Molwin Inv. Co. v. Turner

• Court: Florida Supreme Court
• Writing for the Court: WHITFIELD, Chief Justice.
• Citation: Molwin Inv. Co. v. Turner, 123 Fla. 505, 167 So. 33 (Fla. 1936)
• Decision Date: 30 March 1936
• Parties: MOLWIN INV. CO. v. TURNER et al.

167 So. 33

123 Fla. 505

MOLWIN INV. CO. v. TURNER et al.

Florida Supreme Court, Division A.

March 30, 1936

Suit by the Molwin Investment Company against Cecila A. Turner and others, as and constituting the Board of County Commissioners of Dade County, Florida. From a decree dismissing the bill plaintiff appeals.

Affirmed. Appeal from Circuit Court, Dade County; Paul D Barns, Judge.

COUNSEL

Stapp Gourley, Ward & Ward, of Miami, for appellant.

Hudson & Cason and G. M. McNutt, all of Miami. for appellees.

OPINION

WHITFIELD Chief Justice.

Molwin Investment Company, a Florida corporation, filed in the circuit court a bill of complaint against the county commissioners of Dade county, Fla., in which it is alleged that the plaintiff corporation is the owner of real estate and a taxpayer in Dade county, Fla. The object of the suit is to enjoin the county commissioners from paying $1,250, or any part thereof, to a firm of persons for services rendered in auditing the accounts of the fee officers of the county and to cancel the contract of employment. The contract is for a fee of $5,000 for one year beginning July 1, 1935. At a hearing on bill and answer, the chancellor dismissed the bill of complaint, and plaintiff appealed.

The contention is that there is no express provision of a statute authorizing such employment and payment, and that the statute establishing the State Auditing Department covers the field of auditing the books, records, and accounts of all county officers, and by implication excludes authority of the county commissioners to employ auditors to audit the records and accounts of county officers who collect fees for their public services in their offices.

An express power duly conferred may include implied authority to use means necessary to make the express power effective, but such implied authority may not warrant the exercise of a substantive power not conferred. The county commissioners are constitutional officers, and the statute confers upon them the express power and duty to receive from county officers due accountings for fees received and to apply for county purposes amounts derived from such fees in excess of the compensation fixed for the officers. Such express power and duties include implied authority to employ appropriate means to determine the correctness of the fees reported under the statute and to make reasonable payments for services rendered in auditing such fee accounts. The implied authority does not involve the exercise of a substantive power. Such reasonable payments are...