Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

285 So. 2d 431

Docket No. 73-771.

Monroe County v. Gustinger

MONROE COUNTY, Florida, a Political Subdivision of the State of Florida, et al., Appellants, v. Alfred GUSTINGER, Jr., Appellee.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided November 13, 1973.

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1973-11-13

Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently March 1980

4 state decisions

Relies on Henry v. County of Dade · HARVEY W. SEEDS POST NO. 29, AMER. LEG. v. Dade County · Askew v. MGIC Development Corporation of Florida

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1973-11-13

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1Stuart Simon, Co. Atty., and Gail P. Fels, Asst. Co. Atty., for appellants.

¶2Bolles, Goodwin, Ryskamp & Welcher, Miami, for appellee.

¶3Before BARKDULL, C.J., and CHARLES CARROLL and HENDRY, JJ.

¶4PER CURIAM.

¶5By this interlocutory appeal, the appellants seek review of an order of the trial court refusing to dismiss an action challenging a 1972 tax assessment of certain lands owned by the taxpayer.

¶6The principal basis of error urged is that the taxpayer failed to exhaust his administrative remedies and bring his suit, as provided in § 194.171, Fla. Stat., F.S.A. We find this point to be well taken and reverse the order here under review, with directions to dismiss so much of the taxpayer's cause of action seeking to attack the 1972 assessment. Henry v. County of Dade, Fla.App. 1963, 149 So.2d 89; Harvey W. Seeds Post No. 28, Amer. Leg. v. Dade County, Fla.App. 1970, 230 So.2d 696; Dade Drydock Corp. v. Broward County, Fla. App. 1971, 250 So.2d 286; Askew v. MGIC Development Corporation of Florida, Fla. App. 1972, 262 So.2d 227.

¶7Reversed and remanded, with directions.

/285/so2d/431 · .json · Public domain