Florida State Racing Commission v. Ponce de Leon Trotting Ass'n
This text of 151 So. 2d 633 (Florida State Racing Commission v. Ponce de Leon Trotting Ass'n) 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.
Opinion
This is an appeal from a decision of the Circuit Court for Leon County vacating an order of the appellant Racing Commission by which it revoked a harness racing permit held by the appellee Ponce de Leon Trotting Association since 1946. ' Upon review by certiorari proceedings, the circuit court found that the order of revocation must be vacated for the alternative reasons that there had been shown no willful violation of F.S. Chapter 550, F.S.A., and that Chapter 61-1940, Special Acts 1961, was valid and effective to cure any violations which had occurred.1
The statutory provisions controlling revocation of such permits are F.S. Sec. 550.07, F.S.A.2 permitting revocation “upon the willful violation” of the statutes or regulations, and Sec. 550.16(12) providing [634]*634“any willful or wanton failure” to make payment of the required taxes
“ * * * shall constitute sufficient ground for the state racing commission to revoke the permit * *
The briefs on this appeal contain exhaustive debate and citation of conflicting authority for definition of willfulness in this context. We believe, however, that the issue is concluded by prior decisions construing the statutory language to limit revocation to the situation where the statutes or rules have been violated knowingly and with a “stubborn purpose, with evil intent, without justifiable excuse.”3 The record facts fall far short of such a showing and indicate, instead, that long standing financial difficulty constituted the gist of the charges relied on, and that appellee amply demonstrated good faith and anticipated capability of fulfilling all requirements.
The court’s quashal of the order of revocation should accordingly be affirmed upon this ground. We assumed jurisdiction of this case because the circuit court passed directly on the constitutionality of Chapter 61-1940, supra. We determined that question in companion litigation, West Flagler Kennel Club, Inc., et al. v. Florida State Racing Commission et al., Fla.1963 153 So. 2d 5, and now adhere to that decision on this point.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
151 So. 2d 633, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/florida-state-racing-commission-v-ponce-de-leon-trotting-assn-fla-1963.