Cases from cite.case.law:

BJ S WHOLESALE CLUB, INC. v. BUGLIARO,, 273 So. 3d 1119 (Fla. App. Ct. 2019)

. . . required to exhaust their administrative remedies with the Department of Revenue pursuant to section 215.26 . . .

DALY, v. MARION COUNTY,, 265 So. 3d 644 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . In 2014, Polk County filed a refund application under section 215.26, Florida Statutes, the tax refund . . . Appellees must therefore rely on section 215.26, Florida Statutes, to obtain a refund for overpayments . . . We do not agree that section 215.32 negates section 215.26 where a trust fund is involved, as Florida . . . courts have frequently allowed refunds from trust funds pursuant to section 215.26. . . . Section 215.26 allows refunds to be issued "to the person who paid same." § 215.26(1), Fla. Stat. . . .

EASTER, v. CITY OF ORLANDO,, 249 So. 3d 723 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . assessed on county's tax rolls "has been made voluntarily or involuntarily" in specified circumstances); § 215.26 . . . refund for the same the taxpayer need not comply with the 'administrative' requirements in section 215.26 . . . has noted that Florida has a "longstanding practice of permitting taxpayers to seek refunds under § 215.26 . . .

MARION COUNTY, v. DEPARTMENT OF JUVENILE JUSTICE, v., 215 So. 3d 621 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . How those monies are returned to the appellants, whether it be through a proceeding under section 215.26 . . .

AMERICAN HERITAGE WINDOW FASHIONS, LLC, v. DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,, 191 So. 3d 516 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . See § 215.26, Fla. Stat. (2014). . . .

AMERISURE MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, v. FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES, DIVISION OF WORKERS COMPENSATION,, 156 So. 3d 520 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . This refund transaction falls squarely within the ambit of Section 215.26, Florida Statutes. . . . The Department’s position is also consistent with the plain language of section 215.26, Florida Statutes . . . Section 215.26 provides, in part: (1) The Chief Financial Officer may refund ... any moneys paid into . . . overpayment against future assessments owed to the same fund or submit a refund request under section 215.26 . . .

SCHOJAN, v. PAPA JOHN S INTERNATIONAL INC. s USA,, 34 F. Supp. 3d 1206 (M.D. Fla. 2014)

. . . Plaintiffs are seeking a refund of taxes paid to the State and must first pursue a refund claim under § 215.26 . . .

In PHARMACY DISTRIBUTOR SERVICES, INC. C. v., 455 B.R. 817 (Bankr. S.D. Fla. 2011)

. . . . § 215.26. . . .

D. COHEN, v. WORLD OMNI FINANCIAL CORP., 426 F. App'x 766 (11th Cir. 2011)

. . . . § 215.26(3), but it includes various exceptions and extensions to accommodate taxpayers who pursue . . . administrative and judicial challenges, see, e.g., §§ 215.26(2), (5), 72.011. . . . district court’s constitutional-injury determination to the Department of Revenue’s application of § 215.26 . . .

OGBORN, v. ZINGALE,, 988 So. 2d 56 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2008)

. . . in a tax case be exhausted is available only when a taxpayer is seeking a refund pursuant to section 215.26 . . . Section 215.26 is the general provision for repayment of funds paid into the State Treasury. . . .

In CITATION CORPORATION, Co. LLC, v. W. III, U. S., 493 F.3d 1313 (11th Cir. 2007)

. . . approval of all fees Citation had paid Miller Buckfire to date ($1,189,622.90), all expenses paid ($180,-215.26 . . .

In CITATION CORPORATION, Co. LLC, v. W. III, U. S., 493 F.3d 1313 (11th Cir. 2007)

. . . approval of all fees Citation had paid Miller Buckfire to date ($1,189,622.90), all expenses paid ($180,-215.26 . . .

STATE DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAY SAFETY AND MOTOR VEHICLES O. III, G. v. RENDON, M. J. L. R., 957 So. 2d 647 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

. . . the ADA; 2) that the action was not time-barred by the three-year claim period specified in section 215.26 . . . At the time the plaintiffs filed this suit, the statute stated: 215.26 Repayment of funds paid into State . . . Under section 215.26, a taxpayer can obtain a refund of a fee paid where no fee was owed. . . . Stat. § 215.26’s authorization of a state-court refund action ... ”). . . . The Florida Supreme Court has held that compliance with section 215.26 will be excused “when the claim . . .

