Stoudenmire v. West Volusia Hospital Authority

113 So. 2d 225, 1959 Fla. LEXIS 1477
CourtSupreme Court of Florida
DecidedJune 10, 1959
StatusPublished

This text of 113 So. 2d 225 (Stoudenmire v. West Volusia Hospital Authority) 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
Stoudenmire v. West Volusia Hospital Authority, 113 So. 2d 225, 1959 Fla. LEXIS 1477 (Fla. 1959).

Opinion

DREW, Justice.

The appeal in this case is from a decree of the Circuit Court for Volusia County directly passing upon the validity of Chapter 57-2085, Laws of Florida, Special Acts of 1957, Ex.Sess., which creates the West Volusia Hospital Authority and provides for its operation. The decree is contested only insofar as it sustains Sections 14 and 16 of the cited act against contentions that they violate Section 3 of Article IX,1 Sections 16 and 17 of Article VIII,2 and Section 5 of Article IX,3 Florida Constitution, F.S.A.

[226]*226One feature of the act in controversy is its provision4 that taxes levied by the Authority shall be assessed and collected by the Volusia County tax assessor and collector. Prior decisions5 of this Court establish the propriety of provisions for performance of such duties by county officers under general law and constitutional principles. We are not persuaded by any argument of appellant that the contrary result should be reached in this case because of the constitutional amendments relating specially to Volusia County.6 The application of the maxim “ex-pressio unius est exclusio alterius” cannot be justified in the' face of the obvious purpose of those amendments to consolidate in the specified officers the tax assessment and collection functions within the county area. In addition, these sections contain the further mandate that the Legislature “shall * * * from time to time * * enact laws specifying the powers, functions, duties and compensation” of these officers, which clearly permits the assignment of new duties by the Legislature under the rule of our cases.

The remaining contention is that the court erred in upholding Section 147 of the act insofar as it authorized a tax levy “for the payment of any outstanding indebtedness authorized by Section Seven (7) of this Act.” 8 On this issue the opinion of the court below correctly states the law:

“That portion of Section 14, Chapter 57-2085, Laws of Florida, Special Acts, Extra-ordinary Session 1957, which imposes a duty upon the Board of Commissioners of the West Volusia Hospital Authority to annually levy an ad valorem tax against the taxable property within said special tax district to be used ‘for the payment of any outstanding indebtedness authorized by Section (7) of this Act’ is a valid and constitutional authorization to exercise the power of taxation in that the amount of indebtedness which may be incurred at any one time is definitely limited by Section (7) of this Act. This case is distinguished from the case of State ex rel. Smith v. Loftus, 116 Fla. 23, 156 So. 341 (1934), in [227]*227that the indebtedness which may be incurred under Section (7) of this Act is limited to ‘periods of time not exceeding one (1) year at any one time/ while the date of maturity of the time warrants authorized in the Loftus case was not limited in any way whatsoever.” 9

The terms of the act and the facts of this case present no issue as to unauthorized pledge of the taxing power under Section 6, Article 9, Florida Constitution.

Affirmed.

TERRELL, C. J., and THOMAS, HOBSON and THORNAL, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Whitney v. Hillsborough County
127 So. 486 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1930)
Martin v. Dade Muck Land Co.
116 So. 449 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1928)
Stewart v. Daytona & New Smyrna Inlet District
114 So. 545 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1927)
State Ex Rel. Smith v. Loftus
156 So. 341 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1934)
Merriman v. Hutchinson
116 So. 271 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1928)
Vassar v. Arnold
18 So. 2d 906 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1944)
Lainhart v. Catts
75 So. 47 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1917)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
113 So. 2d 225, 1959 Fla. LEXIS 1477, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stoudenmire-v-west-volusia-hospital-authority-fla-1959.