ARTHUR H. BECKWITH, JR., CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT, ETC., APPELLANTS,
v.
WEBB'S FABULOUS PHARMACIES, INC., ET AL., APPELLEES
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The Florida Supreme Court, after remand from the U.S. Supreme Court, held that section 28.33, Florida Statutes, which authorized court clerks to invest registry funds and keep the interest as office income, is constitutionally infirm and cannot be severed from related provisions. The court affirmed the circuit court's order invalidating the statute.
The court held that the constitutionally objectionable portion of section 28.33—which dictates that interest earned shall be deemed income of the clerk's office—cannot be validly severed from the provision authorizing the clerk to invest registry funds, because these provisions are inseparably connected. Consequently, both provisions are unconstitutional, and without statutory authorization, the clerk has no duty or discretion to invest court registry funds to earn interest.
[1] A statute's constitutionally infirm provision may be deemed unconstitutional in its entirety if it is inseparably connected to a valid provision and excising the infirm p…
[2] A clerk of court has no duty or discretion to invest money deposited in the court registry to earn interest in the absence of a specific court order or statutory authoriz…
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“The portion of section 28.33, Florida Statutes, which the Supreme Court finds constitutionally objectionable is the portion which dictates disposition of the interest earned.”
Identifies which part of the statute the U.S. Supreme Court found unconstitutional
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceSection 28.33, Florida Statutes (1977), authorized the clerk of the circuit court to deposit moneys in the court registry in interest-bearing certific…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Severability Of Statutes cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The judgment of this Court was entered on May 31, 1979, reversing the Order of Circuit Court in and for Seminole County, Florida, and holding section 28.33, Florida Statutes (1977), constitutional. Beckwith v. Webb’s Fabulous Pharmacies, Inc., 374 So. 2d 951 (Fla.1979). On December 9, 1980, the judgment of this Court was reversed with costs by the Supreme Court of the United States. - U.S. -, 101 S.Ct. 446, 66 L.Ed.2d 358. By mandate of that Court, this cause has been remanded to us for further proceedings not inconsistent with the opinion of the Supreme Court.
The portion of section 28.33, Florida Statutes, which the Supreme Court finds constitutionally objectionable is the portion which dictates disposition of the interest earned. This portion, however, cannot be validly severed from the portion of section 28.33 which provides: “Moneys deposited in the registry of the court shall be deposited in interest-bearing certificates at the discretion of the clerk, subject to the above guidelines.” The provision that “[a]ll interest accruing from moneys deposited shall be deemed income of the office of the clerk of the circuit court” is inseparably connected to the portion authorizing the clerk to invest the money. We cannot excise the constitutionally infirm portion of this statute while leaving intact the portion that provides “moneys deposited in the registry of the court shall be deposited in interest-bearing certificates at the discretion of the clerk, subject to the above guidelines,” without doing violence to the legislative purpose of this statute. High Ridge Management Corp. v. State, 354 So. 2d 377 (Fla. 1977); Cramp v. Board of Public Instruction of Orange County, 137 So. 2d 828 (Fla. 1962). Consequently, we hold that this portion of section 28.33 is also unconstitutional.
We note that without the above-quoted portion of section 28.33, Florida Statutes (1977), and in the absence of a court order, the clerk has no duty, or even discretion, to invest money deposited in the court registry in order to earn interest.
Accordingly, having now reconsidered our judgment in light of the opinion of the Supreme Court of the United States, we affirm the order of the circuit court.
SUNDBERG, C. J., and ADKINS, BOYD, OVERTON, ENGLAND and ALDERMAN, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Burnett v. Brito, 478 So. 2d 845 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985)…rest earned on interpleaded and deposited funds follows the principal and shall be allocated to whomever is found entitled to the principal. Webb’s Fabulous Pharmacies, Inc. v. Beckwith, 449 U.S. 155, 101 S.Ct. 446, 66 L.Ed.2d 358 (1980), on remand, 394 So. 2d 1009 (Fla.1981). Where there is an unreasonable delay in placing disputed funds into the court, interest will run to the time of such deposit. Powers v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Co., 439 F. 2d at 608. In the instant case, the broker filed the interpl…
-
Int'l Studio Apt. Ass'n, Inc. v. Lockwood, 421 So. 2d 1119 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982)…itted the clerk to retain the income earned on deposited funds was declared unconstitutional. On remand the Florida Supreme Court further declared unconstitutional the portion of the statute authorizing the clerk to invest deposited funds. Beckwith, 394 So. 2d 1009 (Fla.1981). The present suit was brought to test whether the holding of unconstitutionality in Webb’s, 449 U.S. at 164-65, 101 S.Ct. at 452, would be applied retrospectively, to permit appellants to recover interest accrued during the pendency of t…
-
Fla. Elks Child's. Hosp. v. Stanley, 610 So. 2d 538 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992)…that the statute worked an unconstitutional taking. On remand the Florida Supreme Court further declared unconstitutional the portion of the statute which authorized the clerk to invest deposited funds. Beckwith v. Webb’s Fabulous Pharmacies, Inc., 394 So. 2d 1009 (Fla.1981). [*543] In Lockwood, the Fourth District concluded that this holding would be applied prospectively only relying upon both the exception set forth in Strickland and the federal three-phase test of Chevron Oil Company v. Huson, 404 U.S. 97…
Authorities Cited
- Webb's Fabulous Pharmacies, Inc. v. Beckwith, 449 U.S. 155 (U.S. 1980)
- Cramp v. The Bd. OF Pub. Instruction OF Orange Cnty., 137 So. 2d 828 (Fla. 1962)
- Beckwith v. Webb's Fabulous Pharmacies, Inc., 374 So. 2d 951 (Fla. 1979)
- Lastition v. Lastition, 354 So. 2d 377 (Fla. 1977)
- High Ridge Mgmt. Corp. v. State, 354 So. 2d 377 (Fla. 1977)