STATE DEPT. OF REVENUE, v. BRIDGER, J., 935 So. 2d 536 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006)

. . . Department contends that the taxpayers failed to pursue the administrative remedies outlined in sections 215.26 . . .

VENTURE COAL SALES COMPANY, v. UNITED STATES,, 370 F.3d 1102 (Fed. Cir. 2004)

. . . . § 215.26(2) (1985) (generally applicable three-year limitations period for tax refund actions)). . . .

VENTURE COAL SALES COMPANY, v. UNITED STATES,, 370 F.3d 1102 (Fed. Cir. 2004)

. . . . § 215.26(2) (1985) (generally applicable three-year limitations period for tax refund actions)). . . .

STATE v. RENDON,, 832 So. 2d 141 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

. . . the ADA; 2) that the action was not time-baired by the three-year claim period specified in section 215.26 . . .

D. SARNOFF, v. FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAY SAFETY AND MOTOR VEHICLES,, 825 So. 2d 351 (Fla. 2002)

. . . jurisdiction over the case because petitioners had failed to comply with the requirements of section 215.26 . . . Nemeth, 733 So.2d 970 (Fla.1999), provided a direct file exception to section 215.26. . . . Section 215.26 provides the mechanism for receiving a refund from the State. . . . The board argued that because Hygrade had failed to comply with section 215.26, its claim was barred. . . . Hygrade countered, arguing that the exhaustion of administrative remedies pursuant to section 215.26 . . .

FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, v. LEON,, 824 So. 2d 197 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

. . . We reverse this judgment because the appellees’ lawsuit was untimely filed pursuant to section 215.26 . . . They argued that state law, including the procedures in sections 72.011 and 215.26, did not provide “ . . . Section 215.26(2), however, provides that such a lawsuit must be commenced “within 3 years after the . . . But the Florida Supreme Court rejected this argument in Nemeth, stating that “section 215.26 provides . . . The Florida Supreme Court evidently rejected this argument when it decided to enforce section 215.26 . . .

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, v. DAYSTAR FARMS, INC. ETC., 803 So. 2d 892 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

. . . In June 1996, however, Daystar sought a refund pursuant to section 215.26, Florida Statutes and rule . . . debt, asserted that Daystar did not have standing to seek the refund under the language of section 215.26 . . . Section 215.26, Florida Statutes, provides that a refund may be paid only to the person who paid the . . . Pursuant to section 215.26 and Szabo, Dean & Dean is the entity that should have sought the refund, and . . . Section 215.26 provides in pertinent part: The Comptroller of the state may refund to the person who . . .

STATE DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAY SAFETY AND MOTOR VEHICLES, v. D. SARNOFF,, 776 So. 2d 976 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

. . . the named plaintiffs, appellees herein, complied with the provisions of the refund statute, section 215.26 . . . failed to state a cause of action, because they never filed claims for refunds as required by section 215.26 . . . may file directly in the appropriate court without filing an administrative claim pursuant to section 215.26 . . . The refund statute, section 215.26, Florida Statutes, provides in pertinent part: 215.26 Repayment of . . . Pursuant to Nemeth, appellees were required to seek a refund under section 215.26, before filing suit . . . Representation Allegations, ... must dismiss the plaintiffs claims for lack of jurisdiction, in light of Section 215.26 . . . plaintiffs in GTE Florida had applied to the Department of Revenue for refunds in accordance with section 215.26 . . .

P. R. MARKETING GROUP, INC. d b a v. GTE FLORIDA, INC., 747 So. 2d 962 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)

. . . . § 215.26. . . . See § 215.26, Fla. Stat. (1997). . . . because none of the class representatives had applied for a refund pursuant to sections 26.012(2)(e) and 215.26 . . . any basis other than the unconstitutionality of the tax there must be full compliance with section 215.26 . . .

