Lang v. City of Mobile

Decision Date04 April 1940
Docket Number1 Div. 99.
Citation195 So. 248,239 Ala. 331
PartiesLANG v. CITY OF MOBILE ET AL.
CourtAlabama Supreme Court

Appeal from Circuit Court, Mobile County; Claude A. Grayson, Judge.

Bill for declaratory judgment by Dudley W. Lang, Jr., against the City of Mobile, Cecil F. Bates, as Mayor and Commissioner and Charles A. Baumhauer, as Commissioner, of the City of Mobile, as to right of the City of Mobile to refund certain bonds issued for purpose of financing construction of port facilities, its right to contract with the State Department of Docks and Terminals for lease of said port facilities, and the right of the Department of Docks and Terminals to so contract. From an adverse decree, complainant appeals.

Affirmed.

City of Mobile would have authority to lease municipal port facilities to state department of docks and terminals, under contract providing for rentals to be paid from first gross operating revenues of leased facilities. Code 1923, § 2018 as amended by Gen.Acts 1939, p. 38; Gen.Acts 1927, p. 1; Gen.Acts 1935, p. 195; Const.1901, Amend. No. 12.

The proposed contract of lease is in pertinent part as follows:

"Now therefore, in consideration of the business which the Department believes will be developed for the Project and for the state-owned terminals and in consideration of the profit which the Department believes that it can derive through the acquisition and operation of the project, the State of Alabama, acting by and through the Department of State Docks and Terminals for the State of Alabama (herein referred to as the 'Department'), and with the approval of the Governor, hires and takes from the City of Mobile and the City of Mobile rents, leases, and lets unto the aforesaid Department, upon the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth, those certain marine terminal facilities hereinabove described and referred to as the 'Project' and the use and occupation thereof, for a term of thirty years, beginning as of February 1, 1940, and ending on January 31, 1970.
"The rents for said facilities shall be for the following amounts for the following years
"For the year beginning February 1, 1940, and ending on January 31, 1941, $14,900, which sum shall be payable in equal installments of $7450 each, the first installment being payable on July 1, 1940, and the second installment on January 1, 1941. (Here follow remaining rental figures.)
"For the period beginning February 1, 1965, and ending February 1, 1970, the rental for the entire period shall be the sum of twenty-three Thousand Eight Hundred Dollars ($23,800), which shall be payable in one lump sum on July 1, 1965.
"These rentals shall be payable from the first gross operating revenues of the project itself and if for any reason and at any time such first gross operating revenues are insufficient to make such payments, and to the extent of such insufficiency, they shall be payable from the gross operating revenues derived from the operation of the stateowned terminals at the Port and City of Mobile, Alabama. Such rentals shall be payable from no other funds than those mentioned above.
"The Department agrees to maintain said Project during the life of this lease as a unit or part of the entire marine terminal system owned and operated by the State.
"The Department agrees to maintain said Project in as good a condition as when the same was acquired by it, the usual wear and tear excepted.
"The City shall cause the Project to be insured and at all times kept insured in an amount equal to the full insurable value thereof under a policy or policies covering specifically all loss or damage occasioned by fire or lightning and all other risks or hazards usually insured against by private parties carrying on a similar business with similar facilities. All policies of insurance shall be issued by a responsible insurance company or companies and shall be for the benefit of the holder or holders of the Bonds and the coupons thereunto appertaining and/or the City as their respective interests may appear. The proceeds of any insurance received on account of any of the risks or hazards specified above shall be applied solely to the repair, rebuilding or replacement of the portion of the Project destroyed or damaged; provided, however, that any portion of the proceeds of such insurance remaining after the completion of such repair, rebuilding, or replacement and after the payment in full of all cost thereof shall be paid into the Bond Fund and applied as hereinafter provided. The City shall provide, or cause to be provided, insurance for the benefit of all employees injured or killed in the operation of the Project; provided, however, that that basis of any settlement for any such injuries or deaths under the terms and provisions of the Workmen's Compensation Act of Alabama. (Sic) The City shall further cause public liability insurance to be carried for the Project, providing coverage for each accident occurring on or in connection with the Project of not more than $10,000. for one person killed or injured therein, and not more than $25,000. if there be more than one person killed or injured therein. The City shall, however, be under no obligation to pay insurance premiums except from the income and revenues from the project.
"In the event the Department fails or refuses, for any reason, to pay the rentals stipulated herein or to perform the covenants undertaken under the terms of this lease to operate, maintain and insure said project, and a default in payment of such rentals and the performance of such covenants continues for thirty days (30), then in that event the City may perform such covenants and may, at its option, declare the terms and conditions of this lease and operating agreement to be terminated and of no further force and effect and in that event the City may immediately enter upon and take possession of the project and upon doing so agrees to fulfill its obligation to the holder or holders of any bond or bonds then outstanding, issued for the purpose of refunding the bonds with the proceeds of the sale of which, said project was constructed.
"It is mutually understood and agreed that the execution of this lease does not merge the leasehold interest of the City to the site on which said project is constructed with the fee simple title and reversionary interest held by the State of Alabama, but it is mutually understood and agreed that in consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein, the Department, acting for the State, shall have any and all rights of ingress and egress over, to or through the site on which the project is constructed which are necessary and incidental to the enjoyment of the use or occupancy of the project by the Department and the operation and maintenance thereof. It is agreed, however, that upon the expiration or termination of the leasehold interest of the City to the site the project constructed upon said site shall revert to and become the property of the State of Alabama. (Here follows usual clause setting forth the execution of the agreement, the approval of the Governor and the acknowledgments of the officers or agents executing such agreement.)"

