EM'S COFFEE SHOP AND KENT INSURANCE COMPANY, APPELLANTS,

v.

RUBY TURNER, APPELLEE

Citator

Cited By

• Dep't OF Revenue OF the State OF Fla. v. Markham, 396 So. 2d 1120 (Fla. 1981)
  …ENGLAND, Justice. On the basis of a direct conflict of decisions, the Department of Revenue has asked us to review an adverse ruling by the First District Court of Appeal, reported at 381 So. 2d 1101, to the effect that household goods owned by nonresidents were exempt from ad valorem taxation. Despite an extensive legal analysis by a majority of the district court with regard to the tax issue presented, we are compelled to reverse the decision…
• Godheim v. City OF Tampa, 426 So. 2d 1084 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983)
  …n of his own tax burden which, of course, was a part of overall gross tax revenues. What Markham did involve was principally the adoption by the Florida [*1093] Supreme Court of the dissent in the prior district court of appeal opinion in that case. 381 So. 2d 1101,1111. That dissent said that no one, except the property appraiser himself, was challenging as wrong his own action of taxing non residents’ property and that he could not have a justiciable controversy with himself. [A] public official is allowed…
• Colding v. Herzog, 467 So. 2d 980 (Fla. 1985)
  …437 So. 2d 226 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983), holding that household goods and personal effects in Florida are not subject to ad valorem taxation, and approving, in its entirety, the First District Court of Appeal’s opinion in Department of Revenue v. Markham, 381 So. 2d 1101 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979). The district court certified the following question to be of great public importance: WHETHER HOUSEHOLD GOODS AND PERSONAL EFFECTS ARE SUBJECT TO AD VALOREM TAXATION UNDER THE STATUTES AND CONSTITUTION OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA.…