Inglis v. Rymer

• Decision Date: 12 January 1934
• Citation: 113 Fla. 732,152 So. 4
• Parties: INGLIS v. RYMER, Chief of Police.
• Court: Florida Supreme Court

152 So. 4

113 Fla. 732

INGLIS v. RYMER, Chief of Police.

Florida Supreme Court, Division A.

January 12, 1934

Error to Circuit Court, Indian River County; Elwyn Thomas, Judge.

Habeas corpus proceeding by S.W. Inglis, opposed by Eli Rymer, Chief of Police of the City of Vero Beach.Judgment adverse to petitioner, and petitioner brings error.

Judgment reversed, and petitioner discharged.

COUNSELC. P. Diamond, of Vero Beach, and Allen Clements, of Ft. Myers, for plaintiff in error.

Charles A. Mitchell, of Vero Beach, for defendant in error.

OPINION

DAVIS Chief Justice.

Pursuant to its asserted charter powers granted by sections 33and37 of chapter 14439, Special Acts of 1929, Laws of Florida, the city of Vero Beach enacted an ordinance reading as follows:

'An Ordinance Prohibiting the Operation of Skating Rinks within the Corporate Limits of the City of Vero Beach, Florida and Prescribing Penalties for the Violation of this Ordinance.

'Whereas the City Council of the City of Vero Beach, Florida, believes that it is detrimental to the peace, happiness, safety and well-being of the citizens of Vero Beach, Florida, for the operation of skating rinks to be allowed within said city; now, therefore, pursuant to the police powers vested in said City,

'Be It Ordained by the Mayor and City Council of the City of Vero Beach, Florida:

'Sec. 1.That it shall be unlawful for any person, firm or corporation to operate or maintain any skating rink within the corporate limits of the City of Vero Beach, Florida, where any price of admission or for the renting of skates is charged, collected or received, or attempted to be charged, collected or received.

'Sec. 2.That any person, firm or corporation violating any of the provisions of this ordinance shall, upon conviction therefor, be punished by a fine not exceeding $500.00 or by imprisonment not exceeding sixty days, or by both such fine and imprisonment in the discretion of the court trying the offender.

'Sec. 3.All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.

'Sec. 4.This ordinance shall be in full force and effect immediately upon its passage and approval by the mayor or upon its becoming a law without such approval.'

Plaintiff in error, having, in a habeas corpus proceeding, attacked the ordinance as being unreasonable, unconstitutional, and invalid, and having been denied relief against its enforcement by means of threatened penalties of fine and imprisonment, brings the question of its validity here by writ of error.

The general laws of this state permit the operation and provide for the imposition of a small occupational license tax on the conduct of skating rinks, and impliedly recognizes that the operation of a skating rink, with or without a charge therefor, is neither per se a nuisance nor otherwise detrimental to the public health, welfare, or morals of the community where operated.

In this case, the attempted prohibition of the operation of skating rinks in Vero Beach is directed, not against all operation of such rinks under any circumstances, but is confined solely to a denouncement of their operation 'where any price or admission or for the renting of skates is charged, collected or...