State v. City of Brooksville

Supreme Court of Florida

State v. City of Brooksville

118 So. 13, 96 Fla. 141

CourtSupreme Court of Florida

DecidedJuly 6, 1928

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 118 So. 13 (State v. City of Brooksville) 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 v. City of Brooksville, 118 So. 13, 96 Fla. 141 (Fla. 1928).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The sole question raised here is whether or not Chapter 10354, Acts of 1925, Laws of Florida, the same being the charter of the City of Brooksville, appellee, is in conflict with Chapter' 9298, Acts of 1923, Laws of Florida, the same being intended as an additional and supplemental method of procedure for the benefit of all cities, towns, and municipal corporations in this State.

Appellant grounds his appeal on the decision of this Court in the City of Apalachicola v. State, 93 Fla., 921, 112 So. R. 618. In the Apalachicola case it was' found that the provisions of the city charter were in direct conflict with Chapter 9298, Acts of 1923, and the city charter being a local law governing the subject matter under the terms of the constitution repealed said Chapter 9298, Acts of 1923, In the instant case it is not shown that Chapter 10354, Acts of 1925, is in conflict with Chapter 9298, Acts of 1923, but Sec. 24 provides that the “Council shall have *142 in addition to the powers given them by this Act all the powers given to towns and cities under the general statutes of the State of Florida.”

We, therefore, by virtue of the terms of Chapter 10354, Acts of 1925, and on authority of Abel v. Town of Boynton, decided by this Court May 30, 1928, affirm the decree of the chancellor.

Affirmed.

Whitfield, "P. J., and Terrell and Buford, J. J., concur. Ellis, C. J., and Strum and Brown, J. J., concur in the opinion and judgment.

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

Per Curiam.

The sole question raised here is whether or not Chapter 10354, Acts of 1925, Laws of Florida, the same being the charter of the City of Brooksville, appellee, is in conflict with Chapter' 9298, Acts of 1923, Laws of Florida, the same being intended as an additional and supplemental method of procedure for the benefit of all cities, towns, and municipal corporations in this State.

Appellant grounds his appeal on the decision of this Court in the City of Apalachicola v. State, 93 Fla., 921, 112 So. R. 618. In the Apalachicola case it was' found that the provisions of the city charter were in direct conflict with Chapter 9298, Acts of 1923, and the city charter being a local law governing the subject matter under the terms of the constitution repealed said Chapter 9298, Acts of 1923, In the instant case it is not shown that Chapter 10354, Acts of 1925, is in conflict with Chapter 9298, Acts of 1923, but Sec. 24 provides that the “Council shall have *142 in addition to the powers given them by this Act all the powers given to towns and cities under the general statutes of the State of Florida.”

We, therefore, by virtue of the terms of Chapter 10354, Acts of 1925, and on authority of Abel v. Town of Boynton, decided by this Court May 30, 1928, affirm the decree of the chancellor.

Affirmed.

Whitfield, "P. J., and Terrell and Buford, J. J., concur. Ellis, C. J., and Strum and Brown, J. J., concur in the opinion and judgment.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

118 So. 13, 96 Fla. 141, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-city-of-brooksville-fla-1928.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack