Home
Menu
Call attorney Graham Syfert at 904-383-7448
Personal Injury Lawyer
Florida Statute 193.461 | Lawyer Caselaw & Research
F.S. 193.461 Case Law from Google Scholar
Statute is currently reporting as:
Link to State of Florida Official Statute Google Search for Amendments to 193.461

The 2023 Florida Statutes (including Special Session C)

Title XIV
TAXATION AND FINANCE
Chapter 193
ASSESSMENTS
View Entire Chapter
F.S. 193.461
193.461 Agricultural lands; classification and assessment; mandated eradication or quarantine program; natural disasters.
(1) The property appraiser shall, on an annual basis, classify for assessment purposes all lands within the county as either agricultural or nonagricultural.
(2) Any landowner whose land is denied agricultural classification by the property appraiser may appeal to the value adjustment board. The property appraiser shall notify the landowner in writing of the denial of agricultural classification on or before July 1 of the year for which the application was filed. The notification shall advise the landowner of his or her right to appeal to the value adjustment board and of the filing deadline. The property appraiser shall have available at his or her office a list by ownership of all applications received showing the acreage, the full valuation under s. 193.011, the valuation of the land under the provisions of this section, and whether or not the classification requested was granted.
(3)(a) Lands may not be classified as agricultural lands unless a return is filed on or before March 1 of each year. Before classifying such lands as agricultural lands, the property appraiser may require the taxpayer or the taxpayer’s representative to furnish the property appraiser such information as may reasonably be required to establish that such lands were actually used for a bona fide agricultural purpose. Failure to make timely application by March 1 constitutes a waiver for 1 year of the privilege granted in this section for agricultural assessment. However, an applicant who is qualified to receive an agricultural classification who fails to file an application by March 1 must file an application for the classification with the property appraiser on or before the 25th day after the mailing by the property appraiser of the notice required under s. 194.011(1). Upon receipt of sufficient evidence, as determined by the property appraiser, that demonstrates that the applicant was unable to apply for the classification in a timely manner or that otherwise demonstrates extenuating circumstances that warrant the granting of the classification, the property appraiser may grant the classification. If the applicant files an application for the classification and fails to provide sufficient evidence to the property appraiser as required, the applicant may file, pursuant to s. 194.011(3), a petition with the value adjustment board requesting that the classification be granted. The petition may be filed at any time during the taxable year on or before the 25th day following the mailing of the notice by the property appraiser as provided in s. 194.011(1). Notwithstanding s. 194.013, the applicant must pay a nonrefundable fee of $15 upon filing the petition. Upon reviewing the petition, if the person is qualified to receive the classification and demonstrates particular extenuating circumstances judged by the value adjustment board to warrant granting the classification, the value adjustment board may grant the classification for the current year. The owner of land that was classified agricultural in the previous year and whose ownership or use has not changed may reapply on a short form as provided by the department. The lessee of property may make original application or reapply using the short form if the lease, or an affidavit executed by the owner, provides that the lessee is empowered to make application for the agricultural classification on behalf of the owner and a copy of the lease or affidavit accompanies the application. A county may, at the request of the property appraiser and by a majority vote of its governing body, waive the requirement that an annual application or statement be made for classification of property within the county after an initial application is made and the classification granted by the property appraiser. Such waiver may be revoked by a majority vote of the governing body of the county.
(b) Subject to the restrictions specified in this section, only lands that are used primarily for bona fide agricultural purposes shall be classified agricultural. The term “bona fide agricultural purposes” means good faith commercial agricultural use of the land.
1. In determining whether the use of the land for agricultural purposes is bona fide, the following factors may be taken into consideration:
a. The length of time the land has been so used.
b. Whether the use has been continuous.
c. The purchase price paid.
d. Size, as it relates to specific agricultural use, but a minimum acreage may not be required for agricultural assessment.
e. Whether an indicated effort has been made to care sufficiently and adequately for the land in accordance with accepted commercial agricultural practices, including, without limitation, fertilizing, liming, tilling, mowing, reforesting, and other accepted agricultural practices.
f. Whether the land is under lease and, if so, the effective length, terms, and conditions of the lease.
g. Such other factors as may become applicable.
2. Offering property for sale does not constitute a primary use of land and may not be the basis for denying an agricultural classification if the land continues to be used primarily for bona fide agricultural purposes while it is being offered for sale.
(c) The maintenance of a dwelling on part of the lands used for agricultural purposes does not in itself preclude an agricultural classification.
(d) When property receiving an agricultural classification contains a residence under the same ownership, the portion of the property consisting of the residence and curtilage must be assessed separately, pursuant to s. 193.011, to qualify for the assessment limitation set forth in s. 193.155. The remaining property may be classified under the provisions of paragraphs (a) and (b).
(e) Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (a), land that has received an agricultural classification from the value adjustment board or a court of competent jurisdiction pursuant to this section is entitled to receive such classification in any subsequent year until such agricultural use of the land is abandoned or discontinued, the land is diverted to a nonagricultural use, or the land is reclassified as nonagricultural pursuant to subsection (4). The property appraiser must, no later than January 31 of each year, provide notice to the owner of land that was classified agricultural in the previous year informing the owner of the requirements of this paragraph and requiring the owner to certify that neither the ownership nor the use of the land has changed. The department shall, by administrative rule, prescribe the form of the notice to be used by the property appraiser under this paragraph. If a county has waived the requirement that an annual application or statement be made for classification of property pursuant to paragraph (a), the county may, by a majority vote of its governing body, waive the notice and certification requirements of this paragraph and shall provide the property owner with the same notification provided to owners of land granted an agricultural classification by the property appraiser. Such waiver may be revoked by a majority vote of the county’s governing body. This paragraph does not apply to any property if the agricultural classification of that property is the subject of current litigation.
