Sholtz v. State Ex Rel. Chalmers

166 So. 319, 123 Fla. 100
CourtSupreme Court of Florida
DecidedFebruary 28, 1936
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 166 So. 319 (Sholtz v. State Ex Rel. Chalmers) 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
Sholtz v. State Ex Rel. Chalmers, 166 So. 319, 123 Fla. 100 (Fla. 1936).

Opinion

Buford, J.

The writ of error brings for review a judgment awarding peremptory writ of mandamus requiring the *101 State Board of Administration to pay certain interest coupons on bonds issued by Monroe County, some of which, bonds were road bonds, others bridge bonds, and others highway bonds, a part maturing August 1, 1933, and a part maturing June 1, 1933, totaling $2120.00.

A material allegation in the alternative writ of mandamus was contained in paragraph 10 thereof as follows:

' “That there was included in the Monroe County Budget adopted September 6, 1933, as same appears in Commissioners Minutes Book, pages 105-6-7, Records Monroe County, Florida, the following items for Bond and Interest Fund:

“Bond and Interest Fund (W. V. Knott, Treasurer Ex-Officio)
$213735.00 Interest and Sinking Fund
85000.00 Past Due, Interest not paid.
298735.00
150000.00 Less Gas Tax Estimated.
148735.00
146200.00 34 Mills on $4,300,000.00
2535.00 Short

and that said Budget was certified to the said Board of Adminisrtation on the 17th day of July, A. D. 1934, and attached to said copy of said budget was the following certificate, to-wit:

“ ‘State of Florida
“ ‘County of Monroe
“‘County Budget Adopted September 6th, 1933, and Monroe County Millage as same appears in Commis *102 sioners Minute Book “E,” pages 105, 6, 7 records of Monroe County, Florida.
“ ‘Witness my hand and official seal this 17th day of July A. D. 1934.
“‘Ross 'C. Sawyer (signed) (seal)
“ ‘Ross C. Sawyer
“ ‘Clerk Circuit Court
“ ‘Monroe County, Florida.’
“That the total interest and principal maturing June 1st and August 1st during the year 1933 by virtue of the outstanding Bond indebtedness of Monroe County, Florida, amounted to $96,272.00, but that the amount which has been paid as of the time of the filing of this petition is unknown to your Relator, and the aforesaid maturities consitute the first and oldest unpaid commitments of the said county. That on the 7th day of November, 1934, there was in the hands of and subject to the control of the said Board of Administration, and in the custody of the said States Treasurer, as County Treasurer Ex-Officio of Monroe County, Florida, to the Clerk- of Monroe County, Florida, the sum of $176,254.49, representing the proceeds collected from the gasoline tax and apportioned to Monroe County under the terms and provisions of the statutes relating thereto. That the said funds were appropriated by the Board of County Commissioners, to the payment of the past due and maturing principal and interest of Monroe County, prior to the fiscal year beginning October 31st, 1933, and ending September 30th, 1934, arising by virtue of its outstanding bonded indebtedness, and that the aforesaid Board of Administration was duly advised of such appropriation by the said Board of Commissioners of the said Monroe County, Florida, all as set forth in the aforesaid' *103 Budget and Certificate. That the said Board of Administration, and W. V. Knott, State Treasurer, as Treasurer Ex-Officio in Monroe County, Florida, have on hand and in their possession, custody and control, more than a sufficient sum properly applicable to the payment of the claim of the Relator for the Interest Coupons herein.
“That Relator, together with all other holders of interest coupons of the said county during the year 1933, is entitled to the payment of same out of the funds so apportioned to this purpose by the Respondents, David Sholtz, J. M. Lee and W. V. Knott, as and constituting the Board of Administration of the State of Florida; J. M. Lee, Comptroller of the State of 'Florida and Secretray of the Board of Administration of the State of Florida, W. V. Knott, State Treasurer of the State of Florida, as County Treasurer Ex-Officio of Monroe County, Florida, pursuant to appropriation described above by the said Board of County Commissioners of Monroe County, Florida, but that the said Respondents have failed and refused to pay the claim of the Relator arising by virtue of the aforesaid Interest Coupons, and notwithstanding the fact that there is in said custody and control of said Board of Administration and Respondent, W. V. Knott, Treasurer of the State of Florida, as Treasurer Ex-Officio of Monroe County, Florida,' more than a sufficient sum of money legally and duly budgeted, allocated and appropriated for this purpose, and properly allocated to the payment of Relator’s Coupons for the year 1933, and due all other holders and owners of Coupons maturing during said year.”

The Return of the Respondents is, in part, .as follows:

“9. That they admit the allegations in numbered- paragraph 10, contained, 'except that these respondents deny that the total interest! and principal maturing .-June ’ 1 .and *104 August 1, 1933, by virtue of the outstanding bonded indebtedness of Monroe County, Florida, amounted to $96,272; but admit that the June 1 and August 1, 1933, maturities constitute the first and oldest unpaid commitments of said county; and these respondents deny that there is in their possession, custody or control more than a sufficient sum properly applicable to the payment of the relator’s alleged claim, and further deny that relator, or any other alleged holder of interest coupons of the said county, is entitled to payment of same out of the funds in their hands or in the hands of W. V. Knott, State Treasurer, as County Treasurer ex-officio.
“10. And further answering said alternative writ of mandamus, these respondents allege that as of the date of the service of the alternative writ herein, to-wit: November 16, 1934, the defaults in the aforesaid seven issues were as follows:
6/1/25 $ 650,000 Bridge 6/1/33 $15,867.50
6/1/25 2,000,000 Highway 6/1/33 46,722.50
6/1/27 650,000 Road 6/1/33 18,540.00
1/1/28 100,000 Road 7/1/33 2,500.00
2/1/24 151,000 Bridge 8/1/33 1,050.00
2/1/24 142,000 Road 8/1/33 1,500.00
5/1/28 200,000 Ferry 11/1/33 5,460.00
6/1/25 Bridge 12/1/33 15,867.50
6/1/25 Highway 12/1/33 46,722.50
6/1/27 Road 12/1/33 18,540.00
1/1/18 Road 1/1/34 2,500.00
2/1/24 Bridge 2/1/34 $5,000.00 1,050.00
2/1/24 Road 2/1/34 5,000.00 1,500.00

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

Related

Pierce v. Isaac
184 So. 669 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1938)
Sholtz v. State Ex Rel. Jones
168 So. 803 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1936)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
166 So. 319, 123 Fla. 100, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sholtz-v-state-ex-rel-chalmers-fla-1936.