Airth v. City of Live Oak

• Decision Date: 03 August 1936
• Parties: AIRTH v. CITY OF LIVE OAK et al.
• Court: Florida Supreme Court

169 So. 646

125 Fla. 155

AIRTH v. CITY OF LIVE OAK et al.

Florida Supreme Court

August 3, 1936

En Banc.

Suit by H. F. Airth against the City of Live Oak, Florida, and others. From a decree dismissing the bill of complaint, H. F. Airth appeals.

Affirmed. Appeal from Circuit Court, Suwanee County; R. H. Rowe, Judge.

COUNSEL

A. C. Johnson, of Live Oak, for appellant.

Alfred T. Airth, of Live Oak, for appellees.

OPINION

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a decree dismissing a bill of complaint seeking to enjoin the issue of $37,000 of water revenue certificates by the city of Live Oak, Fla., without an approving vote of the freeholder electors of the city, as required by section 6, article 9 of the Constitution of Florida, as amended in 1930; the purpose of the issue being for improvements to the existing waterworks system of the city of Live Oak.

The water revenue certificates are to be paid solely from the revenue derived from the operation of the said waterworks system, and not otherwise.

The decree dismissing the bill of complaint should be affirmed upon the authority of State ex rel. v. City of Miami, 113 Fla. 280, 52 So. 6; State v. City of Daytona Beach, 118 Fla. 29, 158 So. 300; Boykin v. Town of River Junction (Fla.) 169 So. 492; State ex rel. City of Vero Beach v. MacConnell (Fla.) 169 So. 628; Williams v. Town of Dunnellon (Fla.) 169 So. 631; Bradley v. City of Homestead (Fla.) 169 So. 639; and other like cases filed at this term.

Affirmed.

WHITFIELD, C.J., and TERRELL, BROWN, BUFORD, and DAVIS, JJ., concur.

ELLIS, P.J., concurs upon the principle announced in his specially concurring opinion in the case of State ex rel. City of Vero Beach v. MacConnell (Fla.) 169 So. 628, this day filed.