(4) The property appraiser shall reclassify the following lands as nonagricultural:
(a) Land diverted from an agricultural to a nonagricultural use.
(b) Land no longer being utilized for agricultural purposes.
(5) For the purpose of this section, the term “agricultural purposes” includes, but is not limited to, horticulture; floriculture; viticulture; forestry; dairy; livestock; poultry; bee; pisciculture, if the land is used principally for the production of tropical fish; aquaculture as defined in s. 597.0015; algaculture; sod farming; and all forms of farm products as defined in s. 823.14(3) and farm production.
(6)(a) In years in which proper application for agricultural assessment has been made and granted pursuant to this section, the assessment of land shall be based solely on its agricultural use. The property appraiser shall consider the following use factors only:
1. The quantity and size of the property;
2. The condition of the property;
3. The present market value of the property as agricultural land;
4. The income produced by the property;
5. The productivity of land in its present use;
6. The economic merchantability of the agricultural product; and
7. Such other agricultural factors as may from time to time become applicable, which are reflective of the standard present practices of agricultural use and production.
(b) Notwithstanding any provision relating to annual assessment found in s. 192.042, the property appraiser shall rely on 5-year moving average data when utilizing the income methodology approach in an assessment of property used for agricultural purposes.
(c)1. For purposes of the income methodology approach to assessment of property used for agricultural purposes, irrigation systems, including pumps and motors, physically attached to the land shall be considered a part of the average yields per acre and shall have no separately assessable contributory value.
2. Litter containment structures located on producing poultry farms and animal waste nutrient containment structures located on producing dairy farms shall be assessed by the methodology described in subparagraph 1.
3. Structures or improvements used in horticultural production for frost or freeze protection, which are consistent with the interim measures or best management practices adopted by the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services pursuant to s. 570.93 or s. 403.067(7)(c), shall be assessed by the methodology described in subparagraph 1.
4. Screened enclosed structures used in horticultural production for protection from pests and diseases or to comply with state or federal eradication or compliance agreements shall be assessed by the methodology described in subparagraph 1.
(d) In years in which proper application for agricultural assessment has not been made, the land shall be assessed under the provisions of s. 193.011.
(7)(a) Lands classified for assessment purposes as agricultural lands which are taken out of production by a state or federal eradication or quarantine program, including the Citrus Health Response Program, shall continue to be classified as agricultural lands for 5 years after the date of execution of a compliance agreement between the landowner and the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services or a federal agency, as applicable, pursuant to such program or successor programs. Lands under these programs which are converted to fallow or otherwise nonincome-producing uses shall continue to be classified as agricultural lands and shall be assessed at a de minimis value of up to $50 per acre on a single-year assessment methodology while fallow or otherwise used for nonincome-producing purposes. Lands under these programs which are replanted in citrus pursuant to the requirements of the compliance agreement shall continue to be classified as agricultural lands and shall be assessed at a de minimis value of up to $50 per acre, on a single-year assessment methodology, during the 5-year term of agreement. However, lands converted to other income-producing agricultural uses permissible under such programs shall be assessed pursuant to this section. Land under a mandated eradication or quarantine program which is diverted from an agricultural to a nonagricultural use shall be assessed under s. 193.011.
(b) Lands classified for assessment purposes as agricultural lands that participate in a dispersed water storage program pursuant to a contract with the Department of Environmental Protection or a water management district which requires flooding of land shall continue to be classified as agricultural lands for the duration of the inclusion of the lands in such program or successor programs and shall be assessed as nonproductive agricultural lands. Land that participates in a dispersed water storage program that is diverted from an agricultural to a nonagricultural use shall be assessed under s. 193.011.
(c) Lands classified for assessment purposes as agricultural lands which are not being used for agricultural production as a result of a natural disaster for which a state of emergency is declared pursuant to s. 252.36, when such disaster results in the halting of agricultural production, must continue to be classified as agricultural lands for 5 years after termination of the emergency declaration. However, if such lands are diverted from agricultural use to nonagricultural use during or after the 5-year recovery period, such lands must be assessed under s. 193.011. This paragraph applies retroactively to natural disasters that occurred on or after July 1, 2017.
(8) Lands classified for assessment purposes as agricultural lands, which are not being used for agricultural production due to a hurricane that made landfall in this state during calendar year 2017, must continue to be classified as agricultural lands for assessment purposes through December 31, 2022, unless the lands are converted to a nonagricultural use. Lands converted to nonagricultural use are not covered by this subsection and must be assessed as otherwise provided by law.
History.s. 1, ch. 59-226; s. 1, ch. 67-117; ss. 1, 2, ch. 69-55; s. 1, ch. 72-181; s. 4, ch. 74-234; s. 3, ch. 76-133; s. 15, ch. 82-208; ss. 10, 80, ch. 82-226; s. 1, ch. 85-77; s. 3, ch. 86-300; s. 23, ch. 90-217; ss. 132, 142, ch. 91-112; s. 63, ch. 94-353; s. 1468, ch. 95-147; s. 1, ch. 95-404; s. 1, ch. 98-313; s. 1, ch. 99-351; s. 3, ch. 2000-308; s. 4, ch. 2001-279; s. 15, ch. 2002-18; s. 2, ch. 2003-162; s. 43, ch. 2003-254; s. 1, ch. 2006-45; s. 2, ch. 2008-197; ss. 1, 11, ch. 2010-277; HJR 5-A, 2010 Special Session A; s. 2, ch. 2011-206; s. 15, ch. 2012-83; s. 6, ch. 2013-72; s. 1, ch. 2013-95; s. 2, ch. 2014-150; s. 1, ch. 2016-88; s. 1, ch. 2018-84; s. 12, ch. 2018-118.

