GERALD J. BRIELMAIER v. BILL FURST, PROPERTY APPRAISER
This text of GERALD J. BRIELMAIER v. BILL FURST, PROPERTY APPRAISER (GERALD J. BRIELMAIER v. BILL FURST, PROPERTY APPRAISER) 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.
Opinion
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
OF FLORIDA
SECOND DISTRICT
GERALD J. BRIELMAIER, ) ) Appellant, ) ) v. ) Case No. 2D18-541 ) BILL FURST, as Sarasota County Property ) Appraiser, and LEON M. BIEGALSKI, as ) Executive Director of the Department of ) Revenue, ) ) Appellees. ) )
Opinion filed September 13, 2019.
Appeal from the Circuit Court for Sarasota County; Andrea McHugh, Judge.
David A. Wallace and Amanda R. Kison of Bentley & Bruning, P.A., Sarasota, for Appellant.
Jason A. Lessinger, J. Goeffrey Pflugner, Anthony Manganiello, III, and Mark C. Dungan of Icard, Merrill, Cullis, Timm, Furen & Ginsburg, P.A., Sarasota, for Appellee Bill Furst.
Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Robert P. Elson, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee Leon M. Biegalski. BLACK, Judge.
Gerald Brielmaier filed a lawsuit against the Sarasota County Property
Appraiser (Property Appraiser) and the Executive Director of the Florida Department of
Revenue (Director) after the Property Appraiser recorded a tax lien on his home
pursuant to section 196.161(1)(b), Florida Statutes (2016), and revoked his homestead
tax exemption.1 Mr. Brielmaier brought the suit after the Property Appraiser determined
that for approximately nine years Mr. Brielmaier had been benefiting from a homestead
tax exemption on his Sarasota County home while simultaneously receiving the benefit
of a tax exemption in Wisconsin based upon permanent residency there in violation of
section 196.031(5). Mr. Brielmaier now appeals the entry of the final summary
judgment in favor of the Property Appraiser and the Director, raising five issues. We
affirm in all respects. With regard to the second issue raised on appeal concerning the
circuit court's interpretation and application of section 196.161(1)(b), we affirm for the
reasons set forth in Fitts v. Furst, 2D18-538 (Fla. 2d DCA Sept. 13, 2019). We make no
comment on the remaining issues raised on appeal.
Affirmed.
VILLANTI and MORRIS, JJ., Concur.
1Mr. Brielmaier also lost the benefit of the "Save Our Homes" tax cap. See art. VII, § 4(d)(1), Fla. Const.; § 193.155(8), Fla. Stat. (2016).
-2-
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
GERALD J. BRIELMAIER v. BILL FURST, PROPERTY APPRAISER, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gerald-j-brielmaier-v-bill-furst-property-appraiser-fladistctapp-2019.