Chamberlain v. City of Tampa

• Decision Date: 02 February 1898
• Citation: 40 Fla. 74,23 So. 572
• Court: Florida Supreme Court
• Parties: CHAMBERLAIN v. CITY OF TAMPA et al.

23 So. 572

40 Fla. 74

CHAMBERLAIN v. CITY OF TAMPA et al.

Florida Supreme Court

February 2, 1898

Appeal from circuit court, Hillsborough county; Barron Phillips Judge.

Action by George T. Chamberlain against the city of Tampa and another for injunction. Defendants had judgment, and plaintiff appeals. Reversed.

Syllabus by the Court

SYLLABUS

1. Court of equity have jurisdiction to restrain municipal corporations and their officers from making unauthorized appropriations, or otherwise illegally or wrongfully disposing of the corporate funds, to the injury of property holders and taxpayers in the corporation, and a bill for this purpose is properly brought by an individual taxpayer on behalf of himself and other taxpayers in the municipality.

2. Funds derived from a tax levied by the city of Tampa, 'to meet the accruing interest on any bonds which said city shall have heretofore issued, or shall hereafter issue, in accordance with law,' under authority of section 7, c 4086, Acts 1891, are in their nature special, and, so long as the city has outstanding bonds upon which interest falls due at stated intervals, the city has no power to divert any part of such funds to other purposes than the payment of such interest; and section 10, c. 3951, Acts 1889, gives the city council no power to transfer any part of this special fund to the general fund, or to the waterworks and fire department funds, of said city.

3. The city of Tampa had no power to transfer a surplus in a special fund, levied to meet accruing interest on outstanding bonds to its general fire department and waterworks funds, where it had already levied, collected, and disbursed for these latter purposes the maximum amounts allowed by its charter for that year.

COUNSEL

W. A. Carter, for appellant.

On July 9, 1894, the appellant, in his own right and on behalf of all other taxpayers of the city of Tampa filed his bill in equity against appellees, in the circuit court of Hillsborough county. The bill alleged that appellant was a resident, citizen, and taxpayer of the city of Tampa, owning certain described real estate, besides other real and personal property, of the value of $20,000, subject to taxation by said city, all of which had been duly assessed and taxed by said city for the year 1893; that said city had, by its charter, power to levy taxes as follows only, viz. 10 mills for general municipal purposes, 5 mills for waterworks and fire protection, and in addition a sufficient sum to meet accruing interest on any bonds issued by the city; that the city, in 1889, issued bonds to the amount of $100,000, to run 20 years, all of which had been sold and were then unpaid; that said bonds drew interest at 7 per cent. per annum, payable semiannually; that in 1893 the city levied a tax upon all real and personal property therein, including the property of appellant; that said levy included 10 mills for general municipal purposes, 5 mills for waterworks and fire protection, and a further tax of 3 mills to pay interest on aforesaid bonds; that the city is by its charter prohibited from making appropriations in any one year for a greater amount than it is allowed to collect by taxes, and no officer of the city can draw a warrant on the treasurer except in payment of an appropriation; that the city had exhausted all the moneys collected by taxation for general municipal purposes, and there was then in the treasury only money to the credit of the interest fund, which money was levied and collected for the payment of interest under the power given the city to levy a tax to meet the accruing interest on the bonds above mentioned; that the money in the treasury could legally be used for no purpose other than in paying interest on said bonds; that McFall was the city's treasurer, and by law was the legal custodian of all its moneys; that there was in the city treasury the sum of $2,300 to the credit of the interest fund, raised and collected as aforesaid; that the city, having used all the money allowed by law to be collected for all other purposes save the interest fund, was threatening to use the money to the credit of the interest fund for general municipal purposes, fire protection, and sanitation; that such use was illegal and unauthorized, and would work irreparable injury to appellant and other taxpayers of the city; that the city council had ordered McFall, its treasurer, to pay over to other funds of the city said sum of $2,300 from the interest fund to be drawn against by the council for other purposes than the payment of interest; that the interest fund was a trust fund; that at the time of its levy, and prior thereto, it had been appropriated by the legislature to the payment of interest alone, and that it could be used for no other purpose.

The bill prayed, among other things, that the city and McFall be enjoined and restrained from using the interest fund for any other purpose than the payment of interest on bonds of the city legally issued.

Upon the filing of this bill the court below directed the issuance of a writ of injunction as prayed. On July 15, 1894, the city of Tampa filed its answer, admitting that appellant was a resident property holder and taxpayer of the city, as alleged; that his property was duly assessed and taxed by the city for the year 1893; that the city by its charter had power to levy the taxes specified in the bill; that the city had issued bonds to the amount of $100,000, to run 20 years, which were all then outstanding the unpaid, drawing interest at 7 per cent. per annum, payable semiannually; that the city was prohibited from making appropriations in any one year for a greater amount than it was allowed to collect by taxation; that no officer could draw a warrant on the treasurer except in payment of an appropriation; that the city had exhausted all moneys collected by taxation for 1893 for general municipal purposes; that McFall was the city treasurer, and was by law constituted the legal custodian of all its money. Further answering, it was alleged that the city was chartered by act of the legislature approved June 2, 1887; that, in addition to the powers given to the city council in its charter, the city was vested with all the powers prescribed by the general laws relating to municipal corporations; that by act of the legislature approved May 31, 1889, entitled 'An act to provide for the creation of a board of public works for the city of Tampa, Florida, and prescribing its powers and duties,' it was provided, among other things, 'that whenever the mayor, city council or board of public works find that there is a surplus in any of the special funds created by the tax levy or otherwise, the city council shall then have the power to carry the amount of said surplus into the general fund to be expended for the best interests of the city.' It was further alleged that there was not at that time, and had not been since 189-, a board of public works in said city; that all the powers and duties prescribed by law for the board of public works were vested in and devolved upon the city council. Further, that at a special meeting of the city council held August 25, 1893, a resolution was passed, among other things, as follows: 'Resolved by the city council of the city of Tampa that for the purpose of securing an equal and uniform rate of taxation, and to pay the appropriation for the current expense of the city of Tampa for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 1893, and ending July 1, 1894, that there shall be levied for general municipal...