Poland v. City of Pahokee

J. R. Poland v. City of Pahokee, a Municipal Corporation

Poland v. City of Pahokee, 25 So. 2d 271 (Fla. 1946)

Court: Supreme Court of Florida · State Highest Courts
Decided: March 15, 1946
Judges: Sebring, Chapman, Brown, Thomas
Citations: 25 So. 2d 271157 Fla. 1791946 Fla. LEXIS 693

Cited by 5

Opinion of the Court — Sebring

SEBRING, J.:

The appellant instituted suit in equity against the City of Pahokee to procure relief against what he submits is an arbitrary unjust and excessive discrimination against his lands for taxing purposes. The gist of his complaint is that whereas his lands are being assessed for taxation purposes at approximately 75 per centum of their value, other lands in the approximate vicinity are being taxed at a much lower value. The prayer of the bill is that the court determines what just proportion of the tax he should lawfully pay and cancel the remainder of the tax as void and a cloud on his title. Upon final hearing the chancellor found that the plaintiff had failed to sustain the allegations of his bill of complaint with such competent proof as to support a finding that the assessment was so arbitrary and discriminatory as to amount to a fraud upon the tax payer.

*180 We have carefully considered the testimony and are of the opinion that the chancellor was correct in his findings and decree. A wide discretion must be accorded tax assessors in valuing property for the purposes of taxation. Unless there be a clear and positive showing of fraud, or illegality, or of an abuse of discretion so arbitrary and discriminatory as to amount to a fraud on the taxpayer or to a denial of the equal protection of the law, the courts will not in general disturb an assessment already made or control the reasonable discretion of tax assessors in making valuations for taxation purposes. Buchanan v. City of Tampa, 134 Fla. 618 , 184 So. 104 .

The decree appealed from is affirmed.

It is so ordered.

CHAPMAN, C. J., BROWN and THOMAS, JJ., concur.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 5 cases

View all citing references →

Relies on it most ⓘ

Osborn v. Yeager155 So. 2d 742 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1963)
R. H. James, Inc. v. Anderson165 So. 2d 829 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1964)
Ketchikan Packing Co. v. City of Ketchikan167 F. Supp. 846 (D. Alaska 1958)
84 Lumber Co. v. Cooper656 So. 2d 1297 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)
Hardman v. Koslowski135 So. 3d 434 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

Most recent

Hardman v. Koslowski135 So. 3d 434 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)
84 Lumber Co. v. Cooper656 So. 2d 1297 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)
R. H. James, Inc. v. Anderson165 So. 2d 829 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1964)
Osborn v. Yeager155 So. 2d 742 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1963)
Ketchikan Packing Co. v. City of Ketchikan167 F. Supp. 846 (D. Alaska 1958)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 1

Depth	Case	Cited by
	Buchanan v. City of Tampa, 184 So. 104 (Fla. 1938)	6

`/`	Focus the search box
`j` `k`	Next / previous result
`Enter`	Open the selected result
`x`	Add / remove the selected result from the download list
`n` `p`	Next / previous search term in a case
`c`	Copy the citation of the current case
`+` `−`	Larger / smaller reading text
`?`	Show this list