J. ED STRAUGHN AND STATE OF FLORIDA, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, APPELLANTS,
v.
G. J. M., INC., APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
In this interlocutory appeal concerning venue, the Florida District Court of Appeal reversed the trial court's denial of defendants' motion to transfer venue in a tax assessment case. The court held that when a state agency has taken only preliminary actions such as requests for information and proposed assessments (not affirmative enforcement measures), suit against the agency must be brought in Leon County, where the Department of Revenue maintains its official headquarters, rather than in the county where the agency's initial demand originated.
Venue does not lie in Bay County but only in Leon County, the county where the Department of Revenue maintains its official headquarters. A state agency may be sued in a county other than its official headquarters location only where it has taken affirmative action to enforce collection, not merely preliminary administrative actions such as requests for information or proposed assessments.
[1] A state agency may generally only be sued in the county where its official headquarters is located.
[2] The sending of a formal notice of assessment and demand for delinquent taxes, without further affirmative action to enforce the demand, does not establish venue in a coun…
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“a state agency may be sued only in the county in which its official headquarters is located, which in this instance is Leon County, the seat of state government”
Establishes the general venue rule for state agency suits absent exceptions
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe appellees filed suit in the trial court contesting a documentary stamp tax assessment imposed by appellant J. Ed Straughn and the Florida Departme…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Improper Venue cases and more on FLexlaw
McCORD, Judge.
This is an interlocutory appeal from an order of the trial court which denied appellant’s motion to dismiss for improper venue or, in the alternative, to transfer venue. Appellee initiated the suit below by filing a complaint contesting a documentary stamp tax assessment imposed by appellants upon an assignment of lease. Subject to certain exceptions, a state agency may be sued only in the county in which its official headquarters is located, which in this instance is Leon County, the seat of state government. In Department of Revenue v.
First Federal Savings and Loan Association of Ft. Myers, 256 So. 2d 524 (Fla. 2 DCA 1971), our sister court of the Second District held that where the only action taken by the Department of Revenue with regard to collection of taxes was the send ing of a “formal notice assessment and demand” for delinquent taxes specifying the amount and date due, that such was a mere naked demand and not affirmative action to enforce that demand. In the absence of affirmative action to enforce the demand, the Second District Court held that venue would not lie in Lee County but would lie only in the county where the state agency maintains its official headquarters. In the ease sub judice appellants’ only actions in relation to the tax have been a request for information and the issuance of a “proposed notice of assessment of tax and penalty under Chapter 201, Florida Statutes.” Such does not at this point constitute an attempt by appellant to seize and sell property to enforce collection of the disputed tax.
Therefore, venue does not lie in Bay County but only in Leon County.
Reversed and remanded with directions that the case be transferred to the Circuit Court of the Second Judicial Circuit in and for Leon County, Florida.
BOYER, C. J., and MILLS, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Lindquist, 698 So. 2d 299 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997)…Fla. 2d DCA 1976) (noting that “This court has been quite careful to distinguish between the types of agency action which are affirmative and those which are passive and dormant.”), cert. denied, 346 So. 2d 1248 (Fla.1977); Straughn v. G.J.M., Inc., 344 So. 2d 318, 319 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977) (holding that “mere naked demand” by agency and no affirmative action to enforce demand not enough to establish sword wielder exception). We pause at this juncture to examine whether the Department took affirmative action i…
-
Fla. Dep't OF Revenue v. Hardy, 697 So. 2d 954 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997)…ingly, the First Federal court determined that in the absence of affirmative or official action to enforce the demand, venue would lie only in the county where the state agency maintains its. official headquarters. See also Straughn v. G.J.M., Inc., 344 So. 2d 318 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977) (where the only action taken by the Department of Revenue in relation to documentary stamp tax assessment imposed upon assignment of lease had been a request for information and issuance of proposed notice of assessment and penal…
Authorities Cited
- Dep't OF Revenue v. First Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n OF Fort Myers, 256 So. 2d 524 (Fla. 2d DCA 1971)