PUBLIC MEDICAL ASSISTANCE TRUST FUND, v. M. HAMEROFF, M. D., 736 So. 2d 1150 (Fla. 1999)

. . . constitutionality of the vehicle impact fee statute within the three-year time limit mandated by section 215.26 . . .

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, v. A. NEMETH, J., 733 So. 2d 970 (Fla. 1999)

. . . Additionally, DOR alleged that pursuant to section 215.26(2), the Nemeths could no longer seek a refund . . . Section 215.26(2) requires a taxpayer to file an application for a refund within three years after the . . . The trial court reasoned: In my view, [section] 215.26 Fla. . . . Of course that court dealt with a prior version of Section 215.26 and the facts involved the failure . . . (l)(a); when no tax is due, section 215.26(l)(b); or for payments made in error, section 215.26(l)(c) . . .

DRYDEN, v. MADISON COUNTY,, 727 So. 2d 245 (Fla. 1999)

. . . and vacated the district court decision, pointing out that a different statutory provision, section 215.26 . . . of the District Court of Appeal’s decision below, however, was to cut off Newsweek’s recourse to § 215.26 . . . Newsweek is entitled to a clear and certain remedy and thus it can use the refund procedures [in section 215.26 . . .

DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES, v. BRUNNER,, 707 So. 2d 1197 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998)

. . . In December 1996, appellees instituted two separate actions pursuant to section 215.26, Florida Statutes . . . DBPR is the executive agency authorized to defend in tax refund litigation such as the instant case. § 215.26 . . .

NEWSWEEK, INC. v. FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, 522 U.S. 442 (U.S. 1998)

. . . . § 215.26(1) (Supp. 1998) (“The Comptroller of the state may refund ... any moneys paid into the State . . . Under Florida law, there was a longstanding practice of permitting taxpayers to seek refunds under § 215.26 . . . urging, federal courts have dismissed taxpayer challenges, including constitutional challenges, because §215.26 . . . of the District Court of Appeal’s decision below, however, was to cut off Newsweek’s recourse to § 215.26 . . .

J. POGGE, v. DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, STATE OF FLORIDA,, 703 So. 2d 523 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1997)

. . . Levy relied upon section 215.26, Florida Statutes, which allows the refund of any monies paid into the . . . The Department took the position that no refund was available under section 215.26(l)(e), Florida Statutes . . . Pogge argues that circuit courts have jurisdiction of denials of refunds of taxes under section 215.26 . . . See § 215.26(1), Fla. Stat. (1987). . . .

G. LUSSIER, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAY SAFETY AND MOTOR VEHICLES,, 972 F. Supp. 1412 (M.D. Fla. 1997)

. . . . §§ 72.011, 215.26 (1995)(detailing procedure for seeking refund of tax from state comptroller and securing . . .

PUBLIC MEDICAL ASSISTANCE TRUST FUND, v. M. HAMEROFF, M. D., 689 So. 2d 358 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1997)

. . . sufficiently similarly situated to the proposed class and that they had failed to first comply with section 215.26 . . . standing to serve as class representatives because compliance with the refund procedure in section 215.26 . . . was barred because none of the class representatives had applied for a refund pursuant to sections 215.26 . . .

A. NEMETH, J. L. v. FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,, 686 So. 2d 778 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1997)

. . . The trial court stated in its order of dismissal; In my view Sex. 215.26(2) Fla. Stat. . . . Of course that court dealt with a prior version of Section 215.26 and the facts involved the failure . . . Nonetheless, Kuhnlein did not overrule Victor Chemical’s decision that 215.26(2) was a nonclaim statute . . . Section 215.26, F.S.A., is not, strictly speaking, a statute of limitations but is more in the nature . . . Section 215.26, F.S.A. Id. at 564-65. . . .

WESTRING, v. STATE, 682 So. 2d 171 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)

. . . Gay, 74 So.2d 560 (Fla.1954), Westring is required to file a claim for a refund pursuant to section 215.26 . . . correctly notes, Westring is still within the three-year statutory non-claim period provided by section 215.26 . . .

STATE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, v. KEMPER INVESTORS LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY,, 660 So. 2d 1124 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)

. . . Section 215.26, Florida Statutes. . . . Supp.1992), provides as follows: 213.34 Authority to audit. (4) Notwithstanding the provisions of s. 215.26 . . . By reference to section 215.26, the language of section 213.34(4) appears to place a responsibility upon . . .