F.S. 193.461 on Google Scholar

F.S. 193.461 on Casetext

Amendments to 193.461


Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 193.461
Level: Degree
Misdemeanor/Felony: First/Second/Third

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 193.461.



Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases from cite.case.law:

BT LLC, A v. VILLAGE OF WELLINGTON, FLORIDA, A, 240 So. 3d 1 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . on land that is an integral part of a farm operation or is classified as agricultural land under s. 193.461 . . .

MCLENDON v. R. NIKOLITS,, 211 So. 3d 92 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . requested 4.5 acres and instead issued the classification for only 2.25 acres, pursuant to section 193.461 . . . McLendons appealed to the Palm Beach County Value Adjustment Board (“VAB”) in accordance with section 193.461 . . . lands that are used primarily for bona fide agricultural purposes shall be classified agricultural.” § 193.461 . . . Accordingly, section 193.461(5) is not ambiguous. . . . The term “farm product” as listed in section 193.461(5) is unambiguously defined by section 823.14(3) . . . property appraiser lamented, “snakes, ferrets, horned toads or any other exotic ... pets,” section 193.461 . . . See §§ 193.461(5), 823.14(3)(c), Fla. Stat. . . .

F. BENCIVENGA, v. OSCEOLA COUNTY,, 140 So. 3d 1035 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . on land that is an integral part of a farm operation or is classified as agricultural land under s. 193.461 . . .

SPENCER ESTATES OF FLORIDA, LLC, v. HAVILL,, 125 So. 3d 795 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2012)

. . . classification was entitled to continue to receive that classification in subsequent years pursuant to section 193.461 . . . The changes warranting reclassification are outlined in section 193.461(4), Florida Statutes, which provides . . .

ORANGE COUNTY PROPERTY APPRAISER, v. D. SOMMERS P., 84 So. 3d 1277 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2012)

. . . See § 193.461(4)(a), Fla. Stat. (2010). . . .

WILSON, LLC, LLC, v. PALM BEACH COUNTY,, 62 So. 3d 1247 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2011)

. . . limit an activity of a bona fide farm operation on land classified as agricultural land pursuant to s. 193.461 . . .

V. TILTON, W. v. E. GARDNER, Jr., 52 So. 3d 771 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2010)

. . . At trial, Tilton argued that section 193.461(3)(e), not section 193.461(3)(b), controlled the classification . . . pursuant to the factors listed in section 193.461(3)(b). . . . him an agricultural classification using section 193.461(3)(b), instead. . . . Construing section 193.461(3)(e) in pari materia with the other provisions of section 193.461, we conclude . . . , Florida Statutes (2006) are set forth below: 193.461. . . .

RH RESORTS, LTD, v. DONEGAN,, 881 So. 2d 1152 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004)

. . . Section 193.461(3)(b) of the Florida Statutes (2001) sets forth in detail the factors to be considered . . . determination of whether a parcel of property is entitled to receive an agricultural classification: 193.461 . . . Such other factors as may from time to time become applicable. § 193.461(3)(b), Fla. Stat. (2001). . . . Indeed, section 193.461(4)(c) of the Florida Statutes provides there is a presumption, albeit rebuttable . . . Section 193.461 (H)(c) of the Florida Statutes provides, in relevant part: 193.461. . . .

MARKHAM, v. PPI, INC. d b a, 843 So. 2d 922 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2003)

. . . and training of horses constitutes a “bona fide agricultural purpose” within the meaning of section 193.461 . . . Section 193.461 states in pertinent part: (1) The property appraiser shall, on an annual basis, classify . . . To decide this case we must construe the term “livestock” as it is used in section 193.461(5). . . . breeding horses for profit, the landowner qualified for an agricultural classification under section 193.461 . . . ’s conclusion that the phrase “all forms of farm products and farm production” contained in section 193.461 . . .

W. ROBBINS, v. RACETRACK TRAINING CENTER, INC., 833 So. 2d 306 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2003)

. . . Section 193.461, Florida Statutes (1997), provides, in pertinent part: Agricultural lands; classification . . . pisciculture to situations “when the land is used principally for the production of tropical fish.” § 193.461 . . . Although not specifically defined in section 193.461 or related sections, the term “livestock” has been . . .

TURNER, v. M. LUSK, III,, 819 So. 2d 258 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

. . . Under section 193.461(3)(a), Florida Statutes (1997), failure to make a timely application constitutes . . . classification, the property appraiser or the value adjustment board may grant the classification. § 193.461 . . . of late filing application of Agricultural Classification for extenuating circumstances pursuant to 193.461 . . . This case hinges on the meaning of language in section 193.461(3)(a) which provides that an applicant . . . Lusk points to the following language in section 193.461(3)(a): “The owner of land that was classified . . .

SUGARMILL WOODS, INC. v. SCHULTZ,, 823 So. 2d 807 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

. . . Section 193.461(3)(a) provides that the failure to make an application by March 1 “shall constitute a . . . Section 193.461(3)(a) also provides that a county may, “at the request of the property appraiser and . . .

SCHULTZ, v. LOVE PGI PARTNERS, LP,, 731 So. 2d 1270 (Fla. 1999)

. . . valorem tax assessment purposes under article VII, section 4(a) of the Florida Constitution and section 193.461 . . . assessor or reviewing court may consider along with the other specified factors provided in section 193.461 . . . an evaluation of the various factors surrounding the alleged agricultural use as provided in section 193.461 . . . Love PGI Partners, 706 So.2d at 891-92 (quoting § 193.461(3)(b)). . . . . § 193.461(3)(b)7, Fla. Stat. (1993); Love PGI Partners, 706 So.2d at 892. . . .

LOVE PGI PARTNERS, LP, v. SCHULTZ,, 706 So. 2d 887 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998)

. . . Section 193.461 implements that provision of the Constitution. . . . But profit motive may be a factor which can be considered under section 193.461(3) (b) 7. . . . As noted above, section 193.461(3)(b) makes this determination turn primarily on the actual, good faith . . . Zoning may be a consideration under the catchall “other factors” provision in section 193.461(3)(b)7, . . . Hutches, the court held that section 193.461(4)(a) did not apply to deny agricultural classification . . .

ST. PETERSBURG KENNEL CLUB, INC. v. SMITH, W. Ed Ed H. W., 662 So. 2d 1270 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)

. . . parimutuel gambling industry is not land used for agricultural purposes within the meaning of section 193.461 . . . Section 193.461 provides that lands which are used primarily for bona fide agricultural purposes shall . . . According to section 193.461(3)(b), land used for agricultural purposes includes land used for “livestock . . .

M. WILKINSON, v. KIRBY,, 654 So. 2d 194 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)

. . . Lee County Tax Collector appeal final judgments granting an agricultural classification under section 193.461 . . . Considering the six specific factors delineated in section 193.461 (3)(b) 1 — 6, the only factor suggesting . . . price three or more times the agricultural assessment is not being used for agricultural purposes. § 193.461 . . . Under the catch-all “other factors” to be considered in section 193.461(3)(b)7, the Property Appraiser . . . “bona fide agricultural purpose” requires a “good faith commercial agricultural use of the land,” § 193.461 . . . Section 193.461(3)(b), in its entirety, states: 193.461 Agricultural lands; classification and assessment . . .

