52 So. 3d 771
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.2010Background
- Tilton purchased 279 parcels (346 acres) in 1998 for $13,000 and harvested timber 2000–2003.
- In 2004, Tilton sought agricultural classification; the Flagler County Appraiser denied it and Tilton appealed to the VAB, which granted the classification.
- In 2005, the new property appraiser continued the classification without inspection.
- In 2006, the appraiser denied the classification, finding inadequate care and non-bona fide commercial use.
- Tilton challenged the denial in circuit court, arguing 193.461(3)(e) governs and VAB findings should control unless abandoned or discontinued.
- The trial court ruled for the appraiser, applying 193.461(3)(e) and concluding abandonment/discontinuation as of January 1, 2006; the appellate court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether 193.461(3)(e) governs post-VAB classifications | Tilton: 3(e) preserves VAB outcome; de novo 3(b) not allowed | Gardner: 3(e) permits annual review and consideration of changed use | Yes, 3(e) governs and limits de novo review to changed use; 3(b) factors apply if use changed |
| Whether 193.461(3)(e) was applied correctly | 3(e) protects prior bona fide use from de novo denial | 3(e) allows consideration of changes; not nullifying 3(b) | Trial court correctly applied 3(e) with pari materia consideration of 3(b) factors |
| Whether substantial evidence supports abandonment as of Jan. 1, 2006 | Evidence showed some agricultural activity and harvests | Evidence showed no regeneration and no active management | Yes; weight of evidence supports abandonment/discontinuation as of 1/1/2006 |
| Whether evidence of future regeneration plans affected classification | Plans to regenerate later should not negate current use | Current lack of regeneration shows non-bona fide use | Evidence of current use, not plans, governs; court affirmed denial |
Key Cases Cited
- Greenwood v. Oates, 251 So.2d 665 (Fla. 1971) (competent, substantial evidence standard for tax classifications)
- Straughn v. Tuck, 354 So.2d 368 (Fla.1977) (physical use of land determines bona fide agricultural status)
- Straughn v. K & K Land Mgmt., Inc., 326 So.2d 421 (Fla.1976) (use of special circumstances to maintain bona fide status)
- Markham v. Fogg, 458 So.2d 1122 (Fla.1984) (owner may rebut nonagricultural presumption with bona fide use factors)
- Container Corp. of America v. Long, 274 So.2d 571 (Fla.1st DCA 1973) (pre-3(3)(e) authority cited regarding de novo review)
- Keith Investments, Inc. v. James, 220 So.2d 695 (Fla.1971) (pre-3(3)(e) authority cited regarding agricultural use)