Lee v. Federal Bake Shop, Inc.

196 So. 185, 142 Fla. 684, 1940 Fla. LEXIS 1439
CourtSupreme Court of Florida
DecidedApril 30, 1940
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 196 So. 185 (Lee v. Federal Bake Shop, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Lee v. Federal Bake Shop, Inc., 196 So. 185, 142 Fla. 684, 1940 Fla. LEXIS 1439 (Fla. 1940).

Opinions

Buford, J.

Appeal brings for review final decree which, inter alia, is,

“It Is Further Ordered, Adjudged and Decreed that the defendant-J. M. Lee, as Comptroller of the State of Florida, his agents and employees, be and they are hereby permanently enjoined and restrained from enforcing or attempting to enforce the provisions of Chapter 16848, Laws of Florida, Acts of 1935, as against the plaintiff in the operation of its bake shops located in the State of Florida, and that the surety bond heretofore filed in this cause by the plaintiff in the sum of $1,000.00 with the Hartford Accident and Indemnity Company as surety be cancelled and released.”

The bill of complaint in part alleged:

“Plaintiff is the owner and operator of seven bake shops *685 or bakeries located at various places in the State of Florida, at each of which it manufactures or makes bakery products, such as bread, pastries, cakes, cookies and, to some extent, baked hams, chickens, and similar items that are prepared and cooked in the bake shop along with the other bakery products, all of which said bakery products are sold to consumers at the bake shop where made or manufactured. Plaintiff does not operate ‘stores’ and does not sell shelf merchandise and is not engaged in the business of buying tangible personal property and reselling the same as is the function and purpose of a ‘store,’ but plaintiff is engaged solely in the business of manufacturing bakery products and selling the same at the bake shop at which they are made, such products being sold from day to day as manufactured and not kept in stock as merchandise is usually maintained in' ‘stores.’
“II
“After the enactment of Chapter 16848, Laws of Florida, Acts of 1935, by the Legislature of the State of Florida, the defendant J. M. Lee, as Comptroller of the State of Florida, demanded of plaintiff that it obtain from the defendant permits for each of its bake shops and pay to the defendant the taxes required .of ‘stores’ by the provisions of the said Act. Plaintiff has obtained from the defendant a permit to operate each of its bake shops and has paid to the defendant each year the sum of $200.00 for each of its bake shops in compliance with the demand of the defendant and his ruling that each of plaintiff’s bake shops is a ‘store’ and subject to the tax of $200.00 imposed by Sub-division' A of Section 4 of Chapter 16848, Laws of Florida, Acts of 1935. Plaintiff has also pursuant to the demands of the defendant, filed with the defendant each month a written report in the manner and form designated by said defend *686 ant showing the amount of gross receipts from sales made by plaintiff during each of the months preceding the month in which said reports have been filed.
“Ill
' “Plaintiff alleges that it has complied with the demands of the defendant by applying for permits, paying taxes, and filing returns under the provisions of Chapter 16848, Laws of Florida, Acts of 1935, for the purpose, of avoiding any controversy with the defendant and because of the uncertainty as to the definite meaning and application of various phases of said Act prior to its construction and interpretation by the courts; but that plaintiff does not believe it is subject to the provisions of said Act, nor liable for the payment of any taxes provided thereby for the following reasons

Then the pleader sets forth the reasons for the contention presented.

Chapter 16848, Acts of 1935, defines the words and phrases as used in the Act as follows:

“Section 2. Definitions. The "following words, terms and phrases when used in this Act have the meaning ascribed to them in this section except where the context clearly indicates a different meaning.
“(a) ‘Person’ includes any individual, firm, copartnership, joint adventure, association, corporation, estate, trust, business trust, receiver, syndicate, fiduciary, or any group or combination acting as a unit, and the plural as well as the singular number.
“(b) ‘Sale’ means any transfer, exchange or barter, conditional or otherwise, in' any manner or by any means whatsoever, of tangible personal property, for a consideration, and includes the furnishing, preparing or serving for a consideration of any tangible personal property consumed on *687 the premises of the person furnishing, preparing or serving such tangible personal property. A transaction whereby the possession of property is transferred by the seller retains the title as security for the payment of the price shall be deemed a sale. For the purpose of this Act the total amount of the sales price above mentioned shall be deemed to be the amount received and no deduction shall be made therefrom by the taxpayer on account of any alleged tax contained in the sales price.
“(c) A ‘retail sale’ or ‘sale at retail’ means a sale to a consumer or to any person for any person other than for resale in the form of tangible personal property.
“(d) ‘Business’ includes any activity engaged in by any person or caused to be engaged in by him with the object of gain, benefit or advantage, either direct or indirect.
“(e) ‘Retailer’ includes every person engaged in the business of making sales at retail.
“(f) ‘Gross Receipts’ means the total amount of the sale price of the retail sales of retailers, including any services that are a part of such sales, valued in money, whether received in money or otherwise, including all receipts, cash, credits and property of any kind or nature, and also any amount for which credit is allowed by the seller to the purchaser, without any deduction therefrom on account of the cost of the property sold, the cost of the materials used, labor or service cost, interest paid, losses or any other expense whatsoever; provided, however, that each discount allowed and taken on sales shall not be included and ‘gross receipts’ shall not include the sale price of property returned by customers when the full sale price thereof is refunded either in cash or by credit, n'or shall ‘gross receipts’ include the price received for labor or services used in installing, applying, remodeling or repairing the property sold. However, ‘gross receipts’ as herein used, shall in no case *688

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

Related

Lee v. Federal Bake Shop, Inc.
3 So. 2d 511 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1941)
Lee v. Smith
198 So. 197 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1940)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
196 So. 185, 142 Fla. 684, 1940 Fla. LEXIS 1439, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lee-v-federal-bake-shop-inc-fla-1940.