasbeck & Fegers, Hollywood, for appellee William Markham, Tax Assessor.
John U. Lloyd, County Atty., and Betty Lynn Lee, Asst. County Atty., Fort Lauderdale, for appellees Fred O. Dickinson, Jr., as Comptroller, and Board of County Commissioners.
William H. Meeks, of McCune, Hiaasen, Crum & Ferris, Fort Lauderdale, for appellee Meeks.
We review a judgment from the Circuit Court of Broward County sustaining the tax assessment on certain buildings which considered a formula prepared and submitted by the tax assessor.
The question presented is whether the formula employed by the tax assessor can be utilized under the statute which provides:
F.S.1967, Section 193.11(4), F.S.A.
The Supreme Court of Florida has heretofore held that statute to be constitutional. Culbertson v. Seacoast Towers East, Inc., Fla.1968, 212 So.2d 646. The statute does not set forth any criteria determining what is 'substantially completed.' A very good determination of substantially completed is to be found in State ex rel. Stites v. Goodman, Mo.1961, 351 S.W.2d 763, 766. It was well said there that a building is 'substantially complete' when it has reached the stage where it can be put to the use for which it was intended, even though some minor items might be required to be added. We construe that it was the intent of the legislature not to tax the property other than as unimproved unless it was complete to the point where it could be used for the purposes intended. In case of doubt the doubt is usually resolved in favor of the taxpayer.
In our judgment the tax assessor was not...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Thames Point Associates v. Supervisor of Assessments of Baltimore City, 1270
...(statute defined substantially completed as meaning the structure can be used for its intended purpose); Sherwood Park Ltd., Inc. v. Meeks, 234 So.2d 702 (Fla.App.1970), aff'd sub. nom., Markham v. Sherwood Park Ltd., 244 So.2d 129 (Fla.1971) (a building is substantially complete when it ca......
-
Somersett Owners Ass'n v. Somersett Dev. Co.
...the use for which it was intended, even though some minor items might be required to be added") (quoting Sherwood Park, Ltd. v. Meeks, 234 So. 2d 702, 703 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1970) ); State ex rel. Stites v. Goodman, 351 S.W.2d 763, 766 (Mo. 1961) (accord); Russo Farms, Inc. v. Vineland Bd......
-
Markham v. Yankee Clipper Hotel, Inc.
... ... 3 See also Sherwood Park ... Ltd. v. Meeks, 234 So.2d 702 (Fla. 4th DCA ... ...
-
City Nat. Bank of Miami v. Blake, 71--595
...for the 1970 tax year. They rely upon Culbertson v. Seacoast Towers East, Inc., Fla.App.1970, 232 So.2d 753 and Sherwood Park Ltd., Inc. v. Meeks, Fla.App.1970, 234 So.2d 702; and they distinguish Metropolitan Dade County v. Colsky, Fla.App.1970, 241 So.2d In response to these arguments the......