Daniel v. American Cyanamid Co.
District Court of Appeal of Florida
1Per curiam
Affirmed.
Under the facts of this case we do not conclude that the trial court erred in finding that appellee’s land should be classified as agricultural for ad valorem tax purposes. It was undisputed that the land was being used agriculturally, albeit under lease. See Fisher v. Schooley, 371 So.2d 496 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979). The land had been classified as agricultural pursuant to court order for the three preceding tax years after litigation of substantially the same issues now raised by the property appraiser involving appellee’s plans and preparations for a nonagricultural use of the land. No…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Markham v. BlountSupreme Court of Florida · 1965
- Fisher v. SchooleyDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1979
- Straughn v. K & K MANAGEMENT, INC.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1977
3Cited by3 opinions
- Ridgewood Phosphate Corp. v. PerkinsDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1986
- Roden v. Estech, Inc.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1987
- Daniel v. StoneDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1986