STATE, EX REL. S. J. MURPHY, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR,
v.
J. P. HARLLEE, ET AL., DEFENDANTS, 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 resolved a statutory interpretation dispute concerning whether Section 3384 of the Revised General Statutes, which pegs justices of the peace fees to those of circuit court clerks, refers to fees defined in Section 3084 or to subsequently enacted fees in Chapter 11893, Acts of 1927. The court held that the reference is to the fees existing in Section 3084 at the time of enactment, not to future amendments.
The court held that Section 3384's reference is to the fees of the Clerk of the Circuit Court as defined in Section 3084 of the Revised General Statutes of 1920, not to the fees later prescribed in Chapter 11893, Acts of 1927. When a statute by reference adopts provisions from another section of the same statute, subsequent amendments to the adopted provisions are not included unless there is clear intent to include such future amendments.
“The reference of section 3384 is to the then existing fees of Clerks of the Circuit Courts as defined in section 3084 of the same revision, and not to other statutes or to statutes that may be subsequently enacted defining the fees of Clerks of the Circuit Courts.”
This quote establishes the core holding that the statutory reference is limited to fees existing in the same revision, not to later enacted fee schedules.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe case involves a dispute over the proper fee schedule for justices of the peace in Florida. The central issue arose from a statutory chain: Chapter…
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.
The question for determination is whether the provision of Section 3384 Rev. Gen. Stats., Section 5237 Comp. Gen. Laws, that “the fees of a justice of the peace shall be the same as those of the Clerk of the Circuit Court for similar services,” refers to the fees of Clerk of the Circuit Court that are prescribed in Section 3084 Rev. Gen. Stats., or to the fees of the Clerk of the Circuit Court prescribed by Chapter 11893, Acts of 1927, Section 4867, Comp. Gen. Laws.
Chapter 1981, Acts 1874, “An Act to fix and regulate the fees and per diem of certain officers herein designated, ’ ’ defined the compensation of designated State and county officers. Section 6 of the Act prescribed the fees of Clerks of the Circuit Court, and section 8 prescribed the fees for Justices of the Peace. Chapter 2089, Acts of 1877, amended certain sections of Chapter 1981, Acts 1874, including sections 6 and 8, and again fixed in detail the fees of Clerks cf the Circuit Court and of Justices of the Peace. Chapter 3106, Acts of 1879, again amended the sections defining the fees of Clerks of the Circuit Court and Justices of the Peace; as to the latter, section 3, Chapter 3106, Acts of 1879, provides:
“That the fees of Justices of the Peace shall be as follows: Warrants in criminal cases, issuing, forty cents; issuing writ of attachment, summons or execution, forty cents; issuing subpoena, twenty'Cents; all other fees the same as is allowed to Clerks of the Circuit Courts and Sheriffs of the counties for like services. ’ ’
Section 1, Chapter 3106, defining the fees of Clerks of the Circuit Court, was re-enacted as section 1394, Rec. Stats. 1892, while section 3, Chapter 3106, was not re-enacted, but section 1630, Rev. Stats. 1892, contains the following:
*1564‘ ‘ The fees of a Justice of the Peace shall be the same .as those of the Clerk of the Circuit Court for similar services. ’ ’
This quotation refers to the contents of section 1394, Rev. Stats. 1892. Section 1, Chapter 3106, section 1394, Rev. Stats. 1892, was re-enacted as section 1839, Gen. Stats. 1906, and as section 3084, Rev. Gen. Stats. 1920; while the above quotation as to the fees of Justices of the peace from section 1630, Rev. Stats. 1892, was re-enacted in section 2092, Gen. Stats. 1906, and in section 3384, Rev. Gen. Stats. 1920.
In each case of enactment and re-enactment the section as to fees allowed Justices of the Peace referred to the provisions of a section in the same statute defining the fees allowed to Clerks of the Circuit Courts. The Revised Statutes of 1892, the General Statutes of 1906, and the Revised General Statutes of 1920 each constitutes one enactment. Section 3084, Rev. Gen. Stats.,' defines the fees of the Clerks of the Circuit Courts. Section 5971, Rev. Gen. Stats., 1920, makes the fees of the Clerks of the Criminál Courts of Record “the same as the fees of the Clerks of the Circuit Courts in like cases.” Section 3312, Rev. Gen. Stats. 1920, allows the Clerks of the Civil Courts .of Record “the same fees as Clerks of the Circuit Courts receive for similar work. ’ ’ Section 3384, Rev. Gen. Stats. 1920, makes the fees of a Justice of the Peace “the same as those of the Clerk of the Circuit Court for similar services.” The last three sections refer to fees that are defined in section 3084, and all four of the sections are contained in one enactment, viz: the Revised General Statutes of 1920.