DAVIS, v. ST. JOE PAPER COMPANY,, 652 So. 2d 907 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)

. . . Section 193.461(3)(b), Florida Statutes, provides that “only lands which are used primarily for bona . . . Zoning regulations must be considered under Section 193.461(4)(a)3., Florida Statutes. . . . ERVIN, J., concurs with opinion. . § 193.461(3)(b)5., Fla.Stat. . § 193.46 l(3)(b)7., Fla.Stat. . . . . requires a showing that the realty was “actually used for a bona fide agricultural purpose,” section 193.461 . . . Thus, it appears that while section 193.461(3)(b) requires that actual, current use be agricultural to . . .

AITKEN, v. MARKHAM,, 595 So. 2d 159 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)

. . . consideration of the physical use of the land, as well as the statutory factors enumerated in section 193.461 . . . regarding the physical use to which the land was put, as well as those factors enumerated in section 193.461 . . . Section 193.461, Florida Statutes (1987), provides in pertinent part: 193.461 Agricultural lands; classification . . . purposes” includes horticulture; floriculture; viticulture; forestry; dairy; livestock; poultry.... § 193.461 . . .

AITKEN v. MARKHAM,, 50 Fla. Supp. 2d 171 (Fla. Cir. Ct. 1991)

. . . this fact, standing alone, would be insufficient to accord an agricultural classification under F.S. 193.461 . . . F.S. 193.461. 7. . . . Although no income was derived from the breeding activity, under F.S. 193.461(3)(b), income is not a . . . year and that horse breeding is a bona fide commercial agricultural use of the property under F.S. 193.461 . . . F.S. 193.461 is commonly known as the “Greenbelt Law”. . . .

ROBBINS v. YUSEM,, 48 Fla. Supp. 2d 156 (Fla. Cir. Ct. 1991)

. . . See, e.g., § 193.461(3)(a) (“The owner of land that was classified agricultural in the previous year . . . or use has not changed may reapply on a short form as provided by the [Department [of Revenue].”); § 193.461 . . . See also § 193.461(4)(a)3, (4)(b), (4)(c). . . . Such rezoning gives rise to the presumptive denial of agricultural classification. § 193.461(4)(a)3; . . . Under such circumstances, section 193.461(4)(a)3 mandates reclassification of the subject property once . . .

ROBBINS, v. M. C. PROPERTY MANAGEMENT, INC., 46 Fla. Supp. 2d 79 (Fla. Cir. Ct. 1991)

. . . claimed its property was being used for “bona fide” agricultural purposes, which, pursuant to section 193.461 . . . Agricultural classification or “exemption” for property tax purposes is governed by section 193.461, . . . agricultural classification is mandated also by the rezoning provision of the Greenbelt statute, § 193.461 . . . Such rezoning gives rise to the presumptive denial of agricultural classification. § 193.461(4)(a)3; . . . Under such circumstances, section 193.461(4)(a)3 mandates reclassification of the subject property as . . .

ROBBINS v. LOVELL,, 45 Fla. Supp. 2d 157 (Fla. Cir. Ct. 1991)

. . . claimed their property was being used for “bona fide” agricultural purposes, which, pursuant to section 193.461 . . .

ROBBINS v. FUTRELL,, 45 Fla. Supp. 2d 118 (Fla. Cir. Ct. 1990)

. . . claimed her property was being used for “bona fide” agricultural purposes, which, pursuant to section 193.461 . . .

BURNS, v. ROBBINS,, 44 Fla. Supp. 2d 199 (Fla. Cir. Ct. 1990)

. . . APPLICATION OF THE LAW TO THE FACTS Section 193.461(3)(a), Florida Statutes (1989), requires each taxpayer . . .

E. GIANOLIO, E. J. a PB No. a d b a a v. MARKHAM, E., 564 So. 2d 1131 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1990)

. . . Section 193.461, Florida Statutes (1989), deals with the agricultural classification and assessment of . . . Such other factors as may from time to time become applicable. § 193.461(3)(b) Fla.Stat. (1989). . . . In addition to the “commercial” factor, section 193.461(3)(b), Florida Statutes (1989), provides that . . . Tuck, the court stated, “[a]s we intimated in Tuck, the factors listed in subsection (b) of section 193.461 . . . the fifth modification to the sales contract); 5.The expressed intent of the “Greenbelt Law” (section 193.461 . . .

ROBBINS v. CAPO,, 42 Fla. Supp. 2d 162 (Fla. Cir. Ct. 1990)

. . . claimed their property was being used for “bona fide” agricultural purposes, which, pursuant to section 193.461 . . . Agricultural classification or “exemption” for property tax purposes is governed by section 193.461, . . . sufficient to mandate reinstatement of the Property Appraiser’s denial of Greenbelt exemption herein. § 193.461 . . . Such rezoning gives rise to the presumptive denial of agricultural classification. § 193.461(4)(a)3; . . . Under such circumstances, section 193.461(4)(a)3 mandates reclassification of the subject property as . . .

W. ROBBINS, v. R. YUSEM, D., 559 So. 2d 1185 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1990)

. . . not be considered a “good faith” use of the property within the meaning of the Greenbelt Law, section 193.461 . . . be considered a “good faith” agricultural use entitled to preferential tax treatment under section 193.461 . . . Agricultural classification or “exemption” for property tax purposes is governed by section 193.461, . . . Section 193.461(3)(b). . . .

CHAMPION REALTY CORPORATION FLORIDA v. BURGESS,, 541 So. 2d 615 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1989)

. . . See § 193.461(4)(c), Fla.Stat. . . .

L. NORIEGA, v. SCHNURMACHER HOLDING, INC. a, 528 So. 2d 28 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1988)

. . . Assessed as agricultural property under s. 193.461. 2. Used exclusively as dwelling units. 3. . . .

IN RE PETITION OF CAROL MANAGEMENT CORPORATION, 27 Fla. Supp. 2d 38 (Dade Cty. Property Appraisal Board 1988)

. . . Florida Statute § 193.461(4)(a)3. . . . Florida Statutes § 193.461(3)(b)7. . . . Zoning, as a general factor and apart from the special circumstances contemplated by § 193.461(4)(a)3 . . . On the other hand, however, where Florida Statutes § 193.461(4)(a)3 did not apply, the rule was more . . . The similarity between the statute declared unconstitutional in Bass and Florida Statutes § 193.461(4 . . .

