Dade County v. State

116 So. 72, 95 Fla. 465, 1928 Fla. LEXIS 1236
CourtSupreme Court of Florida
DecidedMarch 14, 1928
StatusPublished
Cited by29 cases

This text of 116 So. 72 (Dade County v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Dade County v. State, 116 So. 72, 95 Fla. 465, 1928 Fla. LEXIS 1236 (Fla. 1928).

Opinions

Whitfield, J.

In proceedings brought by the county under the statute to validate bonds proposed to be issued by Dade County pursuant to Chapter 13088, Acts of 1927, an answer by the State Attorney challenged the validity of the statute upon grounds that it violates Section 27, Article III, Section 7, Article XVI, of the State Constitution as well as upon other grounds not necessary to be stated. The court held the Act to be unconstitutional and denied validation of the bonds. The county appealed.

The Constitution contains the following:

“The Legislature shall provide for the election.by the people or appointment by the Governor of all State and county officers not otherwise provided for by this Constitution, and fix by law their duties and compensation.” See. 27, Art. Ill, Const.

‘ ‘ The Legislature shall not create any office, the term of which shall be longer than four years. ’ ’ Sec. 7, Art. XVI, Const.

The pertinent provisions of Chapter 13088, are as follows :

*468 "Section 1. It.is hereby declared that an emergency exists which requires the immediate and adequate protection and improvement of the Ocean Front in Dade County, Florida, within the corporate limits of the City of Miami Beach; and the protection and improvement of the said Ocean Front of Dade County in said city is hereby declared to be a county purpose, and also to be a city purpose of the said City of Miami Beach, in said county and State.

‘ ‘ Section 2. Immediately upon this Act' becoming a law there shall be and is hereby created a Commission, to be known as the Dade County Ocean Front Protective Commission, and which commission shall be composed of five members, two of whom hereby named as representing Dade County shall be John C. Knight and J. E. Lummus, citiizens of Miami, in said county, and two of whom hereby named as representing the City of Miami Beach, shall be T, J. Pancoast and W. A. Kohlhepp, both of whom reside in the said City of Miami Beach, and the fifth member of said commission, who shall be chairman thereof, shall be chosen and appointed by the majority vote of the. said four members herein named; provided, that should either or both of the members of the said commission herein named in behalf of the County of Dade, decline to act, die, resign or remove from'said County of Dade, then the Board, of County Commissioners of said county shall appoint and designate some suitable person or persons to take the place of such member or members, and likewise, should either or both of the members of the said Commission herein named on behalf of the said City of Miami Beach, decline to act, die, resign or remove from said County of Dade, then the City Council of said City of Miami Beach shall appoint and designate some suitable person or persons to take the- place of such member or members. The members of said Commission, except the Chairman, shall serve without pay; and *469 shall continue to hold their respective offices until the work contemplated by this bill shall have been completed; provided, the members herein named in behalf of the County of Dade and their-successors as such,' if any, shall be subject to removal by the Beard of County Commissioners of said County for malfeasance or misfeas'ance in office, and their successors shall be appointed as above indicated, and likewise the members herein named in behalf of the City of Miami Beach, and their successors as such, if any, shall be subject to removal by the said City Council of Miami Beach fer malfeasance or misfeasance in office, and their successors shall be appointed as above indicated. ' The Chairman of the said Commission shall be allowed such salary and perform such duties as said Commission shall fix and prescribe and shall retain his position as such and serve as a member of the said Commission until the said work contemplated by this Act shall have been completed; provided, he may be removed from office as such Chairman, and as a member of said Commission, by the unanimous vote of the other four members thereof, for any malfeasance or misfeasance in office which, in the judgment of said other four members, shall constitute just cause for such removal, and his successor as such member and as Chairman of said Commission, shall be chosen by a majority vote of the other four members of said Commission; provided, in all cases, if a majority of the said four members of said Commission named herein, or their successors, shall be unable to agree on said Chairman, he shall be named and designated by the Judges of the Circuit Court of the Eleventh Judicial Circuit of said State.

“The four members of said Commission hereby appointed shall be allowed, from time to time, their expenses necessarily incurred in carrying out and performing the duties imposed upon them by this Act.

*470 “It shall be the duty of said Commission immediately to make or cause to be made a survey of the Ocean Front of Dade County, lying within the territorial limits of Miami Beach, North of Norris Cut, with reference to the proper means and methods of protecting and improving the same as hereinafter more specifically provided for; and the- said Commission shall have power and authority to employ competent engineers and other assistants for such purpose and incur such reasonable expenses connected therewith, as may, from time to time, be assented to or approved by the said Board of County Commissioners and the said City Council.

“Section 11. That immediately upon the selection of the four members of said Commission, as above mentioned, and the selection by them, or otherwise, of the fifth member thereof, the several members of the said Commission shall qualify themselves by filing with the Clerk of the Circuit Court in and for said County, their written oath that they will well and faithfully perform the duties imposed upon them under this Act and by the execution of a good and sufficient bond conditioned upon the faithful performance of their duties as members of said Commission, which- said bond shall be in an amount fixed by the joint action of the Board of County Commissioners and the said City Council, and which shall be likewise approved by the joint action of said two bodies, and shall be payable, jointly, to the County of Dade and the City of Miami Beach, and when so approved, shall likewise be filed with the Clerk of the Circuit Court- of said County; and it is further provided that the said Board of County Commissioners and the said City Council shall have the authority from time to time, by joint action, to require bond in additional amounts, and to relieve the said Commissioners from amounts of the bonds already furnished, as said two bodies *471 shall, from time to time, determine proper; provided, in case of disagreement between said board and said City Council with reference to any of the matters set out in this section of this Act, the matters disagreed upon shall be referred to the Circuit .Judges of the Eleventh Judicial Circuit of Florida, and their decision thereon shall be binding on all parties.

■ “Section 12. As soon as practical after said Commissioners shall have been appointed and qualified,- they shall meet and organize the said.

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

Related

Ago
Florida Attorney General Reports, 1974
Crandon v. Hazlett
26 So. 2d 638 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1946)
In re: Advisory Opinion to the Governor
15 So. 2d 765 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1943)
Glendinning v. Curry
14 So. 2d 794 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1943)
State Ex Rel. Ellars v. Board of County Commissioners
3 So. 2d 360 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1941)
de la Vega v. Sancho Bonet
56 P.R. 722 (Supreme Court of Puerto Rico, 1940)
Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion
Texas Attorney General Reports, 1939
Hazen v. National Rifle Ass'n of America
101 F.2d 432 (D.C. Circuit, 1938)
State ex rel. Wisconsin Development Authority v. Dammann
280 N.W. 698 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1938)
State Ex Rel. Swanson v. Strickland
166 So. 313 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1936)
State Ex Rel., Pickett v. Truman
64 S.W.2d 105 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1933)
State Ex Rel. Bauder v. Markle
142 So. 822 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1932)
Thursby v. Stewart
137 So. 7 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1931)
Atlanta Title & Trust Co. v. Tidwell
160 S.E. 620 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1931)
Blitch v. Buchanan
131 So. 151 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1930)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
116 So. 72, 95 Fla. 465, 1928 Fla. LEXIS 1236, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dade-county-v-state-fla-1928.