Chapter 11893, Acts of 1927, “An Act fixing the fees and compensation to be charged by the Clerk of the various Courts of Record and the Clerks of the Circuit Court, as Recorder” defined the fees of such Clerks, and repealed *1565inconsistent laws as to fees of the Clerks of the various Courts of Record and of the Circuit Courts, but made no reference to the fees of Justices of the Peace or other officers. The intent of Chapter 11893, as shown by its title and contents, is to revise the fees of the Clerks of the Courts mentioned, as such fees are defined in sections 3084, 3312 and 5971, Rev. Gen. Stats., but not to change section 3384, making the fees of Justices of the Peace the same as those of the Clerks of the Circuit Courts as defined in section 3084, Rev. Gen. Stats., the provisions of Section 3084 as to fees being by reference made a part of Section 3384, Rev. Gen. Stats. Chapter 11893 shows this intent by including therein the Clerks “of the various courts of record” with Clerks of the Circuit Courts and not including Justices of the Peace. A provision with reference to the fees of Justices of the Peace if contained in Chapter 11893 would be inoperative under the title of the act. Sections 3084, 3312 and 5971, Rev. Gen. Stats^ were superseded by Chapter 11839, as to the fees of Clerks of the mentioned courts, but in so far as the provisions of section 3084, Rev. Gen. Stats., had been by reference made a part of section 3384, Rev. Gen. Stats., for the purpose of fixing the fees of Justices of the Peace, section 3084 remains a part of section 3384. This view is “consistent with the purpose of the adopting act,” Section 3384, Rev. Gen. Stats., and with the title, contents and purpose of Chapter 11893, Acts 1927.
The reference of section 3384 is to the then existing fees of Clerks of the Circuit Courts as defined in section 3084 of the same revision, and not to other statutes or to statutes that may be subsequently enacted defining the fees of Clerks of the Circuit Courts. Chapter 11893 contains provisions not applicable to justices of the peace.
In Jones v. Dexter, 8 Fla. 276, and Bushnell v. Dennison, 13 Fla. 77, the reference was not to provisions contained in *1566another section of the same Act, but was general “to the I>rovisions of law regulating descents,” which provisions were not contained in the statute making the reference. See also Van Pelt v. Hilliard, 75 Fla. 792, 78 So. R. 693; Panama R. Co. v. Johnson, 264 U. S. 375, 44 Sup. Ct. R. 391, 68 L. Ed. 748.
When one provision of a statute by general words of reference adopts provisions that appear only in another section of the same statute, future amendments of the adopted provisions are not to be regarded as included in the adoption unless an intent to include such future amendments in the adopting provision clearly appears.
Affirmed.
Terrell, C. J., and Strum and Brown, J. J., concur.
Ellis and Buford, J. J., dissent.
(dissenting) : I dissent for reasons stated in the opinion prepared by me in Williams et al. v. State filed at this term.
Ellis, J., concurs.
Buford, J.
(dissenting) : I dissent for reasons stated in the opinion prepared by me in Williams et al. v. State filed at this term.
Ellis, J., concurs.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Renaldo Reino, Sr. v. The State of Fla. & the Honorable Gerald T. Wetherington, 352 So. 2d 853 (Fla. 1977)…tutory section, the only remaining cases on the subject in Florida dealt with in the annotation are Williams v. State, 100 Fla. 1570, 131 So. 864 (1930), its companion case, Kennedy v. Watson, 100 Fla. 1576, 131 So. 866 (1930), and State v. Harllee, 100 Fla. 1562, 131 So. 866 (1930). In the companion cases, the Court held that a statutory provision allowing constables fees “allowed sheriffs for like services” limited the constable to fees allowed sheriffs by the same general enactment (Rev.Gen.St.1920, §§ 28…
-
Orr v. Quigg, 135 Fla. 653 (Fla. 1938)…h State law, ordinances adopting the Federal law by reference, do not violate charter powers which authorize ordinances that are consistent with State and Federal law.” See Hecht v. Shaw, 112 Fla. 762, 151 So. 333; State, ex rel. Murphy, v. Harlee, 100 Fla. 1562, 131 So. 866; Sconyers v. Town of Coffee Springs, 230 Ala. 12, 160 So. 552. Section 7650 C. G. L., being a misdemeanor statute [*660] adopted by Ordinance No. 319, has not been passed on by this Court, but similar statutes have been sustained. See…
-
McLeod v. Santa Rosa Cnty., 116 Fla. 838 (Fla. 1934)…evised General Statutes, as it stood prior to the enactment of Chapter 11893, Acts 1927, raising fees of Clerks of Circuit Court without specifically amending or repealing old Section 3084, Revised General Statutes. State, ex rel. Murphy v. Harllee, 100 Fla. 1562, 131 Sou. Rep. 866. Count B—the material part of the plaintiff’s declaration for the purposes of this appeal—was as follows: “Comes now the plaintiff, and files the following additional count to the Declaration herein: “Count B. “The Plaintiff,…
Authorities Cited
- Panama R.R. Co. v. Johnson, 264 U.S. 375 (U.S. 1924)
- Van Pelt v. Hilliard, 75 Fla. 792 (Fla. 1918)
- Mary Ann Jones and others v. Dexter, 8 Fla. 276 (Fla. 1859)
- Bushnell v. Dennison, 13 Fla. 77 (Fla. 1869)