Judges: TERRELL, J.
Attorneys: George Couper Gibbs, Attorney General, W.P. Allen, Assistant Attorney General, and Bart A. Riley, for Plaintiff in Error;
Milam, McIlvaine Milam, for Defendant in Error.
Filed: Jul. 27, 1938
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: During the years 1931 and 1932, certain tax certificates were issued for the non payment of taxes on described lands in Dade County which accrued prior to the latter year. The fee owner took advantage of Chapter 16252, Acts of 1933, known as the Futch Act and paid all taxes on said lands for the years 1932 to 1936, inclusive. In 1938, the Clerk of the Circuit Court by request of the owner, advertised said certificates for sale under Chapter 18296, Acts of 1937, known as the Murphy Act but refuse
Summary: During the years 1931 and 1932, certain tax certificates were issued for the non payment of taxes on described lands in Dade County which accrued prior to the latter year. The fee owner took advantage of Chapter 16252, Acts of 1933, known as the Futch Act and paid all taxes on said lands for the years 1932 to 1936, inclusive. In 1938, the Clerk of the Circuit Court by request of the owner, advertised said certificates for sale under Chapter 18296, Acts of 1937, known as the Murphy Act but refused..
More
I am unable to concur with the conclusion reached in the opinion prepared by Mr. Justice TERRELL. It is my opinion that when the owner dealt with delinquent taxes under provisions of Chapter 16252, Acts of 1933, it thereby put its lands back on the tax rolls with the obligation to pay the taxes legally assessed for each and every year thereafter. The subsequent assessments had the same force and effect which they would have if the owner had paid the then delinquent taxes in full instead of paying only a portion thereof and acquiring the right to pay the balance in installments over a period of five years, during which time and so long as it paid currently assessed taxes and the stated installments on delinquent taxes, he was protected against foreclosure of such tax liens. By this procedure the owner revived and put new life into what had been dormant.
I think that the conclusion reached in the opinion, supra,
creates an inequality and discrimination in taxation which violates organic law.
