City of Daytona Beach v. State
| Citation | 101 Fla. 560,132 So. 490 |
| Parties | CITY OF DAYTONA BEACH v. STATE et al. |
| Decision Date | 10 January 1931 |
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Florida |
Proceedings between the State and Charles H. Willson and the City of Daytona Beach. From the decree, the City appeals.
Affirmed.
Syllabus by the Court.
Chapter 10466, Sp. Acts 1925, abolishing the three prior municipalities and incorporating them into one new municipality, does not authorize refunding bonds covering a prior indebtedness of one of the three abolished municipalities to be issued payable by taxation embracing the entire territory of the new municipality. See amended section 6, article 9, as to the issue of bonds. Appeal from Circuit Court, Volusia County; M G. Rowe, Judge.
Harry A. Horn, of Daytona Beach, for appellant.
Fred H Davis, Atty. Gen., and Chas. H. Willson, in pro. per., for appellees.
Chapter 10466, Sp. Acts 1925, abolished the three then existing municipalities of 'City of Daytona,' 'Town of Daytona Beach' and 'Town of Seabreeze,' and established the 'City of Daytona Beach,' in lieu of the three abolished municipalities. Section 196 of chapter 10466 contains the following:
'The territorial boundaries of the City of Daytona as constituted on the date of passage of this Act, and all property included therein shall be held responsible for, and be bound for all contracts, judgments, and debts now held against said City and no other territory or property included herein and covered, by this Act, shall be responsible for such contract, judgments, and debts, nor shall any tax ever be levied upon any of such other territory or property for the payment of such contracts, judgments and debts.'
The same section contains similar provisions as to the other two municipalities that are incorporated into the 'City of Daytona Beach.'
Section 1, chapter 11855, Acts 1927, provides that:
'The governing authority of any county, city, town, municipal corporation or taxing district of the State may by resolution authorize the issuance of refunding bonds for the purpose of refunding any bond, note, certificate of indebtedness or other obligation for the payment of which the credit of said county, city, town, municipal corporation or taxing district is pledged, at or prior to maturity in the manner provided in this Act.'
The 'governing authority' of the 'City of Daytona Beach' attempted to issue refunding bonds covering an indebtedness of the 'City of Daytona,' for the payment of which refunding bonds 'the full faith and credit of the City of Daytona Beach' are pledged, the bonds to be paid by taxation covering the entire territory of the 'City of Daytona Beach.' In validating proceedings under the statute, the circuit judge decreed that 'said bonds be not validated.' The 'City of Daytona Beach' appealed.
Section 8, article 8, Constitution, provides that: 'When any municipality shall be abolished,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State ex rel. Consol. School Dist. No. 8 of Pemiscot County v. Smith
... ... court are of law, rather than of facts. State ex rel ... City of Jefferson v. Hackmann, 287 Mo. 156; State ex ... rel. Little Prairie Special Road Dist. v ... into other subdivisions are found in many states. City of ... Daytona" Beach v. State, 132 So. 490; Decatur v. Thames ... Bank & Trust Co., 84 F.2d 105 ... \xC2" ... ...
-
State v. Citrus County
... ... of the particular obligations sought therein to be validated ... Spencer v. City of Clarkesville, 129 Ga. 627, 59 ... S.E. 274. The questions of law and fact to be decided in ... City of Tampa, 101 Fla ... 298, 134 So. 211; Ginsberg v. City of Daytona Beach, ... 103 Fla. 168, 137 So. 253; City of Jacksonville v ... Renfroe, [116 Fla. 681] 102 ... ...
-
State v. City of Miami
...921, 112 So. 618; Sanders et al. v. Howell, 73 Fla. 563, 74 So. 802; Ferguson v. McDonald, 66 Fla. 494, 63 So. 915. In City of Daytona Beach v. State, 132 So. 490, this construed chapter 10466, Special Acts of 1925, abolishing the municipalities of the 'City of Daytona,' 'Town of Daytona Be......
-
City of Lake Alfred v. Lawless
... ... McDonald, 66 Fla. 494, 63 So. 915; Sanders v ... Howell, 73 Fla. 563, 74 So. 802; State ex rel ... D'Alemberte et al. v. Sanders et al., 79 Fla. 835, ... 85 So. 333; State ex rel ... 509; ... Pursley v. City of Ft. Myers, 87 Fla. 428, 100 So ... 366; City of Daytona Beach v. State, 100 Fla. ----, ... 132 So. 490; State v. City of Miami (Fla.) 134 So ... 608; ... ...