BYSTROM, v. MOSES,, 23 Fla. Supp. 2d 49 (Fla. Cir. Ct. 1987)

. . . Section 193.461(3)(a), Fla. . . .

ZEMEL, v. M. WILKINSON,, 501 So. 2d 694 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1987)

. . . parcels of their land (consisting of more than 10,-000 acres) classified agricultural under section 193.461 . . . and that the lands were being used for good faith agricultural purposes within the meaning of section 193.461 . . . Applying the principles set forth in section 12D-5.04 of the Florida Administrative Code, section 193.461 . . .

MARKHAM, v. JUNE ROSE, a, 495 So. 2d 865 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1986)

. . . of appellee’s parcel was under cattle lease and qualified for agricultural treatment under section 193.461 . . .

BEKER MARITIME COMPANY v. PERKINS, A., 493 So. 2d 494 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1986)

. . . 1981 had been granted an agricultural exemption from ad valorem taxation in accordance with section 193.461 . . . Consistent with section 193.461(3)(b), Florida Statutes (1983), “[l]and used primarily for bona fide . . .

MOSES L. A. v. B. BYSTROM,, 489 So. 2d 834 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1986)

. . . seeking that relief had been “filed” with the Dade County property appraiser as required by section 193.461 . . . Reversed and remanded with directions. . 193.461 Agricultural lands; classification and assessment.— . . .

RIDGEWOOD PHOSPHATE CORPORATION d b a v. PERKINS,, 487 So. 2d 40 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1986)

. . . As authorized by section 193.461(3)(a), Florida Statutes (1983), Ridgewood filed a timely application . . . Land used primarily for bona fide commercial agricultural purposes must be classified agricultural. § 193.461 . . .

W. R. DANIEL, Jr. v. STONE,, 481 So. 2d 1251 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1986)

. . . Section 193.461(3)(b), Florida Statutes (1983), provides that “only lands which are used primarily for . . .

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, v. NARANJA LAKES CONDOMINIUM, 480 So. 2d 175 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1985)

. . . Assessed as agricultural property under s. 193.461. 2. Used exclusively as dwelling units. 3. . . .

USS AGRI- CHEMICALS, DIVISION OF UNITED STATES STEEL CORPORATION, USS v. D. STEWART, P., 476 So. 2d 327 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1985)

. . . Pursuant to section 193.461(3)(a), appellants filed a request for an agricultural classification of their . . .

B. BYSTROM, v. UNION LAND INVESTMENTS, INC., 477 So. 2d 585 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1985)

. . . The Property Appraiser testified that he believed the statutory factors of section 193.461(3)(b), Florida . . . Although section 193.461(3)(b) permits consideration of “the length of time the land has been so utilized . . . So.2d 588 (Fla.1978), the supreme court stated that “the factors listed in subsection (b) of section 193.461 . . . absence of growing crops and prior use and by failing to consider all the elements set forth in section 193.461 . . . In his opinion the factors set forth in section 193.461(3)(b), Florida Statutes (1979), “don’t have much . . . determine the weight to afford each element, he must consider all seven factors set forth in section 193.461 . . . The Appraiser’s failure to consider all statutory elements enunciated in section 193.461(3)(b) curtailed . . . Pursuant to Section 193.461(3)(a), Florida Statutes (1979), Union timely applied for an agricultural . . . It is clear, however, that Section 193.461(3)(b), which provides that “[i]n determining whether the use . . . The classification was made pursuant to Section 193.461(3)(b), Florida Statutes (1979): "Subject to the . . . However, by amendment in 1972, see Chapter 72.181, Laws of Florida, subsection (3)(b) of Section 193.461 . . .

L. LACKEY, v. LITTLE ENGLAND, INC., 461 So. 2d 281 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1985)

. . . Section 193.461(4)(a)3, Florida Statutes (Supp.1982) requires the property appraiser to “... reclassify . . . This is not fatal, however, because the instant statute can be read in pari materia with Section 193.461 . . . Apparently in order to satisfy due process concerns, the Florida Supreme Court has construed section 193.461 . . .

MARKHAM, v. E. C. FOGG, III, S., 458 So. 2d 1122 (Fla. 1984)

. . . This is an agricultural classification case pertaining to the classification under section 193.461, Florida . . . The trial court found that the ease was primarily controlled by section 193.461(4)(c) because there was . . . that the land had been rezoned to a nonagricultural use at the request of the owner as per section 193.461 . . . It held that section 193.461(4)(c) applied only to completed sales of realty and that the landowners, . . . First, they contend that the district court erred when it rejected the application of section 193.461 . . .

IN RE PETITION OF VIC POTAMKIN CHEVROLET, INC., 8 Fla. Supp. 2d 214 (Dade Cty. Property Appraisal Board 1984)

. . . Section 193.461(3)(a). . . . The Appellate Courts have consistently held that compliance with Florida Statutes Section 193.461(3)( . . . First, all of the references to “classification” which appear in Florida Statutes Section 193.461(2) . . . This construction would place Florida Statutes Section 193.461(2) in line with the parallel language . . . This construction also harmonizes Florida Statutes Section 193.461(2) with Florida Statutes Section 193.461 . . .

IN RE PETITION OF MISSELL INVESTMENT CORP., 9 Fla. Supp. 2d 177 (Dade Cty. Property Appraisal Board 1984)

. . . Florida Statutes Section 193.461(4)(a)3. . . . It is also true that there has been at least some authority that Florida Statutes 193.461(4)(a)3 may . . . Since Florida Statutes 193.461(4)(a)3 is not applicable, we are led to an examination of the relationship . . . Florida Statutes 193.461(6)(a) lists the following factors to be considered by the Property Appraiser . . . Florida Statutes 193.461(6)(a)7. . . .

ST. JOE PAPER COMPANY St. v. JAMES, Jr. W. S., 429 So. 2d 705 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1983)

. . . The lands in question are classified as agricultural under Section 193.461, Florida Statutes, and were . . . employ in arriving at the just valuation of particular types of property consistent with ss. 193.011 and 193.461 . . . employ in arriving at the just valuation of particular types of property consistent with ss. 193.011 and 193.461 . . .

