State ex rel. Wolyn v. Apalachicola Northern Railroad

81 Fla. 383
CourtSupreme Court of Florida
DecidedMarch 25, 1921
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 81 Fla. 383 (State ex rel. Wolyn v. Apalachicola Northern Railroad) 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
State ex rel. Wolyn v. Apalachicola Northern Railroad, 81 Fla. 383 (Fla. 1921).

Opinion

West, J.

By mandamus relator seeks to require the respondent railroad company to place a car upon its siding at Vilas, a station on its railroad in Liberty County, for the purpose of receiving from relator a shipment of Japanese seed cane to be shipped to Crestview, a station of a «meeting- common carrier in Okaloosa County.

So much of the allegations- of the alternative writ as are necessary to present the decisive question in the case as now presented are in substance that relator owns a farm' at Deerhunt, in Liberty County, a place on the line of road owned and operated by the respondent railroad company, a corporation under the laws of the State of Florida; that respondent railroad company is a common carrier operating a line of road from River Junction, Florida, to Port St. Joe, Florida, through the station Vilas, near the farm of relator, and that the individual respondents are the members and secretary respectively of the State Plant Board and the State Board of Control, and the State Plant Commissioner; that relator has produced at said farm and has for sale there five car loads of Japanese seed cane of the value of $1,500 and now [385]*385has an opportunity to sell the same; that he has requested the respondent railroad company to place a car at Vilas, the said station on its railroad, in which he may ship a car load of said Japanese seed cane from his farm near said station to Crestview, Florida, the placing of which car the said railroad company is required by law to do, yet it has, in violation of its duty and obligation to do so, refused and still refuses to so place said car or any car or cars at said station for said relator for the purpose of making said shipment; that it is now the season of the year for planting Japanese seed cane and unless said shipment is made immediately the opportunity to ship the same will be lost and relator will lose the sale thereof and will thereby suffer irreparable damages; that the purchaser will lose the opportunity of planting the said cane and the profits incident thereto, which damage can be avoided only by the issuance of the writ prayed for; that the Japanese seed cane desired by relator to be shipped is of a variety that is immune, and the same is immune, from the disease known as mosaic disease; that said cane is not now infected by mosaic disease or any other diseases; that relator prior to his request to said railroad company for a car to make shipment of said seed cane had never received any notice from any one and never heard of any claim by any one that said seed cane was infected or likely to be infected by mosaic disease or otherwise; that relator is informed by the said railroad company that its refusal to so place a car for the shipment is due to the order and public notice of the State Plant Board and its chairman and said State Plant Commissioner to the effect that a quarantine against the shipment of Japanese seed cane has been made against the County of Liberty, in which the farm of relator is located, and that said order is appli[386]*386cable to and effective against the Japanese seed cane of relator located on said farm, said board and said commissioner alleging their action to be pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 6885, Acts of 1915, Laws of Florida, and the rules and regulations of said board thereunder, which rules and regulations, known as Circular No. 40, published January 1, 1921, are attached as an exhibit to the writ; but it is alleged that the action of said railroad company in refusing to so place said car for said shipment is without warrant in law for the reasons (1) that the said Japanese seed cane of relator is not now and never has been infected by mosaic disease or any other disease; (2) that prior to the request by relator to said railroad company for the placing of a car for such shipment no notice was ever given or claim made by any person or persons to the relator or to any person in his behalf that the seed cane of relator at said place was infected or likely to be infected by mosaic disease or otherwise; (3) that the alleged quarantine order was made by the State Plant Board upon the recommendation of the State Plant Commissioner and the public notice given declaring certain areas in Florida to be infected with the disease of sugar cane known as mosaic disease was passed by said board upon the recommendation of the said State Plant Commissioner without any knowledge, facts or evidence whatsoever then or at any time prior thereto submitted to said board by said State Plant Commissioner or otherwise to warrant the issuance of said order or public notice.

The notice as contained in the alternative writ is as follows:

[387]*387“PUBLIC NOTICE
“Declaring Certain Areas im Florida to Be Infected with the Disease of Siugar Cane Knotm as Mosaic, Yellow Striping or Mottling. .
“Under the provisions of the Florida Plant Act of 1915, Chapter 6885, of the Laws of Florida, the State Plant Board, in session at Tallahassee, Florida, this 13th- day of December, 1920, and in accordance with Section 12 of said Act, does declare and give public notice that the following counties and areas in which sugar cane is likely to be infected with the Mosaic disease of sugar cane:
“Escambia County; Franklin County; Jackson County; Gadsden County; Leon County; Liberty County; all that portion of Palm Beach County lying within townships 41 S. and 42 S. E., R. 38 E., and township 41 S., R. 37 E., and all of T. 42 S., R. 37 E. Except Kroamer Island in Lake Okeechobee.”

It is further alleged that neither at the time of making said order and giving said public notice, nor at any time prior thereto had the State Plant Commissioner or the said State Plant Board any knowledge, facts or evidence whatsoever that the Japanese seed cane of relator at said place was infected or likely to be infected by mosaic disease or otherwise, or that said cane was in or near any dangerous zone so as to give said State Plant Commissioner or said State Plant Board the right to issue any order preventing the shipment by relator of his said cane, and that the said order and said public notice are arbitrary and oppressive, without warrant in law and void; that there is not now and never has been any mosaic disease in the Japanese seed cane of relator at said farm [388]*388nor within several miles, if at all, distant therefrom so as to constitute or make the said cane within a dangerous zone or likely to be within a dangerous zone, nor had the said State Plant Commissioner or the said State Plant Board, at the time of issuing said order and public notice, any facts or evidence thereof that the said seed cane was so infected or likely to be infected or within any dangerous zone, and that the said order and public notice are arbitrary and oppressive and unreasonable and an abuse of the discretion imposed by the statute in said board.

By other allegations the statute creating the State Plant Board and prescribing its powers and duties is challenged upon various grounds as unconstitutional and void and, therefore, ineffectual to confer any authority or power upon said board to make the quarantine order, but the conclusion which we have reached makes it unnecessary to consider this feature of the case and it will not be necessary to set out the allegations of the writ raising this question.

The respondent railroad company is required by the writ to place, at the request of the relator, which request has been made, a car at its siding at Vilas, in which rela.

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

Related

Floridians United for Safe Energy, Inc. v. Public Service Commission
475 So. 2d 241 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1985)
L. Maxcy, Inc. v. Mayo
196 So. 176 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1940)
Kilgore Groves, Inc. v. Mayo, Commr. Agriculture
191 So. 498 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1939)
State Ex Rel. Myers v. Seaboard Air Line Railway Co.
108 So. 888 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1926)
State ex rel. Atlantic Coast Line Railroad v. Board of Equalizers
84 Fla. 592 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1922)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
81 Fla. 383, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-wolyn-v-apalachicola-northern-railroad-fla-1921.