Varholy v. Sweat
| Decision Date | 08 October 1943 |
| Citation | 153 Fla. 571,15 So.2d 267 |
| Parties | VARHOLY v. SWEAT, Sheriff. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Carlton C. Arnow and Edgar W. Waybright, both of Jacksonville, for plaintiff in error.
J. Tom Watson, Atty. Gen., Lewis W. Petteway, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Harry H. Martin, Co. Sol., and Philip S. May, both of Jacksonville, for defendant in error.
This is an appeal from an order entered by Judge Bayard B. Shields, one of the Judges of the Circuit Court for Duval County, in a habeas corpus proceeding brought in that court to secure the release of the plaintiff in error from detention under a quarantine order entered by a deputy health officer Nathaniel Jones, M.D., on the ground that the petitioner in the court below had a communicable venereal disease.
In her petition for writ of habeas corpus, the petitioner, plaintiff in error here, alleged that she was confined in the county jail of Duval County charged with the offense of being drunk and disorderly; that at the hearing before the Justice of the Peace no evidence was produced showing that there was proper bround to hold her to answer such charge, and that the Justice of the Peace had set her appearance bond in the amount of $500, which amount was excessive. The respondent sheriff filed his return to the writ of habeas corpus showing that he was holding the petitioner by virtue of a commitment and an order of quarantine by the health officer above named. The petition came on to be heard before the Circuit Judge who announced that he would first go into the question of the reasonableness and justness of the quarantine and would later take up the question of the excessiveness of bail on the criminal charge.
The Health Officer Dr. Jones, testified that petitioner had voluntarily submitted to an examination and that the laboratory reports of the State Board of Health, which appear in the transcript showed that the petitioner was infected with a venereal disease, though there was a negative report as to the presence of syphilis. Dr. Jones further stated that the purpose of the quarantine was to remove the infected individual from society so that she might be treated. Dr Jones also testified that in addition to being a State Health Officer, he was with the United States Public Health Service Reserve Corps, and assigned to the State of Florida with the Division of Venereal Control and that he was also Director of the City-County Venereal Disease Clinic. His testimony also shows that the petitioner, while confined in the county jail, was quarantined therein pending transfer to one of the quarantine hospitals operated by the State Board of Health for the isolation and treatment of persons infected with venereal diseases. The Doctor testified that camps had been erected for the isolation and treatment of cases of this kind until they are cured, which frequently happens in a very few weeks; that they were not incarcerated as in a jail but nerely isolated for treatment until they are cured of the disease. He also stated that the State Board of Health did not have any facilities for isolating and treating cases of that kind in the homes of the individuals thus infected. The petitioner testified that she had been steadily employed at the St. John's River Ship Building Company since December, 1942, and her landlady testified that petitioner spent most of her evenings at home studying the books that the Company gave their employees so that they might learn their trade better. There was no testimony of immoral habits on the part of the petitioner. She testified that she was married and that her husband was in the Army and stationed at Camp Shelby, Mississippi, and that he came down to see her whenever he got a furlough. See also testified that she had never been convicted of any crime whatsoever.
After hearing and considering the evidence and exhibits, the Court entered an order to the effect that the evidence showed that the defendant was infected with a venereal disease, to-wit, gonorrhea, and that she had been duly quarantined by the Deputy State Officer of the State Board of Health for the duration of such disease, and that said quarantine was reasonable and proper. He accordingly denied the petition for writ of habeas corpus and ordered that petitioner remain under quarantine for treatment for said disease, under the supervision of the State Board of Health, until petitioner is cured of said disease; and that upon the cure of said petitioner the Court would then consider the application to reduce the bond under the charge of unlawful intoxication and breach of the public peace.
Since 1919 we have had statutes dealing with this subject and we had occasion to refer to them in the case of Lewis v. City of Miami, 127 Fla. 426, 173 So. 150, 151, wherein, in an opinion by Mr. Justice Davis, it was said:
Sections 3951 to 3954, inclusive, C.G.L., with some changes made by the legislature since the original enactment, now appear as sections 384.07 to 384.10 of Florida Statutes 1941. Section 3952, C.G.L., now section 384.08, Florida Statutes 1941 relating to the examination and treatment for venereal diseases of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State ex rel. Sweezer v. Green
...Mo.Sup., 195 S.W.2d 738; People v. Chapman, 301 Mich. 584, 4 N.W.2d 18, 25; People v. Sims, 382 Ill. 472, 47 N.E.2d 703; Varholy v. Sweat, 153 Fla. 571, 15 So.2d 267; McGoldrick v. Downs, 184 Misc. 168, 53 N.Y.S.2d 333; Rowan v. People, 6 Cir., 147 F.2d 138; In re Kemmerer, 309 Mich. 313, 1......
- Acree v. State
-
Graham v. Estuary Properties, Inc.
...60 L.Ed. 348 (1915); Newman v. Carson, 280 So.2d 426 (Fla.1973); State Plant Board v. Smith, 110 So.2d 401 (Fla.1959); Varholy v. Sweat, 153 Fla. 571, 15 So.2d 267 (1943). If the regulation does not promote the health, safety, welfare, or morals of the public, it is not a valid exercise of ......
-
Conner v. Reed Bros., Inc.
...60 L.Ed. 348 (1915); Newman v. Carson, 280 So.2d 426 (Fla.1973); State Plant Board v. Smith, 110 So.2d 401 (Fla.1959); Varholy v. Sweat, 153 Fla. 571, 15 So.2d 267 (1943). Estuary Properties, 399 So.2d at 1380-81. Although the abovequoted language in Estuary Properties seems to contemplate ......