Flint v. Duval County

170 So. 587, 126 Fla. 18, 1936 Fla. LEXIS 1550
CourtSupreme Court of Florida
DecidedOctober 30, 1936
StatusPublished
Cited by10 cases

This text of 170 So. 587 (Flint v. Duval County) 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
Flint v. Duval County, 170 So. 587, 126 Fla. 18, 1936 Fla. LEXIS 1550 (Fla. 1936).

Opinions

[EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.] *Page 20 [EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.] *Page 21 In a bill of complaint brought by Hollis Flint, a resident taxpayer of Duval County, it is alleged:

"II. That the Legislature of the State of Florida, at its regular session in 1935 enacted Chapter 17246 of the Laws of Florida authorizing and providing for the construction of a bridge across the St. Johns River in the City of Jacksonville to a terminus on the south side of the river in that part of said city formerly known as South Jacksonville (hereinafter called the Main Street Bridge); that said Chapter was approved at a special election which was held on the fifth day of November, A.D. 1935, by a majority of the qualified electors participating in said election; that 8020 votes were in favor of the approval of said Chapter and 1481 votes were against the approval thereof.

"III. That said Chapter 17246 refers to Chapter 17534 of the Laws of Florida enacted in 1935, and Chapter 7462 of the Laws of Florida enacted in 1917, both of which are essential to the proper construction of Chapter 17246.

"IV. That the Legislature of the State of Florida, at its regular session in 1917, enacted Chapter 7462 of the Laws of Florida authorizing Duval County to construct a bridge across the St. Johns River (hereinafter called the Broad Street Bridge), providing for an election to determine whether said bridge should be a free bridge or a toll bridge and prescribing how tolls and charges should be fixed in the event a majority of the qualified electors in said county should vote for a toll bridge; that an election was held *Page 22 under the provisions of said Act, bonds were issued by said county for the construction of said bridge in the sum of $950,000.00, said bonds bearing interest at the rate of five per cent. per annum, payable semi-annually, dated January 1, 1918, and due January 1, 1948, and it was determined at said election that said bridge should be a toll bridge; that the Legislature of the State of Florida at its regular session in 1921 authorized the issuance of six per cent. bonds by said county in the sum of $25,000.00, the proceeds to be used for the payment of part of the cost of said bridge; that said bridge was constructed and the entire cost thereof was paid from the proceeds derived from the sale of said bonds and said bridge was opened for traffic on July 4, 1921, and is now and since then has been continuously operated by Duval County as a toll bridge.

"V. That from July 4, 1921, to July 21, 1936, the total receipts collected as tolls and charges for the use of the Broad Street Bridge amounts to $3,543,542.14; that the total expenditures for said period for the operation, maintenance and repair of said bridge amount to $949,606.49; that the sum of $2,587,435.65 of said tolls and charges has been turned over to the trustees for said bonds and the County Commissioners retain for the operation, maintenance and repair of said bridge the sum of $16,500.00.

"VI. That from the tolls collected for the use of said bridge, all of the said second issue of bonds and all of the said first issue, except $71,000.00, had prior to August 1, 1936, been paid and cancelled. That from said tolls, the trustees for said bonds in pursuance of Chapter 16400 of the Laws of Florida, assigned to the State Board of Administration 318,000 bonds of Duval County, Florida, other than said bridge bonds to be used by said Board of Administration as a sinking fund for certain road bonds of said *Page 23 county, and had purchased and cancelled other bonds of said county not pertaining to said bridge in the sum of $361,000.00. That after providing said sinking fund and purchasing bonds as aforesaid, said county, on August 1, 1936, had net cash on hand, after paying all costs of operation, maintenance and repair of said bridge, derived from the tolls thereon the sum of $360,283.52.

"VII. That Chapter 17534 of the Laws of Florida (Senate Bill No. 771) provided that an election be held on October 8, 1935, to determine whether the Broad Street Bridge should remain a toll bridge or whether it should be a free bridge after January 1, 1936. That said election was enjoined by the Circuit Court of Duval County, Florida, in the case of Jennings, et al., v. Duval County, et al.; that the case was appealed to the Supreme Court of the State of Florida and affirmed as appears in 164 So. 356; that said Chapter 17534 was in said case held unconstitutional by the Supreme Court of the State of Florida.

"VIII. That on the 20th day of July, 1935, Duval County and the State Road Department entered into a contract for carrying into effect the provisions of Chapter 17246 of the Laws of Florida, a copy of which contract is hereto attached marked Exhibit `A,' and made a part hereof to the same extent as if fully set out herein.

"IX. That in pursuance of said contract, the said State Road Department has caused a preliminary survey and plans and specifications to be made for the Main Street Bridge and approaches thereto, and has caused an estimate to be prepared of the cost of the materials and construction of the said bridge and approaches, and has filed with the Board of County Commissioners of Duval County a copy of such plans and specifications and estimated costs. *Page 24

"X. That the Board of County Commissioners of Duval County has fixed the location of said bridge, and the same has been approved by the State Road Department.

"XI. That on the 10th day of October, A.D. 1936, the Board of County Commissioners of Duval County, Florida, adopted a resolution authorizing the issuance of debentures in the sum of $1,100,000.00 as authorized by Chapter 17246, which together with the grant expected to be made by the United States of America, will be sufficient to pay for the cost of the construction of the Main Street Bridge, to-wit, $1,429,000.00, exclusive of lands, easements, rights of way, franchises, riparian rights and real and personal property and rights and interests of every description necessary to provide a right of way for said bridge. A true and correct copy of said resolution is hereto attached and marked Exhibit `B' and made a part hereof to the same extent as if fully set out herein.

"XII. That Chapter 17246 is unconstitutional and said resolution passed in pursuance thereof, is illegal and void for the following reasons:

"1. Chapter 17246 embraces two subjects, to-wit: Broad Street Bridge and Main Street Bridge.

"2. Sections 4 and 6 of Chapter 17246 provide a different method for fixing tolls from that provided in Section 5 of Chapter 7462 of the Laws of Florida.

"3. The use of moneys derived from the operation of the Broad Street Bridge for acquiring rights of way, franchises and other property for the Main Street Bridge and approaches thereto, and in constructing the necessary roads and streets leading to said bridge, and in paying interest as provided in Section 13 of said Act, is in contravention of the opinion in the case of Jennings,et al., v. Duval County, et al., supra. *Page 25

Said debentures are in effect bonds and cannot be legally issued without an election in Duval County, as provided in Section 6 of Article 9 of the Constitution of Florida, as amended in 1930.

"5.

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

Related

Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion
Texas Attorney General Reports, 1984
Opinion No.
Texas Attorney General Reports, 1984
State v. Miami Beach Redevelopment Agency
392 So. 2d 875 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1980)
Switzer v. City of Phoenix
341 P.2d 427 (Arizona Supreme Court, 1959)
State v. Florida State Improvement Commission
60 So. 2d 747 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1952)
State v. Escambia County, Florida
14 So. 2d 576 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1943)
State v. Dade County
200 So. 848 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1941)
American Bakeries Co. v. City of Haines City
180 So. 524 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1938)
King v. Duval County
174 So. 817 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1937)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
170 So. 587, 126 Fla. 18, 1936 Fla. LEXIS 1550, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/flint-v-duval-county-fla-1936.