Court Opinion

ID: 9517366
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 00:14:57.867066+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:43:59.738873
License: Public Domain

McCown, J.,
dissenting.
I agree with the concurring opinion of Boslaugh, J., except that I believe exemption should have been allowed here for the infirmary.
The one physical change in the property and its. use after our original decision involved the complete remodeling of the second floor and its subsequent exclusive use as an infirmary. There should be little question *605under our previous cases that a specific identified portion of a building, which differs in use from the remainder of the building, may be either taxed or excluded separately. See Christian Retirement Homes, Inc. v. Board of Equalization, ante p. 11, 180 N. W. 2d 136. Constitutional exemptions for property as applied to portions of a single building ought not to depend upon whether there is a separate and distinct title to the portion of the building sought to be taxed or exempted. In the day of condominiums, such distinctions are a matter of form and not of substance.