O. ZIPPERER, Jr. v. CITY OF FORT MYERS, a No. No. No. No. No. No. a, 41 F.3d 619 (11th Cir. 1995)

. . . Florida Statutes § 215.26 (1989) gives Florida taxpayers the right to seek a tax refund from the state . . .

STATE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, v. WEST FLAGLER ASSOCIATES, LTD. a a IHA, a BHH, a a a, 646 So. 2d 853 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)

. . . . § 215.26, Fla.Stat. (1989); Flack v. Graham, .461 So.2d 82 (Fla.1984); Della-Donna v. . . .

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, v. KUHNLEIN, DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAY SAFETY AND MOTOR VEHICLES, v. ADAMS,, 646 So. 2d 717 (Fla. 1994)

. . . a refund, which allegedly would trigger circuit court jurisdiction under sections 26.012(2)(e) and 215.26 . . .

FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE R. v. SEMINOLE ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC. a, 598 So. 2d 115 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)

. . . Seminole Electric applied for a tax refund under section 215.26, Florida Statutes (1987). . . .

DIVISION OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES AND TOBACCO, v. CORPORATION,, 574 So. 2d 114 (Fla. 1991)

. . . to raise their objections to the tax at issue in a postdeprivation refund action pursuant to section 215.26 . . .

McKESSON CORPORATION v. DIVISION OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES AND TOBACCO, DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS REGULATION OF FLORIDA,, 496 U.S. 18 (U.S. 1990)

. . . overpayment of any tax, license or account due” and “[a]ny payment made into the State Treasury in error,” §§ 215.26 . . . See § 215.26 (2) (generally applicable 3-year limitations period for refund actions containing no protest . . . Stat. § 215.26(2) (1989) (generally applicable 3-year limitations period for tax refund actions). . . . Stat. § 215.26’s authorization of a state-court refund action, they contend that this waiver extends . . .

GUARANTY SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATION, v. ULTIMATE SAVINGS BANK, F. S. B. FSLIC, 737 F. Supp. 366 (W.D. Va. 1990)

. . . Under this note Cardinal collected $126,-215.26. . . .

OSCEOLA, v. FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,, 893 F.2d 1231 (11th Cir. 1990)

. . . . § 215.26 (West 1971). . . . The Florida Supreme Court has held that this statute (§ 215.26) authorizes the refund of taxes paid under . . .

OSCEOLA, v. FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,, 705 F. Supp. 1552 (S.D. Fla. 1989)

. . . . § 215.26 (West 1971). . . . Section 215.26(4) of the Florida Statutes provides that a refund action under that section is the “exclusive . . .

DIVISION OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES AND TOBACCO, DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS REGULATION, v. McKESSON CORPORATION,, 524 So. 2d 1000 (Fla. 1988)

. . . It maintains that because it has paid the discriminatory taxes under protest, pursuant to section 215.26 . . .

FLORIDA EXPORT TOBACCO CO. INC. v. DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, 510 So. 2d 936 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1987)

. . . had assumed for nearly thirty years in the handling of applications for refunds pursuant to Section 215.26 . . . Since the Comptroller has discretionary authority under Section 215.26, Florida Statutes, to grant a . . . The amendment to Section 215.26(2), Florida Statutes, by Chapter 78-352, Section 2, Laws of Florida, . . . The Comptroller’s authority to delegate is, by the express terms of Section 215.26(2), permissive. . . . An application for refund of taxes, filed pursuant to section 215.26, is made to the Comptroller — not . . . refund of the taxes in an administrative proceeding prosecuted by Florida Export pursuant to sections 215.26 . . . Section 215.26, however, continued to provide the Comptroller with authority to pay refunds. . . . The statutory authority of the Comptroller to pay refunds under section 215.26 was not altered by the . . . The legislature also amended section 215.26, Florida Statutes, to read as quoted in note 3, supra. . . . In this case appellants applied to the Comptroller for a refund under section 215.26 on grounds that . . .

