State v. Gay

40 So. 2d 225, 1949 Fla. LEXIS 1356
CourtSupreme Court of Florida
DecidedApril 29, 1949
StatusPublished
Cited by11 cases

This text of 40 So. 2d 225 (State v. Gay) 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
State v. Gay, 40 So. 2d 225, 1949 Fla. LEXIS 1356 (Fla. 1949).

Opinion

Mandamus proceeding by the State of Florida, on the relation of Tampa Electric Company, a corporation incorporated under the laws of the state of Florida, against Clarence M. Gay, as Comptroller of the State of Florida, to compel respondent to repay certain taxes collected by him.

Peremptory writ ordered. The petitioner by mandamus seeks to coerce the respondent Comptroller to refund certain taxes paid by it. The petitioner alleges that:

"On the 27th day of September, 1946, in New York City, your petitioner issued 7,500 bonds of said initial series, each in the denomination of $1,000 and dated August 1, 1946, by delivering the same to Goldman, Sachs Co. for their account and for the several accounts of the other purchasers thereof, namely The First Boston *Page 226 Corporation, Salomen Bros. Hutzler, Kidder, Peabody Co., W.C. Langley Co., Riter Co. and White, Weld Co., and then and there received from said purchasers certified or bank cashier's checks payable in New York Clearing House funds, to the order of your petitioner, aggregating $7,436,875.01, which constituted payment in full of the purchase price of said bonds * * *."

And that thereafter:

"On the 10th day of February, 1948, in New York City your petitioner issued 6,000 bonds of a new series, to be designated "First Mortgage Bonds, 3% Series due 1978," each in the denomination of $1,000 and dated January 1, 1948, by delivering the same to Goldman, Sachs Co. for their account and for the several accounts of the other purchasers thereof, namely The First Boston Corporation, Salomon Bros. Hutzler and White, Weld Co., being four of the concerns which purchased the initial series, and then and there received from said purchasers certified or bank cashier's checks payable in New York Clearing House funds, to the order of your petitioner, aggregating $6,036,840.00, which constituted payment in full of the purchase price of said bonds * * *."

The bonds were secured by a mortgage on property in Florida to the "State Street Trust Company," of Massachusetts, and "First Savings Trust Company," of Tampa (a Florida corporation), as Trustees.

The petitioner also alleges that:

"On the day before the day the bonds were delivered, to-wit, on the 26th day of September, 1946, counterparts of said indenture of mortgage were presented to the respective clerks of the Circuit Courts of the Counties of Hillsborough, Polk, Pasco and Pinellas, for filing and recordation, and were by them duly filed and recorded among the records of their offices. Prior thereto, the respondent Comptroller's predecessor in office, the late J.M. Lee, who died October 6, 1946, had required as a prerequisite to such recordation payment to the respective tax collectors of said four counties of the intangible tax prescribed by the Florida legislature pursuant to Article IX, Section 1, of the Constitution of Florida, as amended in 1924 and 1944 [F.S.A.], and levied and assessed by Chapter 21943, Laws of 1943, (Section 199.11(3), Florida Statutes, as amended [F.S.A.]) upon said bonds as being class C intangible personal property as classified and defined by Chapter 22867, Laws of 1945, (Section 199.02(3), Florida Statutes, as amended [F.S.A.]), and said Comptroller had fixed the amount of such tax at $1,521.00, apportioned as follows: Hillsborough County, (93.28 per cent of the real property encumbered by the mortgage) $1,418.78, Polk County, (4.60 per cent) $69.97, Pasco County, (1.79 per cent) $27.23, Pinellas County, (.33 per cent) $5.02. Said tax was duly paid by your petitioner, as so required immediately before said mortgage indenture was presented for recordation."

