STATE OF FLORIDA, EX REL. FRANK GONZALES, ALIAS "CHEEKO," PLAINTIFF IN ERROR,
v.
M. P. LEHMAN, SHERIFF OF DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA, DEFENDANT IN ERROR
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 affirmed a lower court's decision, holding that two statutes could operate concurrently without conflict. The case concerned whether one statute implicitly repealed another.
No, Section 5413 R.G.S. does not repeal Section 5435 R.G.S. Both statutes can operate concurrently as they have distinct fields of service and operation.
“The ohly question presented in this case is whether or not Section 5435 R. G. S., 7578 C. G. L., is in such conflict with Section 5413 R. G. S., 7556 C. G. L., that both statutes cannot be held to be operative.”
This quote frames the central legal question of the case regarding statutory conflict.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe plaintiff in error contended that a later statute, enacted as part of chapter 6225 Acts of 1911, implicitly repealed an earlier statute. The core …
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 Statutory Repeal cases and more on FLexlaw
The ohly question presented in this case is whether or not Section 5435 R. G. S., 7578 C. G. L., is in such conflict with Section 5413 R. G. S., 7556 C. G. L., that both statutes cannot be held to be operative.
It is contended by the plaintiff in error that Section 5413 R. G. S., being a part of chapter 6225 Acts of 1911, repealed the other Section. We can find no basis for this contention. Both of these statutes were adopted as substantive law by the Legislature of the State of Florida in its adoption of the Revised General Statutes of Florida as the statutory law of this State and as both sections have a definite field of service and operatio'n, although they apply to like subjects, there is no such conflict between them as to destroy the force and effect of either.
The judgment should be affirmed and it is so ordered.
Affirmed.
Bueord, C.J., and Ellis and Brown, J.J., concur.
*19Whitfield, P.J., and Terrell and Davis, J.J., concur in the opinion and judgment.