City of Daytona Beach v. Stansfield

247 So. 2d 753, 1971 Fla. App. LEXIS 6727
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided April 20, 1971·No. No. M-500·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinions

PER CURIAM.

Appellant seeks reversal of a final decree permanently enjoining it from charging certain water customers outside its city limits water rates which are in excess of 133¾/3% of the rates which are charged to in-city customers for the same services, which said maximum rate differential was contractually agreed to by appellant at the time it acquired the water system previously servicing the subject outside areas. Said final decree also commands appellant to account for and refund all charges in excess of the earlier agreed to maximum differential.

We have carefully examined the voluminous record of testimony and exhibits before the trial court and considered the exhaustive briefs and oral arguments of counsel. Such consideration leads us to conclude that the trial court’s findings of facts and conclusions of law are clearly supported by the evidence and that no reversible error was committed in arriving at the decree and judgment appealed.

Accordingly, the same is affirmed.

SPECTOR and RAWLS, JJ., concur. JOHNSON, C. J., dissents.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

City of Daytona Beach v. Stansfield, 247 So. 2d 753, 1971 Fla. App. LEXIS 6727 (Fla. Ct. App. 1971).

247 So. 2d 753 (City of Daytona Beach v. Stansfield) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Anchor Hocking Corp. v. Jacksonville Electric Authority
419 F. Supp. 992 (M.D. Florida, 1976)
City of Daytona Beach v. Stansfield
258 So. 2d 809 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1972)