Lainhart v. Catts
| Decision Date | 29 March 1917 |
| Citation | 75 So. 47,73 Fla. 735 |
| Parties | LAINHART v. CATTS et al. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Palm Beach County; H. Pierre Branning Judge.
Suit for injunction by George W. Lainhart against Sidney J. Catts and others as Governor, Comptroller, State Treasurer Attorney General, and Commissioner of Agriculture, and against them as the Board of Commissioners of the Everglades Drainage District, and against the Board of Commissioners of Everglades Drainage District. From an order sustaining a demurrer to the bill, complainant appeals. Order affirmed.
Syllabus by the Court
The drainage and reclamation of swamp and overflowed lands are a proper exercise of legislative authority.
The Legislature, unless restricted by constitutional limitations may establish districts for draining and reclaiming large bodies of swamp and overflowed lands in the state by direct enactment, or through the medium of administrative officers or commissions.
No duly enacted statute should be declared unconstitutional, unless beyond a reasonable doubt, it is in positive conflict with some designated or identified provision of the Constitution.
A local or special charge or tax imposed on land in a drainage district to pay for proposed local public improvements therein, by which such property derives a special benefit, constitutes a special assessment, distinct from general taxation for state, county, and municipal purposes.
There is no express provision in the state Constitution as to special assessments for local improvements or as to the formation of taxing districts for particular purposes.
When a statute does not violate the federal or state Constitution, the legislative will is supreme, and its policies are not subject to review by the courts, whose province it is not to regulate, but to effectuate the policy of the law as expressed in valid statutes.
The enactment of chapter 6456 of the Laws of Florida of 1913, and the amendment thereto (Laws 1915, c. 6957), establishing the Everglades drainage district, being a valid exercise of the legislative power, the duties imposed upon certain county officers in carrying out the provisions of such enactments, being of the same nature as their general official duties, as well, also, as their compensation provided in such enactments, are a mere incident to and the necessary concomitant with the exercise of the power of the Legislature to establish such district, and to effectuate the purposes for which it is established.
Chapter 6456 of the Laws of Florida of 1913, Laws 1915, c. 6957, establishing the Everglades drainage district, and providing for special assessment of taxes on land embraced therein, is not in conflict with section 20, art. 3, of the Constitution, providing that 'the Legislature shall not pass special or local laws in * * * regulating the jurisdiction and duties of any class of officers, except municipal officers, * * * for assessment and collection of taxes for state and county purposes; * * * regulating the fees of officers of the state and county.'
A general tax or special assessment must be uniform, in that it must be imposed upon the land subject to such charges, so that the burden on every parcel thereof will bear a just proportion to that imposed upon all the other parcels similarly situated and included within the assessment provisions.
It is within the legislative power to establish, directly, a drainage district for legitimate public purposes, to divide the lands in such districts into classes and fix the actual amount of special assessments placed at a level rate, founded upon a unit of area, which rate is equal and uniform as to the lands in each class, but varies as to the classes, unless the language employed in the legislative act makes it manifest that the Legislature did not intend to distribute the burden on the lands in proportion to the benefit it would in the legislative judgment receive from the proposed drainage system. Such enactment does not violate the constitutional requirements for a uniform and equal rate of taxation, and that the Legislature shall prescribe such regulations as shall secure a just valuation of property for taxing purposes.
Sections 2, 3, and 5 of article 9 of the state Constitution apply only to general taxation for state, county, and municipal purposes, and have no application to special assessments for local improvements.
The provision of chapter 6456 of the Laws of Florida of 1913 Laws 1915, c. 6957, that the revenue derived from the special assessment thereby imposed shall be set aside and especially appropriated to carry out the particular purposes stated in the acts, is in effect an appropriation made by law; and such provision is not in conflict with section 4, art. 9, of the Constitution, providing that no money shall be drawn from the treasury except in pursuance of appropriations made by law.
If the title of an act expresses its subject with sufficient certainty to give reasonable notice of the purposes dealt with by such act and of its scope, and reasonably leads to inquiry as to its contents, it is sufficient. The title need not be an index to the act.
If a duly enacted statute contains unconstitutional provisions, and such provisions may be eliminated, and the remainder of the statute may be effective for the purposes designed, and will not cause results not intended by the Legislature, and it does not appear that such statute would not have been enacted without the invalid portions, such invalid portions may be disregarded, and the remainder of the statute enforced if by so doing the legislative intent may be lawfully carried out.
The courts will not pass upon the constitutionality of an act in a proceeding which does not involve the part of the act claimed to be unconstitutional, if the part involved is complete and operative within itself.
The action of the Legislature in apportioning special assessments placed on lands in proportion to the benefits which, in the judgment of the Legislature, such lands will receive from proposed local improvements to be paid for from the proceeds of such assessments, is within the legislative power, and cannot be reviewed in the courts, unless it is so devoid of any reasonable basis as to be essentially arbitrary and an abuse of power.