In LAMICA CORPORATION,, 65 B.R. 849 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 1986)

. . . The debtor has rebutted the prima facie validity of BHM’s claim for $68,-215.26 by a preponderance of . . .

UNITED STATES v. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF CITY OF CHICAGO,, 621 F. Supp. 1296 (N.D. Ill. 1985)

. . . . §§ 215.1, 215.26; U.S. Report, July 15, 1983, at 22) 814. . . . documentation on those models which are found to be effective. (42 U.S.C. § 9861; 34 C.F.R. 215.1; 34 C.F.R. 215.26 . . .

MEDLEY INVESTORS, LTD. v. LEWIS,, 465 So. 2d 1305 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1985)

. . . appeal from appellee’s final order denying appellants’ class action petition, filed pursuant to Section 215.26 . . . In December 1982, appellants, a group of ten Florida chartered limited partnerships, filed a section 215.26 . . . There is no express authority for a class action administrative hearing in either section 215.26, Chapter . . . Nevertheless, appellants argue that the use of the term “person” in section 215.26(1), by reading it . . . action in circuit court on behalf of taxpayers as long as all class members had applied for a section 215.26 . . .

UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC. v. STATE OFFICE OF THE COMPTROLLER,, 443 So. 2d 263 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1983)

. . . On 25 October 1979, pursuant to Section 215.26, Florida Statutes, (1979) U.P.S. filed two refund claims . . . Anderson did not deal with a refund claim under Section 215.26(2). . . . because of failure to comply with the administrative rule in such a situation would render Section 215.26 . . .

GREYHOUND LINES, INC. v. DEPARTMENT OF BANKING AND FINANCE,, 443 So. 2d 162 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1983)

. . . that it is entitled to a refund of seven-twelfths of 100 percent of the 1980 road taxes pursuant to § 215.26 . . . The language of the refund provision, § 215.26, does not indicate that entitlement to a refund is dependent . . . Indeed, § 215.26(1) specifically indicates that if an appropriation has been credited with the sum which . . .

ALACHUA COUNTY, v. A. LEWIS, 440 So. 2d 435 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1983)

. . . . § 215.26, Fla.Stat. (1981). . . .

CAUSEWAY LUMBER COMPANY, INC. v. LEWIS,, 410 So. 2d 511 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1981)

. . . I also do not agree that Section 212.17(3) is the exclusive remedy and that Section 215.26 is not applicable . . . The sales tax statute nowhere states that § 215.26 cannot be applied in an appropriate situation, and . . . Proper Construction of Florida Statute § 215.26 — Liberal Construction in Favor of the Taxpayer. . . . Florida law construing § 215.26. . . . Section 215.26 — a remedial statute to be construed liberally to effectuate the remedy. . . . In 1978, Causeway applied for a refund of the excess taxes relying on Section 215.26, Florida Statutes . . . application, but the Comptroller determined that there was no overpayment of taxes as contemplated by Section 215.26 . . . Section 215.26, Florida Statutes, is not applicable in this case. . . . Causeway was neither overpaid, paid where no tax is due, or erroneously paid, as contemplated by Section 215.26 . . .

ESTATE W. T. GRANT COMPANY v. A. LEWIS,, 370 So. 2d 764 (Fla. 1979)

. . . denying Grant’s request for a sales tax refund and upholding the constitutionality of sections 212.17 and 215.26 . . .

EXXON CORPORATION, v. A. LEWIS,, 371 So. 2d 129 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1978)

. . . Florida Statute § 211.06(2) applies and bars the claim (as contended by DOR) or whether Florida Statute § 215.26 . . . We hold that § 215.26 controls and allows three years after accrual of the right to a refund within which . . . year following payment, and we reject that strained construction in favor of the clear language of § 215.26 . . . Fla.Stat. § 215.26: “(1) The comptroller of the state may refund to the person who paid same, or his . . .

STEWART ARMS APARTMENTS, LTD. a v. STATE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, 362 So. 2d 1003 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1978)

. . . often as any future advance is made, the tax shall be paid on all sums then advanced. . . ” Section 215.26 . . .

