Ford v. ORLANDO UTILITIES COM'N

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding tax-exempt under article VII, section (3)(a), Florida Constitution, a municipally owned electric generating plant, but located in adjacent county and not serving residents of the adjacent county
• interest of municipalities in private power plant was tax exempt
• property located outside Orlando but owned and used by the city for an electrical power plant was used for a valid municipal purpose; under the \clear and unambiguous language\ of article VII, section 3(a), property was exempt from taxation
• interest of municipalities in private power plant was tax exempt

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

7 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Fla. Dept. of Rev. v. City of Gainesville
  Supreme Court of Florida· 2005-12-08· cited 93×
• Lederer v. ORLANDO UTILITIES COM'N
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2008-04-18· cited 6×
• Schultz v. CRYSTAL RIVER THREE PARTICIP.
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1997-02-07· cited 5×
• Dept. of Rev. v. City of Gainesville
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2003-11-26· cited 4×
• CAPFA Capital Corp. 2000A v. Donegan
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2006-04-13· cited 4×
• Treasure Coast Marina, LC, etc. v. the City of Fort Pierce, Florida, etc.
  Supreme Court of Florida· 2017-06-15· cited 4×
• Ago
  Florida Attorney General Reports· 2006-08-03

Cites

1 case in this archive is cited by this case.

• Northcutt v. ORLANDO UTILITIES COM'N
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1993-02-19· cited 5×