THE GLADES, INC. a v. J. COLDING, 422 So. 2d 349 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1982)

. . . In 1980, pursuant to section 193.461(3)(a), Florida Statutes (1979), the property owners filed a return . . . In his final judgment, the trial judge found, pursuant to section 193.461(3)(b), Florida Statutes (1979 . . . The purchase price of land is one of the factors listed in section 193.461(3)(b) to be used in determining . . .

IN RE PETITION OF BABCOCK DEVELOPMENT CO., 6 Fla. Supp. 2d 209 (Dade Cty. Property Appraisal Adjustment Board 1982)

. . . Florida Statutes Section 193.461(4)(a)(3). . . . Does Florida Statutes Section 193.461(4)(a)(3) apply when property is zoned from a non-agricultural zone . . . Florida Statutes Section 193.461(4)(a)(3) is simply intended to keep a property owner from “having it . . . Thus, the undersigned concludes that for the purpose of Florida Statutes Section 193.461(4)(a)(3), the . . . The fact of the matter is that Florida Statutes Section 193.461 (4)(a)(3), whatever its ultimate fate . . .

ST. JOE PAPER COMPANY, v. R. ADKINSON, J. Ed, 400 So. 2d 983 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1981)

. . . Florida Statutes, Section 193.461(3)(b), requires that the lands be used “primarily” for a bona fide . . . Section 193.461, Florida Statutes (1977), provides that the property appraiser shall, on an annual basis . . . Subsection (4)(b) of Section 193.461, Florida Statutes (1977), provides: The board of county commissioners . . .

E. C. FOGG, III, S. v. BROWARD COUNTY, a, 397 So. 2d 944 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1981)

. . . land in question should be classified as agricultural for ad valorem tax purposes pursuant to Section 193.461 . . . The trial involved the application of Section 193.461(3)(b), (4)(a)(3) and (4)(c). . . . Tuck, 354 So.2d 368 (Fla.1978), the Supreme Court considered the constitutionality of Section 193.461 . . . The Supreme Court considered the case and found Section 193.461(4)(a)4, Florida Statutes (1975), to be . . . We next consider the rezoning statute, Section 193.461(4)(a)3, Florida Statutes (1972 Supp.), which the . . .

J. CZAGAS v. MAXWELL, Sr., 393 So. 2d 645 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1981)

. . . Section 193.461(3)(b), Florida Statutes (1979), provides that: [Ojnly lands which are used primarily . . . 368 So.2d 588 (Fla.1978), the Florida Supreme Court declared that the factors enunciated in section 193.461 . . . Section 193.461(4)(c), provides: Sale of land for a purchase price which is three or more times the agricultural . . . Section 193.461(4)(c) must be read in pari materia with section 193.461(3)(b), which lists the seven . . . reverse and remand to the trial court for reconsideration of all seven criteria enunciated in section 193.461 . . .

W. R. DANIEL, Jr. v. A. LYNN,, 393 So. 2d 52 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1981)

. . . We hold that compliance with section 193.461(8)(a), Florida Statutes (1976 Supp.) . . .

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE v. GOEMBEL v. TOMPKINS LAND COMPANY, INC., 382 So. 2d 783 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1980)

. . . Section 193.461(4)(c), Florida Statutes (Supp.1972) creates a presumption that land sold for more than . . . circumstances” may be drawn from the factors for consideration in the classification process listed in Section 193.461 . . . Sec. 193.461(4)(c), Fla.Stat. . . . that the land is to be continued in bona fide agricultural, this presumption may be rebutted. .Sec. 193.461 . . .

W. BASS, v. GENERAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, a, 374 So. 2d 479 (Fla. 1979)

. . . Lucie County, Florida, declaring Section 193.461(4)(a)4, Florida Statutes (1975), unconstitutional. . . . In 1972, the legislature enacted Chapter 72-181, Section 1, Laws of Florida, which amended Section 193.461 . . . Relying upon Section 193.461(4)(a)4, Florida Statutes, appellant James W. Bass, as St. . . . In 1972, Section 193.461 was substantially modified by Chapter 72-181, Laws of Florida (1972). . . . See Section 193.461(3)(b), Florida Statutes (1975). . . . Because section 193.461(4)(a)4. classifies land based on a factor wholly unrelated to use, I concur in . . .

E. FISHER, v. SCHOOLEY,, 371 So. 2d 496 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1979)

. . . evidence conclusively establishes a “good faith commercial agricultural use of the land” pursuant to § 193.461 . . . should conform to the other six statutory considerations if the presumption established by Section 193.461 . . . in order to overcome the statutory presumption at issue, should be read in pari materia with Section 193.461 . . . the contemplation of subsection (7) of the aforequoted factors listed under subsection (3)(b) of § 193.461 . . . denied March 22, 1979) the supreme court held that “the legislature intended to limit application of [§ 193.461 . . .

HARBOR VENTURES, INC. v. C. HUTCHES, 366 So. 2d 1173 (Fla. 1979)

. . . We are asked to determine whether section 193.461(4)(a)3., Florida Statutes (1973), is unconstitutional . . . Appellants attack section 193.461(4)(a)3., Florida Statutes (1973), alleging that it denies equal protection . . . We must initially determine whether section 193.461(4)(a)3, Florida Statutes (1973), applies where land . . . Section 193.461(4)(a)3., Florida Statutes (1973), provides: The assessor shall reclassify the following . . . We hold that section 193.461(4)(a)3. applies only to those situtations where land zoned agricultural . . . It seems to me that the majority opinion in effect rewrites section 193.461(4)(a)(3), Florida Statutes . . . , 326 So.2d 421 (Fla.1976), the issue was whether the rebuttable presumption established by Section 193.461 . . . use of land as the general test for entitlement to the agricultural assessment, then clearly section 193.461 . . .

L. RODEN, v. K K LAND MANAGEMENT, INC. a, 368 So. 2d 588 (Fla. 1978)

. . . Tuck, 354 So.2d 368 (Fla.1978), we reviewed the constitutionality of Section 193.461(3), Florida Statutes . . . agricultural” classification land must be “actually used for a bona fide agricultural purpose,” Section 193.461 . . . Section 193.461(3)(b). . . . As we intimated in Tuck the factors listed in subsection (b) of Section 193.461(3) are to be considered . . . Section 193.461(3), Florida Statutes. . . . Section 193.461(4)(c). . . . Section 193.461(3)(b). . . .