ESTATE W. T. GRANT COMPANY v. A. LEWIS, O D L. A. D. A., 358 So. 2d 76 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1978)

. . . March 29, 1977, requested the refund of $520,060.00 in sales taxes pursuant to the provisions of F.S. 215.26 . . . Petitioner made its claim pursuant to Section 215.26, Florida Statutes (1975). . . . Those agencies had concluded that neither Section 215.26 nor Section 212.-17(3) authorized a refund of . . . the respondent Agencies’ final agency action denying petitioner’s request for a refund under Section 215.26 . . . Petitioner bases its claim for the requested refund also upon the provisions of Section 215.26 F.S. . . .

M. GRUNWALD, v. DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, 343 So. 2d 973 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1977)

. . . available for a period of three years from the date of payment Florida Statutes, Sections 199.252 and 215.26 . . .

STATE FOUR- FIFTY TWO- THIRTY CORP. a v. O. DICKINSON, Jr., 322 So. 2d 525 (Fla. 1975)

. . . Amount — $73,633] Thereafter Relator filed its application for refund pursuant to Sections 199.252 and 215.26 . . . “At the suggestion of the petitioners we have examined also Sec. 215.26, Florida Statutes 1943, and F.S.A . . . Neither Section 215.26 nor Section 199.252, Florida Statutes, pursuant to which relator seeks refund, . . .

HARDY, HARDY ASSOCIATES, INC. a v. STATE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,, 308 So. 2d 187 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1975)

. . . no formal application for refund was filed within the three years as required by Florida Statutes § 215.26 . . . recovery of the amount of the taxes because of a failure to comply with the requirements of Sections 215.26 . . .

STATE DEVLIN v. O. DICKINSON, Jr., 305 So. 2d 848 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1974)

. . . . § 215.26. . . . It is our opinion, and we so hold, that although F.S. § 215.26 requires applications for refund to be . . .

REYNOLDS FASTENERS, INC. a v. E. W. WRIGHT, L. E., 197 So. 2d 295 (Fla. 1967)

. . . . § 215.26, F. . . . Hygrade Food Products Corporation, Fla.App.1962, 145 So.2d 535, in referring to F.S. § 215.26, F.S.A. . . . The one-year limitation referred to in F.S. § 215.26, F.S.A., has, by the Legislature, later been extended . . . F.S. § 215.26, F.S.A. — Covers tax monies and other funds coming into the hands of the comptroller. . . .

MAHORNER v. LIVINGSTON,, 26 Fla. Supp. 196 (Leon Cty. Cir. Ct. 1966)

. . . judicial processes — that she has failed to exhaust her administrative remedies by seeking a refund under §215.26 . . .

STATE C. P. O. MESS OPEN U. S. NAVAL STATION, KEY WEST, v. E. GREEN,, 174 So. 2d 546 (Fla. 1965)

. . . By timely application in accord with Section 215.26, Florida Statutes, F.S.A., rela-tors sought a refund . . . Section 215.26, Florida Statutes, F.S.A., authorizes recovery under such circumstances. . . . taxes were paid and collected. (3) The relators are entitled to have returned to them under Section 215.26 . . .

STATE SEABOARD AIR LINE RAILROAD COMPANY, a v. E. GREEN,, 173 So. 2d 129 (Fla. 1965)

. . . Green, as Comptroller of the State of Florida, for a refund, pursuant to Section 215.26 Florida Statutes . . .

GULF FERTILIZER COMPANY, a v. R. R. WALDEN,, 163 So. 2d 269 (Fla. 1964)

. . . paid, under protest, the tax levied on the stock and filed requisition for refund pursuant to Section 215.26 . . .

FLORIDA LIVESTOCK BOARD, a v. HYGRADE FOOD PRODUCTS CORPORATION, a, 145 So. 2d 535 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1962)

. . . Section 215.26, F.S. . . . Section 215.26, F.S.A., which is the statuté now under consideration. . . . Section 215.26, F.S.A., that it is intended to provide an administrative procedure by which a person . . . Section 215.26, F.S.A.” . . . Section 215.26, F.S.A., its right to a refund or for a money judgment against the Board is barred. . . .

A. L. MAILMAN J. L. v. E. GREEN,, 111 So. 2d 267 (Fla. 1959)

. . . At the suggestion of the petitioners we have examined also Sec. 215.26, Florida Statutes 1943, and F.S.A . . .

