State v. Carlton

• Decision Date: 09 December 1931
• Citation: 103 Fla. 810,138 So. 612
• Parties: STATE ex rel. GILLESPIE et al. v. CARLTON et al.
• Court: Florida Supreme Court

138 So. 612

103 Fla. 810

STATE ex rel. GILLESPIE et al. v. CARLTON et al.

Florida Supreme Court, Division B.

December 9, 1931

Original proceeding in mandamus by the State, on the relation of J. W Gillespie and others, against Doyle E. Carlton and others, as and constituting the Board of Administration for the distribution of interest and sinking funds in connection with road and bridge bonds, and Ernest Amos, as Secretary of said Board, and W. V. Knott, as ex officio county treasurer of Lake county. On relators' motion for a peremptory writ.

Alternative writ of mandamus quashed, and the proceeding dismissed.

COUNSEL Vocelle & Mitchell, of Vero Beach, and H. A Lasseter, of Orlando, for relators.

Cary D Landis, Atty. Gen., and H. E. Carter, Asst. Atty. Gen., for respondents.

E. J. L'Engle and F. P. Fleming, both of Jacksonville, amici curiae.

OPINION

DAVIS J.

This is a case of original jurisdiction in mandamus, the object of the proceeding being to require the Governor, comptroller, and state treasurer, as and constituting the board of administration of the state of Florida, to convene and prepare, pass, adopt, approve, and sign all necessary resolutions, papers, checks, warrants, and vouchers requisite and necessary to the payment and disbursement of funds in the custody of the state treasurer, as county treasurer ex officio of Lake county, Fla., for the purpose of making payment to relators of certain bonds issued by special road and bridge districts Nos. 8 and 9 and East Lake County special road and bridge district in Lake county, and held by them, or so many of said bonds as the funds on hand available for that purpose will permit.

It appears from the alternative writ that relators are the owners, bearers, and holders of certain described bonds of special road and bridge district No. 8 of Lake county, which were issued under authority of chapter 11598, Acts or 1925, Extraordinary Session; that they hold certain other bonds issued by special road and bridge district No. 9 of Lake county under chapter 11597, Acts of 1925, Extraordinary Session, and that they own and hold certain bonds issued by East Lake County special road and bridge district for road purposes pursuant to an election authorized, held and carried out under the general laws of the state pertaining to the issuance of special road district bonds (Rev. Gen. St. 1920, § 1655). These last-mentioned bonds were afterwards validated by chapter 8722, Sp. Acts of 1921.

All the bonds hereinbefore mentioned appear to have been regularly issued and thereafter validated by appropriate judicial proceedings, and, indeed, no question as to their validity is raised or suggested in this case.

It also appears that all the bonds in question matured and were payable under their terms prior to the bringing of this proceeding, but that default has been made in such payment as to principal, in consequence of which the alternative writ of mandamus has been applied for to coerce the state board of administration and the comptroller and state treasurer to take the necessary steps to disburse such funds as they may have on hand to the credit of the several districts herebefore referred to, whether the funds on hand are sufficient to pay all the matured bonds of the several involved districts of Lake county or not, it appearing that relators hold only a part of the total issue of bonds of the classes here under consideration.

Chapter 14486, Acts of 1929, Ex. Sess., created a state board of administration to be composed of the Governor, comptroller, and state treasurer.

That act required all bond trustees and other officials charged by law with the administration of sinking funds of any county road bonds of any special road and bridge district of this state to pay over and transfer to the state treasurer of the state of Florida, as county treasurer ex officio, any and all securities and moneys which they might have in their possession or control as administrations of such sinking funds, said securities and moneys to be held by the county treasurer ex officio for the use and benefit of the counties and special road and bridge districts concerned.

The act also provided that the proceeds of all taxes collected for interest and sinking funds of county road bonds or of special road and bridge district bonds should be remitted and paid over to the state treasurer as county treasurer ex officio by the officers collecting the same, and that, when paid over, such paid or remitted founds should be held by the treasurer for the benefit of the counties and the special road and bridge districts of the counties, to be used solely for the payment of the principal and interest of the bonds for which the moneys were collected.

The moneys just mentioned, together with other moneys made available by the Legislature under other provisions of law, and paid over to the state treasurer as county treasurer ex officio, are required to be administered for the benefit of the several counties and the several special road and bridge districts therein, as provided by law. These resources in the hands of the state treasurer, as county treasurer ex officio, constitute a fund which is required to be disbursed on orders of the state board of administration, subject to the provisions of chapter 14486, supra.

These duties of the state board of administration, as defined by statute, and principally to apply the county and district funds under their control to the interest and sinking fund accounts of the several counties and district of the state which have outstanding county road or road and bridge district bonds, and to do so in such manner that all the available funds accruing to the credit of the several counties and districts shall be applied primarily to the payment of the principal and interest of the bonds of such counties and special road and bridge districts.

All expenditures of the board of administration, under the terms section 15 of the act, must be made upon warrants drawn by the state comptroller, as secretary of the board, upon the treasurer, as county treasurer ex officio. These warrants, when drawn for the payment of county or special road and bridge district bonds or interest, are required to be made payable to the bank or trust company named as the paying agent, or to the specific place of payment, for the bonds or interest, and must be remitted to such bank or trust company ten days before the maturity or payment date of said bonds or interest.

All warrants so drawn are required, under the terms of the statute, to state on their face that the proceeds of the same are to be applied by the paying agent to the payment of certain specified bonds or interest therein described, giving the name of the county of special road and bridge district by which the bonds were issued, the numbers, amounts, and dates of maturity of the bonds and interest to be paid, together with instructions to said paying agent, bank, or trust company to return to the comptroller the designated bonds or interest coupons when the same are paid.

In this case, the relators ask that the respondent Ernest Amos, as comptroller and as secretary of the state board of administration of the state of Florida, be required by a peremptory writ of mandamus to draw instanter his warrants upon the respondent W. V. Knott, as county treasurer ex officio of Lake county, Fla., for the payment of relators' bonds described in the alternative writ, said warrants, when drawn, to be payable by said county treasurer ex officio out of the sums in his possession, custody, and control as such county treasurer ex officio, appearing credited to the interest and sinking fund accounts or special road and bridge districts Nos. 8 and 9, and East Lake County special road and bridge district, all in Lake county, Fla.

Relators further ask that, if funds on hand are not sufficient to make payment of all relators' bonds described in the alternative writ, then the warrants shall be drawn in payment of so many of said bonds as the funds on hand will permit. It is further prayed that the respondents, as members of the state board of administration, be commanded to take such steps as may be required by law to have such warrants drawn and paid according to the commands of the writ when issued.

To the alternative writ of mandamus the respondents have filed their return. By this return such respondents aver that, because of insufficient funds, they have no warrant or authority to pay the relators' bonds referred to in the alternative writ, and suggest as a defense to its commands that, because of their lack of authority in the premises, they ought not to be required to comply with the mandate sought.

Respondents further set up in their return that the bonds owned and held by the relators are only a part of the bonds of each of the districts that matured on July, 1931, and admit that said bonds were in default when the alternative writ was applied for, not only as to relators, but to all others of the same class; that the bonds owned by all the other bondholders of the same issues of bonds were of equal dignity to those held by relators, and that such other bonds were also unpaid and in default; that the board of administration was without power or authority under the laws of the state of Florida to pay one bondholder in preference to the payment of another bondholder, when the holdings of each were of equal dignity and priority, and the funds in the control of the board available for payment of principal or interest were insufficient to pay all the claims of equal dignity; that, while it was true that prior demand had been made by relators on the respondents for the payment of their particular bonds, as alleged in the alternative writ,...