That:

"On the day before the day the bonds of the new series were delivered, to-wit, on the 9th day of February, 1948, counterparts of said supplemental indenture were presented to the respective clerks of the Circuit Courts of the Counties of Hillsborough, Polk, Pasco and Pinellas, for filing and recordation, and were by them duly filed and recorded among the records of their offices. Prior thereto, the respondent Clarence M. Gay, who was then and now is the duly constituted and acting Comptroller of the State of Florida, had required, as a prerequisite to such recordation, payment to the respective tax collectors of said four counties of the aforesaid intangible tax upon said bonds of the new series as being class C intangible personal property as aforesaid, and had fixed the amount of such tax at $1,216.23, apportioned among the said four counties in the same proportions as used for the tax on the bonds of the initial series, and said tax was duly paid by your petitioner, as so required, immediately before said supplemental indenture was presented for recordation, $1,134.50 being paid in Hillsborough County, $55.95 in Polk County, $21.77 in Pasco County and $4.01 in Pinellas County."

"Subsequent to the payment of said taxes and prior to the filing of this petition, *Page 227 your petitioner demanded of the respondent that he refund to it the money it paid in payment of the aforesaid taxes when no such taxes were due, as he is required to do by Section 199.31 of the Florida Statutes, as amended, F.S.A., but respondent refused and still refuses to make such refund."

The respondent's answer contained the following:

"Further answering said paragraph 4, respondent says that the payment of the tax as alleged in said paragraph was made on the 26th day of September, 1946, and that the relator did not, at any time prior to the expiration of one year after the claim for refund asserted accrued, file application for refund of the amount of said tax with the Comptroller of the State of Florida as required by statute. Wherefore, relator is barred of the right of refund thereof."

Section 199.31, F.S. 1941, F.S.A., as amended by Ch. 22867, Acts of 1945, F.S.A. § 199.31, appropriated the proceeds of the Intangible Tax Fund as follows:

"(5) After all of the above amounts have been paid there is hereby appropriated annually out of the intangible tax fund:

"(a) Seventy-five per cent of the net fund to the general revenue fund of the State of Florida, and

"(b) Twenty-five per cent of the net fund to each county in proportion to the net amount of intangible personal property taxes received from the respective several counties, and such money shall be paid to the board of county commissioners of each county for use by the board for county purposes. As amended, Laws 1943, c. 21943, § 3; Laws 1945, c. 22867, § 10." Sec. 199.31(5) (a), (b), F.S. 1941, F.S.A., Cum. Supp.

Section 199.31, supra, authorized and directed refunds from the Intangible Tax Fund as follows:

"(3) When money has been paid into the intangible tax fund in payment of any intangible personal property taxes, whether payment was made voluntarily or involuntarily, the comptroller is authorized and directed to refund to the person who paid same, or to his heirs, personal representatives or assigns:

"(a) Any overpayment;

"(b) Payment where no tax was due; and

"(c) Where a bona fide controversy exists between the tax collector and the taxpayer as to the liability of the taxpayer for the payment of the tax claimed to be due; the taxpayer may pay the amount claimed by the tax collector to be due and if it is finally adjudged by a court of competent jurisdiction that the taxpayer was not liable for the payment of taxes, or any part thereof, the comptroller shall make such refund as the court may direct.

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

Related

Walter E. Heller & Co. Southeast v. Williams
450 So. 2d 521 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1984)
Stewart Arms Apartments, Ltd. v. State Department of Revenue
362 So. 2d 1003 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1978)
Ago
Florida Attorney General Reports, 1975
Hardy, Hardy & Associates, Inc. v. State, Department of Revenue
308 So. 2d 187 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1975)
Florida Livestock Board v. Hygrade Food Products Corp.
145 So. 2d 535 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1962)
Green v. Panama City Housing Authority
110 So. 2d 490 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1959)
State Ex Rel. Palmer-Florida Corporation v. Green
88 So. 2d 493 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1956)
State Ex Rel. Victor Chemical Works v. Gay
74 So. 2d 560 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1954)
Florida Nat. Bank of Jacksonville v. Simpson
59 So. 2d 751 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1952)
Overstreet v. Ty-Tan, Inc.
48 So. 2d 158 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1950)
State Ex Rel. United States Sugar Corp. v. Gay
46 So. 2d 165 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1950)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
40 So. 2d 225, 1949 Fla. LEXIS 1356, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-gay-fla-1949.