Pentecost v. City of Fort Myers

• Decision Date: 03 August 1936
• Parties: PENTECOST v. CITY OF FORT MYERS et al.
• Court: Florida Supreme Court

169 So. 645

125 Fla. 152

PENTECOST v. CITY OF FORT MYERS et al.

Florida Supreme Court

August 3, 1936

En Banc.

Suit by Elizabeth Pentecost, a single woman, against the City of Fort Myers, a municipal corporation, and others. From a decree dismissing the bill of complaint, Elizabeth Pentecost appeals.

Affirmed. Appeal from Circuit Court, Lee County; George W. Whitehurst, judge.

COUNSEL

Sheppard & Clements, of Fort Myers, for appellant.

Allen Clements, of Fort Myers, for appellees.

OPINION

PER CURIAM.

This appeal is from a decree dismissing a bill of complaint seeking to enjoin the issue by the city of Fort Myers of $129,000 of 'Waterworks Revenue Certificates' for the purpose of making additions and improvements to an existing waterworks system of the city, without the approval of the freeholder electors of the city, as is required by section 6, article 9 of the Constitution of Florida, as amended in 1930. The revenue certificates are to be paid solely from the revenue derived from the operation of the said waterworks system and not otherwise.

The decree should be affirmed on the authority of State ex rel. v. City of Miami, 113 Fla. 280, 152 So. 6; State v. City of Daytona Beach, 118 Fla. 29, 158 So. 300; Boykin v. Town of River Junction (Fla.) 169 So. 492, filed July 17, 1936; Williams v. Town of Dunnellon (Fla.) 169 So. 631; and Bradley v. City of Homestead (Fla.) 169 So. 639, decided at this term.

Affirmed.

WHITFIELD, C.J., and TERRELL, BROWN, BUFORD, and DAVIS, JJ., concur.

ELLIS, P.J., concurs upon the principle announced in his specially concurring opinion in the case of State ex rel. v. City of Vero Beach v. MacConnell (Fla.) 169 So. 628, this day filed.