The following is the decree of the Circuit Court:

"Decree

"This cause having been heard upon the pleadings and proof as noted by the Solicitors and attested by the Register and this Court having determined that it has jurisdiction over the issues presented thereby;

"It is therefore ordered, adjudged and decreed by the Court that:
"1. The City of Mobile has full power to refund bonds of the class and description as those authorized under the provisions of the Municipal Revenue Bond Act of 1935, either under power implied in that act itself, or under the provisions of the amendment of the Municipal Bond Code contained in an act approved July 17, 1935, known as Act No. 195.
"2. The Constitution and Enabling Acts authorize the State through a duly created agency, to engage in the work of 'promoting, developing, constructing, maintaining and operating all harbors and seaports within the State.' No broader powers could have been concisely conferred. Section 7 of the Acts, as amended, gives the State, through its agency, the power to 'acquire, purchase, install, lease, construct, own, hold, maintain, equip, use, control and operate at seaports, wharves, piers, docks * * * warehouses and other water and railway terminals and other structures.' It is also given the power to 'lease, own, hold, maintain, control at seaports a line of terminal railroad,' etc., 'with the right to lease, install, construct, acquire,' etc., motor power conveyances and appliances.
"The Legislature recognized that the State in the operation of marine terminals would have ever changing conditions, brought about by progress and competition of other ports. They recognized that the terminals had to be operated on a business basis, requiring operating expenses and authorized 'all expenses of carrying out the purpose of this Act shall be paid from the proceeds' and referred to the proceeds of the operation of the $10,000,000 original investment. They rightly knew that all types of equipment, such as railway engines, crane, fertilizer handling equipment, and special facilities for handling various classes of cargo and necessary to 'promote' the use and development of the state-owned terminals, the State, through its appropriate agency, would have the power to acquire such equipment and facilities under a lease agreement with the owner thereof which, in this case, is the City of Mobile.
"It is, therefore, further ordered, adjudged and decreed by the Court that the State of Alabama, acting through its agency, the Department of State Docks & Terminals for the State of Alabama
...

To continue reading

Request your trial
15 cases
  • Ex parte State ex rel. James
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • January 23, 1998
    ...v. Inman, 238 Ala. 555, 191 So. 224 [ (1939) ]; State v. Tuscaloosa County, 233 Ala. 611, 172 So. 892 [ (1937) ]; Lang v. City of Mobile, 239 Ala. 331, 195 So. 248 [ (1940) ]; Scott v. Alabama [State] Bridge Corp., 233 Ala. 12, 169 So. 273. [ (1936) ]."248 Ala. at 25, 26 So.2d at 110 (footn......
  • Donoghue v. Bunkley
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • February 28, 1946
    ... ... Ala. 424] Francis H. Inge and Armbrecht, Inge, Twitty & ... Jackson, all of Mobile, for appellants ... [247 ... Ala. 425] Palmer Pillans, of Mobile (Pillans & Cowley, of ... relief, which involves many questions going to the propriety ... of such relief. See Lang v. City of Mobile, 239 Ala ... 331, 195 So. 248; Klein v. Jefferson Bldg. & Loan ... Ass'n, 239 ... ...
  • Rogers v. City of Mobile
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • July 31, 1964
    ...became the property of the State. See: State ex rel. Radcliff v. City of Mobile, 229 Ala. 93, 155 So. 872, and Lang v. City of Mobile, 239 Ala. 331, 195 So. 248. (Hereinafter referred to as Radcliff and Lang, respectively.) As will appear from the discussion which follows, the statutes unde......
  • Gordon v. Followell
    • United States
    • Oklahoma Supreme Court
    • March 31, 1964
    ...Lide v. Mears, 231 N.C. 111, 56 S.E.2d 404; Joseph v. National Bank of West Virginia, 124 W.Va. 500, 21 S.E.2d 141; Lang v. City of Mobile, 239 Ala. 331, 195 So. 248; Halpert v. Oleksy, Fla., 65 So.2d 762; Jones v. National Bank of Commerce in Memphis, 193 Tenn. 126, 244 S.W.2d In Kahin v. ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT