State ex rel. Shevin v. Kerwin, No. 42947
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Florida |
| Writing for the Court | ADKINS; CARLTON |
| Citation | 279 So.2d 836 |
| Parties | STATE of Florida ex rel. Robert L. SHEVIN, Attorney General, Appellant, v. Robert KERWIN, City of Safety Harbor Building Official, Appellee. |
| Decision Date | 27 June 1973 |
| Docket Number | No. 42947 |
Page 836
v.
Robert KERWIN, City of Safety Harbor Building Official, Appellee.
Page 837
Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and Jerry E. Oxner, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellant.
William P. O'Malley, Clearwater, for appellee.
ADKINS, Justice.
This cause is before us upon motion of appellee to dismiss the appeal, on the ground that appellant, as Attorney General of the State of Florida, is not empowered to prosecute an appeal where he was not a party to the action in the trial court. The motion must be, and is, denied.
The Attorney General was granted leave to intervene in the cause by the trial court solely for purposes of appeal after the trial judge had declared the last sentence of Fla.Stat. § 553.38(3), F.S.A., to be unconstitutional. Appellee contends that this allowance is contrary to this Court's pronouncement in Dickinson v. Segal, 219 So.2d 435 (Fla.1969), but we cannot agree. In Dickinson v. Segal, Supra, this Court held that the Comptroller of the State of Florida did not have the right to appeal the decision of the trial judge declaring a state statute to be unconstitutional where the Comptroller had not been a party to the cause in the trial court. It was found that the Comptroller was not bound by the finding of the trial court and was not aggrieved by the decision.
Such findings cannot be applied to the Attorney General where a statute has been found unconstitutional. The Attorney General is the chief legal officer of the State (Fla.Const., art. IV, § 4(c), F.S.A.), and is charged to
'(A)ppear in and attend to in behalf of the state, all suits or prosecutions, civil or criminal, or in equity, in which the state may be a party, or in anywise interested, in the supreme court and district courts of appeal of this state.' Fla.Stat. § 16.01, F.S.A.
It cannot be doubted that the constitutional integrity of the laws of Florida is a matter in which the State has
Page 838
great interest, or that the State is a proper, but not necessary, party to any determination of the constitutionality of any state statute. Since many constitutional challenges are raised in a trial court which can be simply disposed of as obviously meritless, it would be futile for the Attorney General to defend each statute against all constitutional challenges at the trial level. However, where the trial court finds a statute to...To continue reading
Request your trial
-
T.W., In re, No. 74143
...to be unconstitutional, it is proper that the Attorney General appear on appeal to defend the statute. State ex rel. Shevin v. Kerwin, 279 So.2d 836, 837-38 The seminal case in United States abortion law is Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113, 93 S.Ct. 705, 35 L.Ed.2d 147 (1973). There, the Court rul......
-
State of Fla. ex rel. Shevin v. Exxon Corp., No. 74--3309
...original institution of actions in a trial court, State ex rel. Ervin v. Collins, supra, (appeal); State ex rel. Shevin v. Kerwin, 279 So.2d 836 (Fla.1973) (appeal), and State ex rel. Shevin v. Yarborough, supra, (intervention) present examples of the Attorney General's involvement of the s......
-
Litvak v. Scylla Properties, LLC, No. 1D05-2163.
...Constr. Co., 285 So.2d 598, 599 (Fla. 1973) (allowing intervention post judgment for purposes of appeal); State ex rel. Shevin v. Kerwin, 279 So.2d 836, 837 (Fla. 1973) (same); Wags Transp. Sys., Inc. v. City of Miami Beach, 88 So.2d 751, 752 (Fla. 1956) (holding that nonparties may interve......
-
Bondi v. Tucker, No. 1D11–5935.
...for the constitutionality of a statute “where the trial court finds a statute to be unconstitutional.” State ex rel. Shevin v. Kerwin, 279 So.2d 836, 837–38 (Fla.1973) (“The Attorney General was granted leave to intervene in the cause by the trial court solely for purposes of appeal after t......
-
T.W., In re, No. 74143
...to be unconstitutional, it is proper that the Attorney General appear on appeal to defend the statute. State ex rel. Shevin v. Kerwin, 279 So.2d 836, 837-38 The seminal case in United States abortion law is Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113, 93 S.Ct. 705, 35 L.Ed.2d 147 (1973). There, the Court rul......
-
State of Fla. ex rel. Shevin v. Exxon Corp., No. 74--3309
...original institution of actions in a trial court, State ex rel. Ervin v. Collins, supra, (appeal); State ex rel. Shevin v. Kerwin, 279 So.2d 836 (Fla.1973) (appeal), and State ex rel. Shevin v. Yarborough, supra, (intervention) present examples of the Attorney General's involvement of the s......
-
Litvak v. Scylla Properties, LLC, No. 1D05-2163.
...Constr. Co., 285 So.2d 598, 599 (Fla. 1973) (allowing intervention post judgment for purposes of appeal); State ex rel. Shevin v. Kerwin, 279 So.2d 836, 837 (Fla. 1973) (same); Wags Transp. Sys., Inc. v. City of Miami Beach, 88 So.2d 751, 752 (Fla. 1956) (holding that nonparties may interve......
-
Bondi v. Tucker, No. 1D11–5935.
...for the constitutionality of a statute “where the trial court finds a statute to be unconstitutional.” State ex rel. Shevin v. Kerwin, 279 So.2d 836, 837–38 (Fla.1973) (“The Attorney General was granted leave to intervene in the cause by the trial court solely for purposes of appeal after t......