Duval County v. Jennings

• Court: United States State Supreme Court of Florida
• Writing for the Court: DAVIS, Justice.
• Citation: 121 Fla. 584,164 So. 356
• Parties: DUVAL COUNTY et al. v. JENNINGS et al.
• Decision Date: 26 November 1935

164 So. 356

121 Fla. 584

DUVAL COUNTY et al.
v.
JENNINGS et al.

Florida Supreme Court

November 26, 1935

En Banc.

Suit by James Jennings and others against Duval County and others. From an interlocutory order or decree granting an injunction, defendants appeal.

Affirmed. [121 Fla. 585] Appeal from Circuit Court, Duval County; Miles W. Lewis, judge.

COUNSEL

Fant & Stanley, of Jacksonville, for appellants.

R. R. Axtell and W. Gregory Smith, both of Jacksonville, for appellees.

OPINION

DAVIS, Justice.

This is an appeal from an interlocutory order granting an injunction. The substance of the complaint was that the board of county commissioners of Duval county, Fla., acting in pursuance of chapter 17534, Sp. Acts 1935, Laws of Florida, had adopted a resolution calling a special election on October 8, 1935, to determine whether the Duval county St. Johns River Bridge [121 Fla. 586] constructed [164 So. 357] under chapter 7462, Sp. Acts 1917, Laws of Florida, should be operated from and after January 1, 1936, as a free bridge, and that to hold such special election in accordance with the resolution thus adopted would be violative of the vested constitutional rights of complainants in the tolls so attempted to be lifted from the affected bridge. On an earlier application, supersedeas of the injunctive order was denied, and the case submitted for determination on its merits without further oral argument.

It is first argued by appellants that appellee Carran, although shown by the bill of complaint to be the holder of a $1,000 Duval county St. Johns River bond in the amount of $1,000, was without any equitable interest to have granted the relief he sought, because the object of his injunction bill was to prevent the calling and holding of an election, which, ex proprio vigore, could not effectually impair complainant's said bond; that the calling and holding of an election, being a political matter, should not be interfered with by a court of equity, but that the election should be allowed to proceed and complainant awarded relief against its adverse result, should that contingency occur to his detriment.

We think the aforementioned objection not well founded. The election here sought to be enjoined was not an ordinary political election relating to the people's right to choose elective officials to govern them, but was special and extraordinary statutory election, the mere holding of which was shown by the bill of complaint to involve the expenditure of alleged trust funds in which complainant asserted and claimed a direct interest, by seeking to have them conserved for his benefit.

The rule in such cases is that in elections not involving the right to public office, where asserted vested contract or [121 Fla. 587] property rights can be more effectually protected by restraining in advance a threatened unlawful election tending toward their encroachment, a court of equity is not bound to speculate upon the likely or probable result of the election if held, but may enjoin the holding of it in a clear case. See 9 R.C.L. 1001, § 22, Compare Joughin v. Parks, 107 Fla. 833, 143 So. 145, 306, 147 So. 273, and State ex rel. Landis v. Tedder, 106 Fla. 140, 143 So. 148. So the complainants' bill in this case was well founded if threatened violation of complainants' equitable rights was otherwise clearly shown.

In 1917 the Legislature enacted chapter 7462, Sp. Acts 1917, whereby the board of county commissioners of Duval county were authorized to issue the series of bonds of which complainant below was one of the holders. Under the statute, the voters of Duval county were given their choice of a free bridge or a toll bridge at the time the bonds were voted, and their choice was for a toll bridge. Under section 6 of the act, it was expressly provided that: 'All tolls and charges collected for the use of...