State ex rel. Walters v. Blackburn

Citation104 So.2d 19
PartiesSTATE ex rel. H. A. WALTERS, Petitioner, v. Ed BLACKBURN, Jr., as Sheriff of Hillsborough County, Florida, Respondent.
Decision Date18 June 1958
CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Florida

J. Danforth Browne and Macfarlane, Ferguson, Allison & Kelly, Tampa, for petitioner.

Richard W. Ervin, Atty. Gen., and David U. Tumin, and Edward S. Jaffry, Asst. Attys. Gen., for respondent.

THOMAS, Justice.

Upon the petition of the relator a writ of habeas corpus issued from this court directed to the respondent, Sheriff of Hillsborough County, Florida, commanding him to produce the relator and to file a return to the writ. In response the sheriff reported that he held the relator by virtue of a warrant of the County Judge's Court of Suwannee County charging him, as 'agent of the owner of the Super Test Filling Station' located at the corner of Houston and Howard Streets in Live Oak, with having caused to be displayed within 15 feet of the right-of-way of Houston Street a sign, placard or other advertisement giving notice of the price of gasoline offered for sale at the station. Although by the petition and return there is brought to us for decision the constitutionality of only that part of Sec. 526.111, Florida Statutes 1957, and F.S.A., relating to the placement of such signs, we will, because of the argument presented by the Attorney General on behalf of the respondent, refer to the preceding provisions of the statute.

In the act the legislature undertook to make it unlawful to display a sign advertising the retail price of gasoline unless the numerals on it indicating fractions are at least half the size of the whole number to which they relate, and the amount of the tax is included. No such sign, even though its composition complies with the law, can be maintained within fifteen feet of the right-of-way of any public street, road or highway.

In the return it is asserted that the police power is by the law properly exercised to prevent fraud and that, as the statute has a rational relation to the safety, health, morals or general welfare of the public, it cannot be considered oppressive, arbitrary or unreasonable, hence a violation of the rights guaranteed relator under Secs. 1 or 12 of the Declaration of Rights of the Constitution of Florida, F.S.A.

Following the course set by the warrant itself we think the first assertion, relative to fraud, need not be considered because the petitioner is charged only with display of a sign within the distance defined and not with maintaining one that was deceiving or misleading. The effect, only, upon safety by the exhibit of such signs, advertising the retail price of gasoline, within the proscribed distance deserves our consideration.

The validity of this regulation of the use of petitioner's property must depend on a proper exercise of the police power by which the enjoyment of property by the individual is interrupted in order to secure safety to the people, else the deprivation is effected without due process of law in violation of Secs. 1 and 12 of the Declaration of Rights of the Constitution of Florida, and the enactment of the law and the enforcement of it constitutes a violation by the State of The Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States.

This court dealt with a similar subject in Town of Miami Springs v. Scoville, Fla., 81 So.2d 188, and held unconstitutional an ordinance limiting the size of signs advertising the price of petroleum products to 12 X 12 inches and restricting their location...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 cases
  • State v. Redman Petroleum Corp.
    • United States
    • Nevada Supreme Court
    • April 5, 1961
    ...& Co. v. City of New Orleans, 238 La. 936, 117 So.2d 64; City of Lake Charles v. Hasha, 238 La. 636, 116 So.2d 277; State ex rel. Walters v. Blackburn, Fla.1958, 104 So.2d 19; State v. Union Oil Company of Maine, 151 Me. 438, 120 A.2d 708; Town of Miami Springs v. Scoville, Fla.1955, 81 So.......
  • State v. Lee
    • United States
    • Florida Supreme Court
    • February 23, 1978
    ...only to railroads created an unreasonable classification which denied railroad companies equal protection of the laws. In State v. Blackburn, 104 So.2d 19 (Fla.1958), a statute forbidding the display of signs advertising the price of gasoline by gas station operators within 15 feet of the r......
  • Bass v. General Development Corp.
    • United States
    • Florida Supreme Court
    • June 28, 1979
    ...there exists a valid and substantial reason for this disparate treatment. See Rollins v. State, 354 So.2d 61 (Fla.1978); State v. Blackburn, 104 So.2d 19 (Fla.1958); Kelly v. Blackburn, 95 So.2d 260 (Fla.1957); and Richey v. Wells, 123 Fla. 284, 166 So. 817 (1936). The requisite valid and s......
  • State v. Saiez
    • United States
    • Florida Supreme Court
    • June 12, 1986
    ...sub nom. Kraft, Inc. v. Florida Department of Citrus, 456 U.S. 1002, 102 S.Ct. 2288, 73 L.Ed.2d 1297 (1982); State ex rel. Walters v. Blackburn, 104 So.2d 19 (Fla.1958); Conner v. Sullivan, 160 So.2d 120, 122 (Fla. 1st DCA 1963), cert. denied, 165 So.2d 176 (Fla.1964). See generally W. LaFa......
  • 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