Baya v. Town of Lake City

• Decision Date: 21 October 1902
• Citation: 44 Fla. 491,33 So. 400
• Parties: BAYA et al. v. TOWN OF LAKE CITY et al.
• Court: Florida Supreme Court

33 So. 400

44 Fla. 491

BAYA et al. v. TOWN OF LAKE CITY et al.

Florida Supreme Court

October 21, 1902

Appeal from circuit court, Columbia county; John F. White, Judge.

Bill by H. P. Baya and Bettie Baya against the town of Lake City and others. Decree for defendants, and plaintiffs appeal. Affirmed in part.

Syllabus by the Court

SYLLABUS

1. Where application is made to dissolve a temporary injunction upon bill, answer, and affidavits filed by the respective parties, the chancellor must be governed by the weight of the evidence; and, unless it clearly appears that the ruling upon such motion is against the weight of the evidence, it will not be reversed on appeal.

2. The chancellor should not, upon a mere motion to dissolve a temporary injunction, based upon the bill, answer, and affidavits submitted by the parties before the time for taking testimony has expired, dismiss the bill, unless the case made by the bill is not a proper one for equitable relief; for, where the bill states a case for equitable relief, it should be retained, to enable the parties to take testimony, and for such final decree as may be proper, even though a temporary injunction therefore granted therein be dissolved upon such hearing.

3. A court of equity has jurisdiction to enjoin a municipal corporation from opening up and using as a public street without the owner's consent, a strip of land belonging to an individual, which has never been condemned, dedicated, or used as a street.

COUNSEL A. J. Henry, for appellants.

B. H Palmer, for appellees.

OPINION

PER CURIAM.

On January 18, 1897, appellants exhibited their bill in equity against appellees in the circuit court of Columbia county alleging that they were the owners and in possession of certain land in the town of Lake City; that the town had never acquired any rights or exercised jurisdiction over any part thereof, but that said town, by the defendants Gillen, mayor, and Miller, marshal, were then attempting to exercise jurisdiction over a certain portion thereof, described as a strip 30 feet wide, 100 yards deep in front of lands theretofore deeded by J. F. Baya to the Florida Agricultural College, claiming said strip to be a street of the town; that said strip for 10 or 12 years theretofore had been vacant and used as an entrance to and exit from said college, and for private use by complainants' predecessor in ownerships, but that said strip had never been dedicated to the public, nor given or sold to the college, nor claimed or used as a street by the town; that on January 14, 1897, complainants inclosed same with a fence, and the same remained inclosed and in complainants' possession at the time the bill was filed; that the town, by its said mayor and marshal, had caused complainant H. P. Baya to be arrested, and the mayor was about to have a charge against him placed upon the docket, and, unless restrained, would proceed to try him upon such charge, for the alleged obstruction of a street of the town by erecting the fence aforesaid, and that the town authorities would also proceed to pull down said fence, and to throw open and use the said strip of land as a street; that the town was a regularly organized municipal corporation; and that, if it were permitted to open up the alleged street and use the same for an indefinite period, such use would ripen into an easement upon the land, and deprive complainants of the use and enjoyment thereof.

The bill contains other allegations not necessary to be stated and prays, among other things, that defendants be enjoined from exercising authority and jurisdiction over said strip of land, and from opening up a street over it, and using same as a thoroughfare, and from arresting and trying complainant H. P. Baya for the alleged offense of obstructing or closing up the said strip of land. Upon application to a court...