When, in a duly established drainage district, a special assessment is imposed and the rate thereof apportioned on lands therein, by a direct exercise of the legislative power, requiring no inquiry as to the weight of the evidence nor investigation in the nature of a judicial inquiry, then no notice to, or hearing of, the owners of such lands on the question of whether or not the benefits to such lands will be in accord with the rates imposed thereon is essential, under the constitutional provision that no person shall be deprived of property without due process of law.
Chapter 6456 of the Laws of Florida of 1913, Laws 1915, c. 6957, making a direct legislative special assessment on lands embraced within the Everglades drainage district for local benefits, and the apportionment of rates thereon, is not in conflict with sections 1 and 4 of the Bill of Rights, or of section 29, art. 16, of the Constitution, by reason of the failure of such statutes to provide for giving notice to the owners of such land of such assessment and apportionment, or for an opportunity for them to be heard upon the merits thereof; the assessment and apportionment being made by direct legislative enactment, and not through administrative officers or otherwise.
COUNSEL H. L. Bussey, of West Palm Beach, for appellant.
T. F. West, Atty. Gen., for appellees.
The appellant, complainant below, who is the owner of several tracts of land embraced within the Everglades drainage district, brought this suit in the circuit court for Palm Beach county to enjoin and restrain the board of commissioners of Everglades drainage district, and the tax collector and tax assessor of Palm Beach county, from doing any act or thing in the furtherance of the assessment or collection of an acreage tax imposed upon his lands within said district for the years 1916 and 1917, under the provisions of chapter 6456 of the Laws of Florida, chapter 6957; and for the purpose of declaring said acts unconstitutional.
The suit is brought against the Governor, comptroller, state treasurer, Attorney General, and the commissioner of agriculture as such officials, and against the same officials as the board of commissioners of Everglades drainage district, and against the board of commissioners of Everglades drainage district, a corporation created by said chapter 6456, the tax collector and tax assessor of Palm Beach county.
Complainant in his bill sets out in substance the provisions of chapter 6456, Laws of Florida, said chapter 6456 being entitled:
'An act to establish the Everglades drainage district in this state and define its boundaries, to create a board of commissioners for said district, and to define its powers, authorizing the construction of canals, drains, dikes, reservoirs and other works for the reclamation and benefit of the lands embraced in said district, and to levy assessments of taxes upon the lands embraced in such district, and to provide for the collection of the same and the sale of lands to enforce the collection of such assessments, and to authorize the board of commissioners of said district to borrow money, and to issue bonds and dispose of the same, to procure money to carry out the provisions of this act, to prevent injury to any works constructed under this act, and to provide a penalty for violating such provision.'
By said acts the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Atlantic Coast Line R. Co. v. City of Lakeland
... ... River ... Drainage Dist., 239 U.S. 254, 36 S.Ct. 58, 60 L.Ed. 266; ... Richardson v. Hardee, 85 Fla. 510, 96 So. 290; ... Bannerman v. Catts, 80 Fla. 170, 85 So. 336; ... Anderson v. City of Ocala, 67 Fla. 204, 64 So. 775, ... 52 L. R. A. (N. S.) 287; Walters v. City of Tampa, ... 88 Fla. 177, 101 So. 227; Lainhart v. Catts, 73 Fla ... 735, 75 So. 47 ... The law ... does not permit an arbitrary exercise of power [94 Fla. 367] ... as to the ... ...
-
Board of Drainage Com'rs of Drainage Dist. No. 10 of Bolivar County v. Board of Drainage Com'rs of Washington County
... ... expressly authorized the use as a natural watercourse for ... drainage purposes. Lainhart v. Catts, (Fla.) 75 So ... 47, 52; Dave v. Florida Power Co. (Fla.), 60 So ... 759; Killiam v. Norfolk and N. P. Co. (Va.), 6 L. L ... R ... ...
-
State v. Watkins
...Moodie v. Bryan, 50 Fla. 293, 39 So. 929; State ex rel. Clarkson v. Philips, 70 Fla. 340, 70 So. 367, Ann. Cas. 1918A, 138; Lainhart v. Catts, 73 Fla. 735, 75 So. 47; Ex Wells, 21 Fla. 280. But, if an invalid section or part of a statute is of such import that the other sections or parts wi......
-
State Ex Rel. Harrell v. Cone
...section 4, article 9, or section 30, article 3, Constitution. Amos v. Mosley, 74 Fla. 555, 77 So. 619, L.R.A.1918C, 482; Lainhart v. Catts, 73 Fla. 735, 75 So. 47. appropriations may be made without designating particular roads if the Legislature so enacts; and the expenditure of such appro......