197.602

Reimbursement required in challenges to the validity of a tax deed.

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us JustiaFla. Statutes CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

197.602 Reimbursement required in challenges to the validity of a tax deed.—

(1) If a party successfully challenges the validity of a tax deed in an action at law or equity, but the taxes for which the tax deed was sold were not paid before the tax deed was issued, the party shall pay to the party against whom the judgment or decree is entered:

(a) The amount paid for the tax deed and all taxes paid upon the land, together with 12 percent interest thereon per year from the date of the issuance of the tax deed;

(b) All legal expenses in obtaining the tax deed, including publication of notice and clerk’s fees for issuing and recording the tax deed; and

(c) The fair cash value of all maintenance and permanent improvements made upon the land by the holders under the tax deed.

(2) In an action to challenge the validity of a tax deed, the prevailing party is entitled to all reasonable litigation expenses, including attorney’s fees.

(3) The court shall determine the amount of the expenses for which a party shall be reimbursed. The tax deed holder or anyone holding under the tax deed has a prior lien on the land for the payment of the expenses that must be reimbursed to such persons.

History.—s. 64, ch. 4322, 1895; GS 592; s. 61, ch. 5596, 1907; RGS 795; s. 3, ch. 12409, 1927; CGL 1026; ss. 1, 2, ch. 23637, 1947; ss. 1, 2, ch. 69-55; s. 1, ch. 72-268; s. 50, ch. 77-104; s. 47, ch. 82-226; s. 199, ch. 85-342; s. 52, ch. 2011-151.

Note.—Former ss. 196.07, 197.310, 197.166, 197.353.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 7 cases, 1999–2018 · leading case: Turnberry Investments, Inc. v. Streatfield

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Turnberry Investments, Inc. v. Streatfield (2010) fladistctapp · cites it 13× “The amount of the expenses and the fair cash value of improvements shall be ascertained and found upon the trial of the action, and the tax deed holder or anyone holding thereunder shall have a pri- or lien upon the land for the payment of the sums.”

Ashear v. Sklarey (2018) fladistctapp · cites it 7× “Section 197.602, Florida Statutes (2010), provides: If, in an action at law or in equity involving the validity of any tax deed, the court holds that the tax deed was invalid at the time of its issuance and that title to the land therein described did not vest in the tax deed…”

Village of Doral Place Ass'n v. RU4 Real, Inc. (2009) fladistctapp · cites it 2× “Although the parties have not addressed the issue, apparently section 197.602, Florida Statutes (2003), is applicable.”

Nourachi v. SOUTH BEACHES PROFESSIONAL PARK OWNERS ASS'N, INC. (2003) fladistctapp · cites it 2× “The order on appeal, Final Judgment on Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint to Quiet Title and for Declaratory Judgment and Defendant's Counterclaim for Declaratory Judgment, rendered on December 18, 2002, declares a tax deed void, awards ,000 spent on the tax deed, but…”

Bullock v. Houston Realty & Investment, Inc. (1999) fladistctapp · cites it 3× “Section 197.602, Florida Statutes (1998), entitled Party recovering land must refund taxes paid and Interest, provides as follows: If, in an action at law or in equity involving the validity of any tax deed, the court holds that the tax deed was invalid at the time of its…”

Ashear v. Sklarey (2018) fladistctapp · cites it 12× “§ 197.602, Fla. Stat. (2010). 5 part and losing in part on the “significant issues,” it is appropriate to deny a motion for appellate fees.”

Surna Construction, Inc. v. Stephens (2012) fladistctapp · cites it 2× “Moreover, absent the stipulation, we believe that Appellant was entitled to interest pursuant to section 197.602, Florida Statutes. Accordingly, we reverse that part of the Final Judgment that found Appellant is not entitled to interest and remand this case to the trial court…”

— 197.602(2) — 1 case

Ashear v. Sklarey (2018) fladistctapp “§ 197.602, Fla. Stat. (2010). 5 part and losing in part on the “significant issues,” it is appropriate to deny a motion for appellate fees.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.