IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF TTIB
I5TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND
FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY,
FLORIDA
GENERAL JURISDICTION DIVIS ION

CASENO:
JUPITER GOLF CLUB LLC,, a Delaware for prof,rt
company authorized to do business in Florida,

Plaintiff,
vs.

GARY R. NIKOLITS , as Property Appraiser of )
Palm Beach County, Florida, ANNE M. GANNON,)
as Tax Collector of Palm Beach County, Florida )
and MARSHALL STRANBURG, Executive
Director, Statc of Florida, f)epartment of Revenue,

COMPLAINI

Defendants.

PlaintiffJUPITER GOLF'CLUB LLC., a Delaware for prof,rt company authorized to do business in
Florida ('J[IPITER"), sues GARY R, NIKOLITS as Property Appraiser of Palm Beach Coutty,
Florida (*NIKOLITS'), ANNFI M. GANNON, as Tax Collector of Palm Beach County, Florida

(*GANNON"), and MARSHALL STRANBURG, Executive Director, State of Florida, Department
of Revenue ('STRANBURG"), and alleges:

l.

'l'his is an action brought pursuant to Sections

l94.l7l

and I94.036(2), Florida Stahfres,

to contost the 2014 ad valorem tax assessmenis levied by Def'endant NIKOLITS on the real property

owned by JUPITER as of January

l,21l4

describcd by Property Control Numbers: #30-4341-19-

09-006-0000,30-43-41-19-09-007-0000,30-43-41-19-14-007-0000,

and 30-4341-19-09-007-0010

("SUBJECT PROPERTY").

2,

Plaintiff JUPITER is a Delaware for profit company authorized to do business in

Florida and authorized to bring this action.
\\gaserver\law active\Palm Beach l-,awsrrit Jupiter GolfClub\Lawsuits\L{wsuit 2014 tax yr\Complaint .
Club vs PA TC DOR.doct

201

4

lu

year\Complaint ' Jupilet Oolf

 Case No.

3.

Defendants, NIKOLITS,

as Property Appraiscr of Palm Beach County, Florida,

GANNON, as '[ax Collector of Palm Beach County, Florida and STRANBURG, as Executive
Director, State of Florida, Department
194. I

of Revenue, are parties to this suit pursuant to Section

81, Florida Statutes.

4.

Jurisdiction zurd vcnuc are placed in this Court by Section 194.171, Florida Statutes,

and article V, sections 5 and 20 of the Constitution of the State of Florida.

5.

In accordance with Section 194.171(3), Florida Statutes, JUPITER has tendered to the

Tax Collector not less than the amount of the tax, which it adrnits in good faith to be owing as a
predicate

to filing this action. A copy of the Defendant GANNON's website issued receipt

s

showing payment and no taxes are owed for the 2014 ad valorem tax is atlached as Composite
Exhibit

"A".

6.
7.

This action is brought tinrcly pursuant to Section l94.l7l(2), Florida Satutes.
Defendant, NIKOLII-S assessed the SLIBJECT PROPERTY at a total valuation figure

of $14,339,616 as of January l, 2014
007-0000-$ I,045,33

6;

(30-43-41-19-09-006-0000-$10,471

30-43-41-19-09-007-0010 -$2,339,323;

and

,924:; 30-43'41-19-09-

30'43-41-19- 14-007-0000-

$483,033).

8.
Board

JIJPITER timely trled an administrative appeal petition with thc Value Adjustment

("VAB")

v,/hich did not reduce the assessments on the SUBJECT PROPERTY to Just Value

as required by Florida Statutes.

9.

Defendant NIKOLITS should have determined that the ju-st value

of the SUBJECT

PROPERTY for purposes of the ad valorem tax assessrnent as of January 1,2014 should be no
more than S5,000,000. The 2014 ad valorem tax assessment of the SUBJECT PROPERTY

as

determined by NIKOLITS is illegal and void because the assessrnent exceeds the constitutional and
statutory standards forjust valuation adopted by the State ofFlorida.

10.

Dcfendant NIKOLI I'S did not observe the essential requirements of law in determining

the a.ssessed valuation of the STJBJECT PROPERTY.
lq0trWg[ryCuflUf,\Hm

fu

such, the assessment is in excess

Bcrdr Lawsuit Jupitcr Cotf Club\Lrrvsuils\Lawsuit 2014 tax yr\C'omplaint - 2014 ta.r ycar\Comptaint

ofjust

- Jupitcr

Colf

 Case No.

value and cannot be sustained under applicable Florida Statutes (including Section 194.301)
Department of Revenue Rules, the Florida Constitution and Florida Court decisions. The reasons
include but are not limited to:

a.

Defbndant NIKOI.ITS' assessment

of the

SUBJECT PROPERTY failed to

properly take into consideration the statutory criteria of Section 193,01l, Florida Statutes, which, in
part, provides that in arriving at 'Just valuation", the Property Appraiser is required by Section 4,

Art. VII, of the Florida Constitution, to take into consideration:

i.
ii.

