Legal Opinion

Adams Construction Equipment Co. v. Hausman

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided February 7, 1985No. 83-1599PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

FRANK D. UPCHURCH, Jr., Judge.

By this appeal, Adams Construction Equipment Company questions the assessment of ad valorem taxes on certain items of heavy equipment for the year 1982. Adams contends that the equipment was “inventory” as defined in section 192.-001(1 l)(c), Florida Statutes (1983), and, as such, was exempt from taxation as tangible personal property pursuant to section 196.-185, Florida Statutes (1983).

Adams is engaged in the sale and lease of heavy duty construction equipment throughout the state. Involved in the litigation below were four pieces of equipment. Their value for…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Volusia County v. DAYTONA BEACH RACING, ETC.Supreme Court of Florida · 1976
  2. Aeronautical Commun. Eq., Inc. v. Metropolitan Dade Cty.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1969
  3. Xerox Corp. v. Ada County AssessorIdaho Supreme Court · 1980
  4. County of Hennepin v. Honeywell, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1973
  5. Olson Equipment Company v. City of MinneapolisSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1969

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. CRANE RENTAL OF ORLANDO v. HausmanDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1987
  2. Grady v. HausmanDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1987
  3. Ago, Florida Attorney General Reports2007
  4. Ago, Florida Attorney General Reports2002
  5. Ago, Florida Attorney General Reports1993

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API