Associated Dry Goods Corp. v. Robbins

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Associated Dry Goods Corp. v. Robbins

691 So. 2d 28, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 3118, 1997 WL 149193

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedApril 2, 1997

DocketNo. 96-1907

StatusPublished

This text of 691 So. 2d 28 (Associated Dry Goods Corp. v. Robbins) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Associated Dry Goods Corp. v. Robbins, 691 So. 2d 28, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 3118, 1997 WL 149193 (Fla. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

COPE, Judge.

Associated Dry Goods Corporation appeals an order dismissing its mandamus action against the appellee Dade County Property Appraiser with prejudice. We affirm.

Appellant Associated Dry Goods Corporation operates the Lord & Taylor store at the Dadeland Mall. Associated owns the store building. Associated leases the land underneath the store from the owner of the Dade-land Mall under a lease running to the year 2002.¹ At the conclusion of the lease, the owner of the Dadeland Mall will own the Lord & Taylor building as well as the land.

Associated brought a mandamus action in the circuit court, seeking to compel the Property Appraiser to issue a separate assessment for the Lord & Taylor building. Associated claims that it is entitled to the requested relief by reason of Rule 12D13.007, Florida Administrative Code, which provides in part:

Rule 12D-13.007 Splits and Cutouts, Time for Requesting and Procedure.

(1) When property has been properly assessed in the name of the owner as of January 1 of the tax year, the appraiser may not cancel the assessment by reason of a sale of the whole or a part of the property. The assessment is against the property, not the owner.

(2) When the new owner or the original owner wishes to pay taxes on his proportionate share of the whole property, it is the duty of the property appraiser to figure the amount of the assessment on that portion of the whole.

We agree with Judge Rivkind that “Florida Administrative Code Rule 12D-13.007 [29]*29does not require the property appraiser to ‘cut out’ the property at the request of a tenant under a land lease.” Order of Dismissal, June 20, 1996. The Rule applies where, for example, the owner of a parcel of real estate sells part and keeps part. If the original parcel had a single assessment, then the original owner and new owner are entitled to separate assessments on their respective shares. Op.Att’y Gen.Fla. 75-105, at 181 (construing predecessor Rule). The same logic would apply if the original owner sold the entire parcel in pieces to separate buyers. See id By its terms, the Rule applies to fee simple owners, not tenants under a land lease.

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

COPE, Judge.

Associated Dry Goods Corporation appeals an order dismissing its mandamus action against the appellee Dade County Property Appraiser with prejudice. We affirm.

Appellant Associated Dry Goods Corporation operates the Lord & Taylor store at the Dadeland Mall. Associated owns the store building. Associated leases the land underneath the store from the owner of the Dade-land Mall under a lease running to the year 2002.¹ At the conclusion of the lease, the owner of the Dadeland Mall will own the Lord & Taylor building as well as the land.

Associated brought a mandamus action in the circuit court, seeking to compel the Property Appraiser to issue a separate assessment for the Lord & Taylor building. Associated claims that it is entitled to the requested relief by reason of Rule 12D13.007, Florida Administrative Code, which provides in part:

Rule 12D-13.007 Splits and Cutouts, Time for Requesting and Procedure.

(1) When property has been properly assessed in the name of the owner as of January 1 of the tax year, the appraiser may not cancel the assessment by reason of a sale of the whole or a part of the property. The assessment is against the property, not the owner.

(2) When the new owner or the original owner wishes to pay taxes on his proportionate share of the whole property, it is the duty of the property appraiser to figure the amount of the assessment on that portion of the whole.

We agree with Judge Rivkind that “Florida Administrative Code Rule 12D-13.007 [29]*29does not require the property appraiser to ‘cut out’ the property at the request of a tenant under a land lease.” Order of Dismissal, June 20, 1996. The Rule applies where, for example, the owner of a parcel of real estate sells part and keeps part. If the original parcel had a single assessment, then the original owner and new owner are entitled to separate assessments on their respective shares. Op.Att’y Gen.Fla. 75-105, at 181 (construing predecessor Rule). The same logic would apply if the original owner sold the entire parcel in pieces to separate buyers. See id By its terms, the Rule applies to fee simple owners, not tenants under a land lease.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

691 So. 2d 28, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 3118, 1997 WL 149193, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/associated-dry-goods-corp-v-robbins-fladistctapp-1997.