LYKES BROS.
v.
BD OF COM'RS OF EVERGLADES DR. DIST
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.
Lykes Brothers and other landowners challenged special acts authorizing the Everglades Drainage District to dedicate its lands for water conservation purposes, claiming the statutes violated the Florida Constitution because they lacked proper notice and referendum approval. The Florida Supreme Court reversed the trial court's dismissal, holding that plaintiffs stated a sufficient cause of action and were entitled to present evidence on whether they had constitutional standing and whether the statutes were unconstitutional.
The court held that although the amended bill lacked specific and detailed allegations, it was not entirely deficient as a pleading and stated grounds for equitable relief. The plaintiffs should be given the opportunity to submit evidence to establish whether they had standing to challenge the statutes and whether the statutes were unconstitutional on the grounds alleged.
“the function of a motion to dismiss a bill of complaint is to test the sufficiency of the bill as a pleading to determine whether it states a cause of action entitling the pleader to equitable relief in the event he sustains the material allegations of his bill by a preponderance of the evidence”
Establishes the standard for evaluating motions to dismiss in equity, requiring only that a bill state some grounds for equitable relief
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceLykes Brothers and other landowners and taxpayers in the Everglades Drainage District, who also held bonds issued by the District, sought to enjoin th…
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 Standing To Challenge Constitutionality cases and more on FLexlaw
If upon a hearing on the merits the appellants can establish, as a matter of fact, that their constitutional rights have been or will be violated, it will then be time enough to pass upon the constitutionality of the local law in question. If upon such hearing the appellants fail to prove that their personal or property rights have been impaired by the operation of the challenged legislation, then there would be no occasion for the court to pass upon the question whether the local laws are unconstitutional; for if the appellants have not been prejudiced by the operation of the local laws involved they cannot question their validity. See Kirk v. Douglass, 190 S.C. 495, 3 S.E. 2d 536; Borden's Farm Products Co. v. Baldwin, 293 U.S. 194, 55 S.Ct. 187, 79 L.Ed. 281; Picking v. Pennsylvania R. Co., 3 Cir., 151 F. 2d 240; People v. Barksdale, 104 Colo. 1, 87 P. 2d 755; Weiskopf v. City of Saratoga, 269 N.Y. 634, 200 N.E. 33.
For the reasons stated, the decree appealed from is reversed with directions that the amended bill be reinstated, and that a time be fixed by the Chancellor for filing answers thereto.
It is so ordered.
TERRELL, Acting Chief Justice, CHAPMAN and HOBSON, Justices, and WHITE, Associate Justice, concur.
THOMAS, Justice, and BROWN, Associate Justice, dissent.
I dissent because I think the constitutionality of the acts should be determined now.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (15 total)
-
Gaulden v. Kirk, 47 So. 2d 567 (Fla. 1950)…nt except insofar as he may be able to show that it adversely affects him. See State ex rel. McClure v. Sullivan, Fla., 43 So. 2d 438 and cases therein cited. See also Lykes Bros. Inc. v. Board of Commissioners of Everglades Drainage District, Fla., 41 So. 2d 898. In support of their contention that the Revenue Act of 1949 did not create an excise tax but that it did establish a state property tax, counsel for appellant assert that a tax is a property tax if the law which ordains it has the raising of reven…
-
Gen. Dev. Corp. v. Kirk, 251 So. 2d 284 (Fla. 2d DCA 1971)…ury, Fla.1952, 56 So. 2d 445; McSween v. State Live Stock Sanitary Board of Florida, 1929, 97 Fla. 750, 122 So. 239. . McBridge v. Overstreet, Fla.1956, 89 So. 2d 672; Lykes Bros. v. Board of Commissioners of Everglades Drainage District, Fla.1949, 41 So. 2d 898. . State ex rel. Pringle v. Dykes, 1937, 127 Fla. 665, 173 So. 904. . Bryan v. City of Miami, Fla.1951, 56 So. 2d 924 (disputed election to be held simultaneously with city primary election at slight additional cost already incurred when injunctio…
-
Glendale Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n: Cmty. Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n of the Palm Beaches: Naples Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n v. State, 485 So. 2d 1321 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986)…f law, or of mixed fact and law, depending upon the nature of the statute brought into question and the scope of its threatened operation as against the party attacking the statute. Lykes Bros., Inc. v. Board of Com’rs. of Everglades Drainage Dist., 41 So. 2d 898 (Fla.1949). While there are circumstances in which trial courts are permitted to adjudi [*1325] cate the merits of constitutional issues in ruling on a motion to dismiss, City of Long Beach Resort v. Collins, 261 So. 2d 498, 601 (Fla.1972), Criterio…
Previewing 3 of 15 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Borden's Farm Prods. Co., Inc. v. Baldwin, 293 U.S. 194 (U.S. 1934)
- Picking v. Pa. R. Co., 151 F.2d 240 (3d Cir. 1945)
- Hillsborough Inv. Co. v. Wilcox, 152 Fla. 889 (Fla. 1943)
- State v. Dyer, 109 Fla. 33 (Fla. 1933)
- State v. Geo J. Dykes, 127 Fla. 665 (Fla. 1937)
- State v. Kirkman, 158 Fla. 11 (Fla. 1946)
- Archibald v. Curry, 140 Fla. 189 (Fla. 1939)