J. Ed STRAUGHN, v. TUCK P., 354 So. 2d 368 (Fla. 1977)

. . . their land was denied agricultural classification pursuant to an unconstitutional statute, Section 193.461 . . . Section 193.461, Florida Statutes (1975). . . . In 1972, Section 193.461 was substantially modified by Chapter 72-181, Laws of Florida (1972). . . . For the reasons expressed above, we find Section 193.461(3)(b) constitutionally sound. . . . Section 193.461, Florida Statutes (1975). . . .

E. LAUDERDALE J. T. v. A. H. BLAKE, M. SEPLER, v. A. H. BLAKE,, 351 So. 2d 742 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1977)

. . . classification of their property for ad valorem tax purposes, their requests were denied pursuant to Section 193.461 . . . their property, even though they had requested and obtained, subsequent to the enactment of Section 193.461 . . .

MARKHAM, L. v. NATIONWIDE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY,, 349 So. 2d 220 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1977)

. . . agricultural purposes and should have been classified for assessment as agricultural property under Section, 193.461 . . . Nationwide was not using the land for bona fide agricultural purposes within the meaning of Section 193.461 . . . Even without the statutory presumption of Section 193.461(4)(c), the facts of this case justify the Property . . . Section 193.461(4)(a)(b), Florida Statutes (1973). . . . Section 193.461(4)(c), Florida Statutes (1973), provides: Sale of land for a purchase price which is . . .

J. Ed STRAUGHN, L. E. v. K K LAND MANAGEMENT, INC. a, 347 So. 2d 724 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1977)

. . . previously assessed agricultural assessment, thus bringing into play the following provisions of Section 193.461 . . . such agricultural use and the extent thereof, giving due regard to the criteria set forth in Section 193.461 . . . Section 193.461, Florida Statutes (1973) as amended in 1972. . Note 2, at p. 131. . See Straughn v. . . .

R. R. WALDEN, v. A. L. TUTEN, 347 So. 2d 129 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1977)

. . . Accordingly, in reliance on Section 193.461(4)(c), Florida Statutes (1973), the appellant Property Appraiser . . . , “bona fide agricultural purposes” as used therein is defined by a preceding subsection of Section 193.461 . . . Inc., in which our Supreme Court determined that the afore-quoted seven criteria outlined in Section 193.461 . . . But the aforequoted subsection (3)(b) of Section 193.461 was added to the statute by amendment in 1972 . . . agricultural value is not intended to be put to ‘good faith commercial agricultural use’ per Section 193.461 . . .

R. G. CASSADY, v. S. McKINNEY,, 343 So. 2d 955 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1977)

. . . the assessment of certain agricultural lands by the tax assessor for failure to comply with Section 193.461 . . . McNULTY, J., concurs specially. .At the time of the assessment in question (1971-1972) Florida Statute § 193.461 . . .

FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF HOLLYWOOD, v. MARKHAM,, 342 So. 2d 1016 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1977)

. . . classification because it is not being used for bona fide agricultural purposes as defined in Section 193.461 . . . When we read Section 193.461(3)(b), Florida Statutes (1976) we find that agricultural use of the land . . .

SEPLER v. BLAKE,, 46 Fla. Supp. 199 (Dade Cty. Cir. Ct. 1977)

. . . defendants denied agricultural classification upon the subject property pursuant to Florida Statute 193.461 . . . (4) (a), which provides in pertinent part as follows — “193.461 Agricultural lands; classification and . . .

L. DOYLE, v. O D. ASKEW,, 341 So. 2d 845 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1977)

. . . The issue is whether Section 193.461(3)(a), Florida Statutes (1973), which required applications for . . .

A. H. BLAKE, v. R. M. S. HOLDING CORP. a, 341 So. 2d 795 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1977)

. . . Section 193.461(3)(a) Florida Statutes (1973). . . . See sections 193.461(2), 194.011(3), 194.032, and 194.042 Florida Statutes (1973). . . . Section 193.461(2) Florida Statutes (1973). . . . It is so ordered. . § 193.461 Fla.Stat. (1973), by subsection (1), directed the assessor, "ún * án 'árinual . . .

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, J. Ed v. A. BOYER G., 341 So. 2d 274 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1977)

. . . The property owners had secured the benefit of the “green belt law” [see: Section 193.461, Florida Statutes . . . (1974)] and, pursuant to the provisions of Section 193.461(3)(b), Florida Statutes (1974), they were . . . part as follows: ***** * “ * * * In order for land to be considered for agricultural zoning under § 193.461 . . . recognize the continuation of the agricultural classification because of the provisions of Section 193.461 . . . Florida Statutes 1975: ‘ “ * * * In order for land to be considered for agricultural zoning under s. 193.461 . . .

ST. JOE PAPER COMPANY, a St. a v. CONRAD,, 333 So. 2d 527 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1976)

. . . of Revenue and do not reflect the true value of the lands used for agricultural timberlands under § 193.461 . . .

J. Ed STRAUGHN, v. K K LAND MANAGEMENT, INC. a, 326 So. 2d 421 (Fla. 1976)

. . . the Tenth Judicial Circuit, in and for Polk County, which entered a final judgment declaring Section 193.461 . . . Section 193.461(4) (c), Florida Statutes, reads as follows: “Sale of land for a purchase price which . . . “Purchase price paid” is set forth by Section 193.461 (3) (b), Florida Statutes, as one of seven criteria . . . We are not persuaded that Section 193.461(4) (c), Florida Statutes,'constitutes an unconstitutional effort . . . In Rainey, this Court went on to uphold as a valid exercise of the State’s police power Section 193.461 . . .

R. R. WALDEN, v. FLETCHER AVENUE DEVELOPMENT CORP., 313 So. 2d 65 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1975)

. . . Appellant denied appellee’s application for agricultrual classification on the authority of § 193.461 . . . of appellee’s evidence of special circumstances offered to rebut the statutory presumption under § 193.461 . . . faith commerical use of appellee’s lands and hence were insufficient to meet the requirements of § 193.461 . . .