P. PEDERSEN, U. S. A. v. E. GREEN,, 105 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 1958)

. . . Subsequently, the petitioner, under the provision of Sec. 215.26, F.S.A., applied for the return of these . . .

B. BRICKELL, v. CITY OF MIAMI, a B. BRICKELL B. v. CITY OF MIAMI, a, 103 So. 2d 206 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1958)

. . . Under Section 215.26, Fla.Stat., F.S.A., provision is made for refund of taxes collected under specified . . . The action, a mandamus proceedings, was based specifically upon 215.26, supra. . . .

STATE RIVERSIDE BANK, a a M. v. E. GREEN,, 101 So. 2d 805 (Fla. 1958)

. . . Sec. 215.26, Florida Statutes 1955, F.S.A. . . .

STATE PENINSULAR TELEPHONE COMPANY, a v. M. GAY,, 90 So. 2d 132 (Fla. 1956)

. . . appellant • having proceeded to . recover it in timely fashion in accordance with the provisions of Section 215.26 . . .

STATE PALMER- FLORIDA CORPORATION, a v. E. GREEN,, 88 So. 2d 493 (Fla. 1956)

. . . Subsequently, but within one year as provided by Sec. 215.26, Florida Statutes 1953, F.S.A., relator . . . with the argument that mandamus is not the proper remedy to procure refund of taxes paid under Sec. 215.26 . . . Respondent next contends that this proceeding is barred by the limitations contained in Sec. 215.26, . . .

STATE VICTOR CHEMICAL WORKS v. GAY,, 74 So. 2d 560 (Fla. 1954)

. . . Section 215.26, F.S.A. is as follows: “Repayment of funds paid into state treasury through error, etc . . . Section 215.26, F.S.A., is not, strictly speaking, a statute of limitations but is more in the nature . . . Section 215.26, F.S.A., and to order a refund of a tax payment made on February 9, 1948. . . . Section 215.26, F.S.A., such as State ex rel. Tampa Electric Co. v. . . . Section 215.26, F.S.A. The return of the respondent, alleging that F.S. . . . Section 215.26(2), Florida Statutes Annotated, is applicable “against petitioner and available to the . . . Obviously the least that can be said is that the clause in Section 215.26, supra, under consideration . . .

STATE OF FLORIDA, BUTLER S INC. a v. C. M. GAY,, 158 Fla. 500 (Fla. 1947)

. . . year after the right to such refund shall have accrued” for subsequent payments as provided by Sec. 215.26 . . . error; and it appears that the relator’s rights have been barred by the limitations provided by Section 215.26 . . .

STATE OF FLORIDA, LIGGETT DRUG COMPANY, INC. a v. C. M. GAY,, 158 Fla. 595 (Fla. 1947)

. . . totaling $2397.60; that on December 7th, 1946 relator made demand for a refund under the provision of 215.26 . . .

STATE OF FLORIDA, s, a v. C. M. GAY,, 158 Fla. 164 (Fla. 1946)

. . . fixing the fiscal year of the relator for tax purposes and denies that relator has complied with Section 215.26 . . . when and if on proper application and proof he deems it necessary to make such refund.” — and section 215.26 . . . and that he is authorized to repay any taxes wrongfully enacted when relator complies with section 215.26 . . . Since respondent’s answer denies compliance with section 215.26 Florida Statutes 1941 we are not able . . .

WALGREEN DRUG STORES COMPANY, a v. J. M. LEE,, 158 Fla. 260 (Fla. 1946)

. . . Section 215.26, Florida Statutes 1941, effective June 10, 1943, is also pertinent to the issue raised . . . a renewal of the application for refund was necessary, provided it met the requirements of Section 215.26 . . .

STATE OF FLORIDA, a Co- v. J. M. LEE,, 156 Fla. 291 (Fla. 1945)

. . . (Section 215.26, Florida Statutes, 1941, Sup., and F.S.A.) . . .

v., 34 F. 399 (E.D. Pa. 1888)

. . . Quimby & Co., of Bangor, Me., furnished the ship (then at that port) with supplies of the value of $215.26 . . .