East Coast Grocery Co. v. Collins
| Decision Date | 29 May 1957 |
| Citation | 96 So.2d 793 |
| Parties | EAST COAST GROCERY COMPANY, a Florida corporation, Appellant, v. LeRoy COLLINS, Governor, Ray E. Green, Comptroller, J. Edwin Larson, Treasurer, Richard W. Ervin, Attorney General, Nathan Mayo, Commissioner of Agriculture, as and composing the Trustees fo the Internal Improvement Fund of the State of Florida, Appellees. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Philip G. Nourse, Fort Pierce, for appellant.
Richard W. Ervin, Atty. Gen., and Fred M. Burns, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellees.
Suit was instituted in the Circuit Court of St. Lucie County by East Coast Grocery Company against the Trustees of the Internal Improvement Fund and was dismissed by the chancellor on the sole ground that there was 'want of proper venue.'
The parties have divergent views about the nature of the proceedings. The appellant insists, 'the opinion of the Attorney's [sic] General's office and the Opinion of the Court below notwithstanding,' to quote from its brief, that the primary purpose was to try the title to certain property located in the county, while the secondary purpose was to enjoin the Trustees from selling an undetermined amount of appellant's realty. On the other hand, the appellees contend that the suit was one for injunction in the guise of one to quiet title.
We turn to the complaint in an effort to determine just what sort of relief was sought. The appellant claimed ownership of Government Lot 6, Section 1, Township 35 South, Range 40 East excepting the south 211.4 feet and the east 525 feet of the north 415 feet. Title was deraigned from the United States Government through various mesne conveyances, including a tax deed, to East Coast Grocery Company. At least three other conveyances from individuals were said to constitute clouds upon appellant's title.
So far as the appellees are concerned, the action which cast a cloud on appellant's title was charged to have been a published notice that they would offer for sale in Tallahassee 'for Objections Only' certain submerged lands within the projected boundaries of the section, township and range we have already given. This advertisement contended the appellant, amounted to a cloud on its title because sale in accordance with the notice would deprive it of its riparian rights.
The appellant averred that it registered with the Trustees an objection which was overruled with the stipulation that a deed the Trustees proposed to issue would be withheld for 30 days to give the objector an opportunity to sue if it desired.
Our analysis of the allegations of the complaint is quite brief but it should suffice as a background for the question we must decide. The appellant prayed for a decree declaring it the owner of the fee simple title of the land and enjoining the Trustees from attempting to sell any interest in the property.
In that part of the motion of the appellees to dismiss, for lack of venue, the attention of the court was drawn to Secs. 253.12, et seq., and especially 253.14, and to Sec. 10 of Article XVI of the Constitution.*
Under the first cited section the title to certain submerged lands is vested in the Trustees of the Internal Improvement Fund and may be sold in accordance with the provisions of Sec. 253.13. In that law it is required that notice be published in a newspaper of the county where the land is situated so that persons having objection may be heard. If no objection is offered the Trustees are authorized to consummate the sale; if objection is made and upon hearing it appears that the sale would interfere with the riparian rights of private owners, the lands must be withdrawn from sale.
We pause now to remark that the notice described in the complaint was the notice contemplated by this section and that according to the complaint the objection of the appellant was...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Ringling Bros.-Barnum & Bailey Combined Shows, Inc. v. State
...S.C.Fla.1954, 72 So.2d 50; Florida Real Estate Commission, etc. v. State of Florida ex rel. Bodner, supra; East Coast Grocery Company v. Collins, S.C.Fla.1957, Fla.1957, 96 So.2d 793; Star Employment Service v. Florida Industrial Com'n., supra; Green v. Bob Lourie Films, Inc., Fla.App.3rd 1......
-
7 Utes Corp. v. District Court In and For Eighth Judicial Dist. (Jackson County), 84SA333
...officials affect real property. See Tri-State Corp. v. State ex rel. Gallion, 272 Ala. 41, 128 So.2d 505 (1961); East Coast Grocery Co. v. Collins, 96 So.2d 793 (Fla.1957).10 Section 13-51-115, 6 C.R.S. (1973) and C.R.C.P. 57(j) require that all parties having any interest that might be aff......
-
Paxson v. Collins
...Commission v. State ex rel. Bodner, Fla.1954, 75 So.2d 290; Larson v. R. K. Cooper, Inc., Fla.1954, 75 So.2d 757; East Coast Grocery Company v. Collins, Fla. 1957, 96 So.2d 793. The motion of the Trustees was granted, the cause was dismissed as to them and the matter is now before us on cer......
-
Morgan v. Canaveral Port Authority
...one when attempted to be put in issue by a collateral attack in a suit between private parties * * *.' See also East Coast Grocery Company v. Collins, Fla.1957, 96 So.2d 793; Conoley v. Naetzker, Fla.App.1962, 137 So.2d The appellants rely upon Romine v. Cramer, Cir.Ct.Monroe Co.1958, 15 Fl......