State Ex Rel. Public Institutional Building Authority v. Neffner

30 N.E.2d 705, 137 Ohio St. 390, 137 Ohio St. (N.S.) 390, 19 Ohio Op. 112, 1940 Ohio LEXIS 494
CourtOhio Supreme Court
DecidedDecember 18, 1940
Docket28145
StatusPublished
Cited by14 cases

This text of 30 N.E.2d 705 (State Ex Rel. Public Institutional Building Authority v. Neffner) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
State Ex Rel. Public Institutional Building Authority v. Neffner, 30 N.E.2d 705, 137 Ohio St. 390, 137 Ohio St. (N.S.) 390, 19 Ohio Op. 112, 1940 Ohio LEXIS 494 (Ohio 1940).

Opinion

*391 By the Court.

The Public Institutional Building Authority, by action instituted in this court, seeks the issuance of a writ of mandamus to compel George M. Neffner, secretary of state of the state of Ohio, to attest certain bonds in the total amount of $4,250,000 heretofore approved and authorized by the relator. The proceeds of the sale of such bonds are to be used to construct an institution for the housing and medical care of feeble-minded people at Apple Creek, Ohio.

Issue was made by a general demurrer to the petition.

This is the second time a proposed issue of bonds for a similar purpose has been challenged by a like proceeding in this court. In the case of State, ex rel. Public Institutional Building Authority, v. Griffith, Secy. of State, 135 Ohio St., 604, 22 N. E. (2d), 200, this court had before it a proposed issue of bonds in the sum of $7,500,000, the proceeds of which were to be used in constructing, equipping and improving certain hospitals and institutional buildings for the care of patients afflicted with mental diseases. It was there held that the proposed bonds created an indebtedness of the state within the meaning of the debt limitations prescribed by Sections 1 and 3, Article VIII of the state Constitution.

The proceedings now before the court have evidently been prepared with a view of meeting the objections pointed out by the court in the previous case. The vital need for such institution has been urged. Such necessity may well be conceded. However, the question before the court in this proceeding is not one of policy but of power. The question of policy is a legislative function. The court considers only the legal aspects of the petition and ascertains whether the Public Institutional Building Authority has the power under the law to issue these bonds.

The petition sets forth in full the resolution authorizing and providing for the issuance of the bonds by *392 the Public Institutional Building Authority, and also the rental agreement entered into by the Department of Public Welfare and the Public Institutional Building Authority for the rental and occupancy of the proposed institution by the Department of Public Welfare. The resolution of the building authority authorizing the issuance of bonds contains the following statement:

“Section 3. That said bonds shall be and constitute negotiable instruments under the negotiable instruments law of Ohio but nevertheless they shall not be or constitute general obligations of the authority or of the state of Ohio or any agency or department thereof; shall not be or be construed to be unconditional promises to pay and the holders thereof shall be entitled to look for the payment thereof and the interest thereon only to the special fund hereinafter provided for the payment of such bonds and the interest thereon.”

The bonds contain the following statement: “The bonds of said authorized issue as may be outstanding from time to time constitute obligations only for the fulfillment of which the revenues of said Public Institutional Building Authority, derived from said institution, are pledged, and payment of said bond's, together with the interest thereon are secured by a lien upon the revenues, rentals and receipts of said Public Institutional Building Authority received for the use and occupancy of said institution. Neither the payment of the principal of this bond or any part thereof, nor the interest thereon or any part thereof constitutes an indebtedness of the state of Ohio nor a charge on the credit or taxing power of said state, nor an indebtedness of the Public Institutional Building Authority nor a charge on its credit or general revenues.”

And further these proposed bonds contain the following language: “That the revenues, rentals and receipts of the authority, received under an agreement with the Department of Public Welfare for the use and occupancy of said institution or otherwise received or *393 derived by the authority from any use of said-institution, have been pledged to and will be set aside into a special fund created and identified as the ‘Public Institutional Building Authority Apple Creek Bevenue Fund’ for the purpose of paying the reasonable cost of the maintenance and repair of said institution and the reasonable expenses of the authority attributable to said institution, and the interest on this bond and the issue of which it is a part as the same becomes due, and fully discharging said bonds at. or prior to the maturity thereof.”

In addition to the above, the resolution adopted by the authority contains the following language:

“Section 7. The gross revenues derived by the authority from said agreement with the Department of Public Welfare or otherwise accruing to or derived by the authority from said institution so to be constructed at Apple Creek from the proceeds of said bonds, shall be set aside and deposited as received into a. separate and special fund to be known as the Public Institutional Building Authority Apple Creek Bevenue Fund, which shall be kept as a special fund and shall not be considered as moneys in the treasury of the state. Said fund shall be applied to the following purposes in the following order of priority and not otherwise:
“First: To the payment of the reasonable cost of the maintenance and repair of said institution and the reasonable expenses of the authority attributable to said institution.
“Second: To the payments into the Public Institutional Building Authority Apple Creek Bond Fund, mentioned in Section 8 hereof.
“Third: As to any surplus revenues remaining, to be disposed of as the authority may from time to time determine consistent with law to be for the best interest of the authority and the Department of Public Welfare and of the state of Ohio, and without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing, including the use of *394 any such surplus for the call of any or all of said bonds for redemption and the use, if the authority so determines, of any such surplus for the Department of Public Welfare.”

The.petition also sets forth in detail a rental agreement entered into between the Department of Public Welfare and relator for the use, occupancy and maintenance of this hospital building at Apple Creek, Ohio. This agreement, after setting forth the necessity for additional facilities for the care of the feeble-minded agrees that the Public Institutional Building Authority may have possession for a period ending the 31st day of December 1964 of certain nonproductive and non-income-producing land now owned by the state of Ohio and located near Apple Creek, upon which land the authority agrees to construct a hospital. The Department of Public Welfare in this rental agreement agrees to use this institution and to occupy it for the term set forth as a hospital for the feeble-minded, and agrees to assign to the hospital such patients as are available, up to its capacity, whose support and maintenance are, by law, required to be paid for by persons or counties charged with their support. The rental agreement provides as follows:

“5.

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

Related

State Ex Rel. Marockie v. Wagoner
438 S.E.2d 810 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1993)
State ex rel. Shkurti v. Withrow
513 N.E.2d 1332 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1987)
State ex rel. Kitchen v. Christman
285 N.E.2d 362 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1972)
New Jersey Sports & Exposition Authority v. McCrane
292 A.2d 545 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1972)
Opinion No. 68-245 (1968) Ag
Oklahoma Attorney General Reports, 1968
City of Phoenix v. PHOENIX CIVIC AUD. & CON. CENT.
408 P.2d 818 (Arizona Supreme Court, 1965)
State ex rel. Lynch v. Rhodes
208 N.E.2d 906 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1965)
State ex rel. Saxbe v. Brand
176 Ohio St. (N.S.) 44 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1964)
State Ex Rel. Rogers v. Milligan
66 N.W.2d 326 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1954)
People v. Illinois Toll Highway Commission
120 N.E.2d 35 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1954)
State Ex Rel. Allen v. Ferguson
97 N.E.2d 660 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1951)
City of Middletown v. City Commission
37 N.E.2d 609 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1941)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
30 N.E.2d 705, 137 Ohio St. 390, 137 Ohio St. (N.S.) 390, 19 Ohio Op. 112, 1940 Ohio LEXIS 494, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-public-institutional-building-authority-v-neffner-ohio-1940.