Florida Livestock Bd. v. Gladden
| Decision Date | 11 April 1956 |
| Citation | 86 So.2d 812 |
| Parties | FLORIDA LIVESTOCK BOARD, a Body Corporate, Appellant, v. W. G. GLADDEN, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Halley B. Lewis, Arcadia, Richard W. Ervin, Atty. Gen., and Fred M. Burns, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellant.
Wayne E. Ripley, Jacksonville, for appellee.
The Florida Livestock Board appeals from a final judgment awarding a sum of money to Gladden for destruction of a herd of hogs afflicted with viscular exanthema.
The sole question now here is whether the Florida Livestock Board, a state agency, is liable under the facts and applicable statutes for interest on the judgment.
The original judgment, dated October 26, 1953, in the amount of $12,562.46, was affirmed by this court in Florida Livestock Board v. Gladden, Fla.1954, 76 So.2d 291. After the mandate was filed, the Circuit Judge allowed the Board certain credits for previous payments to Gladden and thereupon entered judgment against the Board for $8,406.71, plus interest at the legal rate from October 26, 1953, the date of the original judgment, to February 8, 1955, the date of the judgment from which this appeal is taken. We hold that the Circuit Judge ruled correctly.
The appellant contends that the Florida Livestock Board as an agency of the state is not liable for interest in the absence of a specific statute or a lawfully binding contract providing for interest. The appellee contends that Section 55.03, Florida Statutes, F.S.A., which authorizes six per cent interest on judgments, applies to all judgments and makes no exception in favor of the state.
The conclusion we here announce is grounded upon the particular statute which we are called upon to consider in the matter before us. This statute is Section 585.03, Florida Statutes, F.S.A., and reads in part as follows:
(Emphasis added.)
While we pretermit any discussion of the nature of the Florida Livestock Board as a state agency, it is clear from the quoted statute that the Board is specifically authorized 'to sue and be sued'. When the Legislature authorized suit against the Livestock Board, it placed no restriction whatever on the nature of the suit or the amount of the recovery.
Under Article III, Section 22, of the Florida Constitution, F.S.A., the Legislature is empowered to authorize suits against the state or any of its agencies. When suit is authorized against a state agency without limitation as to interest, the authorizing statute may by reasonable intendment be construed to permit the award of interest against the state agency as a legal incident to the judgment even though...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Family Bank of Hallandale
...Treadway v. Terrell, 117 Fla. 838, 158 So. 512 (1935). The state's immunity from interest can be waived. Flack; Florida Livestock Bd. v. Gladden, 86 So.2d 812 (Fla.1956); Treadway; Brooks v. School Bd., 419 So.2d 659 (Fla. 5th DCA1982); Department of Health & Rehabilitative Services v. Boyd......
-
Broward County v. Finlayson
...1923. Id. at 858, 158 So. at 519 (emphasis in original). The precepts of Treadway were recognized by this Court in Florida Livestock Board v. Gladden, 86 So.2d 812 (Fla.1956), where past judgment interest was allowed. The Court carefully noted: "The conclusion we here announce is grounded u......
-
South Carolina State Highway Dept. v. Schrimpf, 18067
...206 Okl. 223, 242 P.2d 129; State v. La. Plata Rivr & Cherry Creek Ditch Co., et al., 101 Colo. 368, 73 P.2d 997; Fla. Livestock Board v. Gladden, Fla., 86 So.2d 812; Connecticut General Life Ins. Co. v. State, Cal.App., 117 P.2d In this state the right to sue the state for compensation for......
-
Dade County v. American Re-Insurance Co., RE-INSURANCE
...can sue or be sued, the state (or subdivision) is impliedly liable for any interest on a claim against it. See Florida Livestock Board v. Gladden, 86 So.2d 812 (Fla.1956); Treadway v. Terrell, 117 Fla. 838, 158 So. 512 (1935); Brooks v. School Board of Brevard County, 419 So.2d 659 (Fla. 5t......