COUNTY OF VOLUSIA, a v. UNION CAMP CORPORATION, a, 302 So. 2d 160 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1974)

. . . purposes ‘exclusively’ so used under old Section 193.201 and ‘primarily’ so used under new Section 193.461 . . .

R. G. CASSADY, v. S. McKINNEY,, 296 So. 2d 94 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1974)

. . . excessive and in violation of the preferential treatment mandated by Florida’s “Green Belt” law, Fla.Stat. 193.461 . . . dealing with non-agricultural realty, we find no significant differences in the statutory language of § 193.461 . . .

WITHERS v. METROPOLITAN DADE COUNTY, a, 290 So. 2d 573 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1974)

. . . “Section 193.461 F.S. (1971), F.S.A., grants preferential treatment to land zoned agricultural for ad . . . Agricultural Zoning Board that their land was entitled to be classified as agricultural under Section 193.461 . . . The circuit judge found as follows: “Section 193.461(3) F.S. (1971), F.S. . . .

ULRICH v. DADE COUNTY, 40 Fla. Supp. 34 (Dade Cty. Cir. Ct. 1974)

. . . . §193.461. . This court has also considered petitioner’s reliance on Hall v. Korth, Fla. . . .

L. CHAPMAN, Jr. v. R. G. CASSADY,, 278 So. 2d 665 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1973)

. . . Section 193.461(3), Florida Statutes, F.S.A.: “. . . . . . We, therefore, reverse the trial court’s order on the basis of Section 193.461(3), supra, and the opinion . . .

CONTAINER CORPORATION OF AMERICA v. W. G. RUTHERFORD,, 293 So. 2d 379 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1973)

. . . operations on January 1, 1971, and were zoned and assessed as agricultural under the provisions of Section 193.461 . . .

WITHERS, v. DADE COUNTY,, 38 Fla. Supp. 94 (Dade Cty. Cir. Ct. 1973)

. . . . §193.461, Florida Statutes 1971, grants preferential treatment to land zoned agricultural for ad valorem . . . the agricultural zoning board that their land was entitled to be classified as agricultural under §193.461 . . . assessor stated no agriculture was found on the property and presented an aerial photograph thereof. §193.461 . . .

MARTIN COUNTY v. ASKEW, DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD LEE COUNTY, v. ASKEW,, 38 Fla. Supp. 50 (Leon Cty. Cir. Ct. 1972)

. . . statutory standards to which assessors are required to adhere (§236.09(a)) which are set forth in §193.461 . . .

HAUSMAN, K. v. A. RUDKIN, Jr., 268 So. 2d 407 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1972)

. . . The complaint alleged that the Board refused to zone as agricultural land under the terms of Sec. 193.461 . . . and, therefore, such “use” disqualifies the land for agricultural zoning under the terms of Section 193.461 . . . the use being made of the land by the tenant is an agricultural use as the same is defined by Section 193.461 . . .

J. SMITH, v. M. M. PARRISH,, 262 So. 2d 237 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1972)

. . . Section 193.461, F.S.A. . . .

SCHOOLEY v. WETSTONE, 258 So. 2d 483 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1972)

. . . . § 193.461 F.S.A.). . . .

E. RAINEY v. NELSON,, 257 So. 2d 538 (Fla. 1972)

. . . . § 193.461, F.S.A. (formerly 193.201) unconstitutional on its face. Fla.Const. art. . . . Board of Pinellas County for agricultural zoning of her property located within the county, under § 193.461 . . . The trial court ultimately entered a final judgment declaring subsection 4(b) of § 193.461 unconstitutional . . . The sole question before this Court is the constitutionality vel non of § 193.461. . . . We therefore hold that § 193.461(4) (b) is a valid exercise of the state’s police power and in no way . . .

E. McKINNEY, v. L. HUNT S., 251 So. 2d 6 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1971)

. . . Section 193.201, as amended by Chapter 67-117, Acts Florida Statutes, as amended and renumbered Section 193.461 . . . purposes, and was entitled to the tax benefits on January 1st, 1969, as provided for under Section 193.461 . . . Florida Statutes Section 193.201, as amended by Chapter 67-117, Acts of 1967, now renumbered as 193.461 . . . nor contentions that the appellees used the land in one or more of the uses stated in the Statutes (193.461 . . . Section 193.461, Florida Statutes, F.S.A., provides that the land must be used primarily for agricultural . . .

J. SMITH, v. A. RING,, 250 So. 2d 913 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1971)

. . . . § 193.461(3), F.S.A. . Walden v. Borden Company (Fla.1970), 235 So.2d 300. .Matheson v. . . .

CONRAD, v. J. M. SAPP, 252 So. 2d 225 (Fla. 1971)

. . . .-11 (1965); 193.201 (1967) [now § 193.461], F.S.A. . . . criterion to be considered in determining use as agricultural (forestry) lands (unless Subsection 4(b) of § 193.461 . . .

L. GREENWOOD, v. B. H. OATES,, 251 So. 2d 665 (Fla. 1971)

. . . [formerly § 193.11 (1967)], and § 193.461 (1969) [formerly § 193.201 (1967)] (popularly referred to as . . . (Emphasis supplied) Sections 193.461(3) and 193.461(5) provide, inter alia, as follows: “(3) * * * All . . .

ST. JOE PAPER COMPANY, a v. F. MICKLER, 241 So. 2d 415 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1970)

. . . County was arbitrary and contrary to the standards set in Section 193.461, Florida Statutes, F.S.A. . . . Section 193.461, Florida Statutes, F.S.A., which is referred to in the above point on appeal, provides . . . purposes ‘exclusively’ so used under old Section 193.201 and ‘primarily’ so used under new Section 193.461 . . .

J. M. SAPP, H. P. Wm. H. v. CONRAD, A. G. O. Jr., 240 So. 2d 884 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1970)

. . . purposes ‘exclusively’ so used under old Section 193.201 and ‘primarily’ so used under new Section 193.461 . . .

R. R. WALDEN, v. BORDEN COMPANY, a, 235 So. 2d 300 (Fla. 1970)

. . . Section 193.201 as amended by Ch. 67-117, Acts of 1967, carried forward as Section 193.461, Fla.Stat.1969 . . . purposes “exclusively” so used under old Section 193.201 and “primarily” so used under new Section 193.461 . . .