The prcsent value of the SUBJECT PROPERTY as of January 1,2014;

The highest and best use trr which the SUBJECT PROPER'I'Y could be

expected to be put in the immediate future and the present use of the SUBJECT PROPERTY as

of

January 1,2014;

iii.
iv,
v.

ThC IOCAIiON Of thE SUBJECT PROPERTY;

'fhe quantity and size of the SUBIEC'I PROPHRTY;
The cost of the SUBJECT PROPERTY and the present replacement value

of any improvements thereon as of January l, 2014;

vi.

The condition of the SUUJFIC'  PROPERTY, including its

physical

condition, as ofJanuary 1,2014;

vii,

'fhe income from the SUBJECT PROPERTY

viii.

The net proceeds of the sale of the SUBJECT PROPERTY, as received by

as of January

l,

2014; and

the seller, after dedrction of all reasonable fees and costs of the sale under the conditions present as

ofJanuary 1,2014,

b.

Defendant NIKOLITS' assessment did not consider, and

did not reflect

th&t

Plaintiff purchased the SUBJECT PROPERTY in an arm's length transaction for $5,000,000 in
December,20l2.

c.

Defendant NIKOLITS' assessment did not consider, and

did not reflect

the

actualmarket based income and expenses of the SUBJECT PROPERTY.
LHg.*VX"feBUB$lm

Beach Lrlvsuit Jupitcr Oolf Club\Lawsuits\Lawsuit 2014 tax yr\Complaint - 2014 tax Far\Comptaint - JttpiterGolf

-3-

 Case No.

d.

Defendant

NIKOLI S'

assessment

did not consider, and did not reflect

the

application of proper appraisal adjustment.s to alleged comparable sales whose purchase prices were
based on future speculation as to use and profits rather than based on immediate use as required by
Statutes and Florida C,ourts.

c.

Defendant NIKOLITS' assessment

of the SUBJECT

PROPERTY failed to

properly consider the over'supply of competing golf courses in South F-lorida.

f.

Defendant NIKOI"ITS' assessment of the SUBJECT PROPEKIY exceeds just

value and therefore violates article VII, section 4 of the Florida Constitution.

g.

Defendant NIKOLITS's assessmont of the SUBJECT PROPERTY violates the

equal protection clause of the state and federal constitutions because the assessment of the Suhject

property is not equal and uniform compared to the assessments of other properties in the same class

within Palm llcach County.

h.

Defendant NIKOLITS, in violation of the law, arbitrarily assessed the SUBJECT

PROPERTY based on appraisal practices different from the appraisal practices generally apptied by

NIKOLITS to comparable property within the same class and within

11.
entitled

Based in part on

all ol'the

to any presumption of

Regardless, as

to

whether

its

conectness pursuant

burden

is not

above, DEFENDAN-I NIKOLI'I'S's assessment

or not NIKOLITS's

correctness, Plaintiff has met

PaJm Beach County.

to

Section 194.301, Florida Statutes.

assessment

is entitled to a

of proof in support of reducing the

of

presumption

a.ssessment

on

the

SURJECT PROPERTY for2014 to no more than $5,000,000.

WHEREFOR"E, Plaintiff JUPITER requests that this Coufi grant the following relief:

A.
B,

That this Court take jurisdiction of the subject matter and the parties hereto;

-I'hat

this Court declare thc ad valorem tax asscssment of the SUBJECT

PROPERTY determined by the Defendant NIKOLITS, for the 2014 ad valorem tax year, to be nonsustainable undcr applicable t'lorida Statutes and other laws and is thcrefore, null and void;

tttgSriy["fegg1\Prhn

Bcrch Lawsuit Jupilcr GolfClub\Larvsuits\Larvsuit

-4-

201

4 tax yr\Con)plsinl - 20 I 4 ta,\ ycar\C'omploirl - Jupilcr Golf

 Case No.

C.

That this Court establishes thc conect value of the SUBJECT PROPERTY fot

2014 advalorem tax purposes at no more than $5,000,000;

D.

That this Court order Defendant, GANNON, to refund to the Plaintiff JUPITER the

difference between the taxes paid

by JUPITER and the amount due under the assessment

established by this Court;

E.

That this Court assess costs in bringing this action pursuant to Section 194.192

Florida Statutcs.

F.

That this Court grant any such further relief as it deems appropriate.

DArEr)

I7

'ni"

or A uq "rl.*-, 2015.

auy

LAW OFFICES OF GARY APPEL, P.A.
Bay Point Office Tower
4770 Biscayne Blvd., Suite I 100
Miami, FL 33137
305-576-0033

By:

GARY A. APPEL
Florida Bar No. 919306

tmffifXryftr8hy0,r!,J

g.urrl t.awsuir

Jupirer Golf Club\l.swsuits\l.amuir 2014 tax yr\Cornplnint'2014 tar vcar\Complaittt - Jupitcr Goll'

-5-