WILLIAM S. HOOD, TRUSTEE, APPELLANT,
v.
OCKLAWAHA VALLEY RAILROAD COMPANY, A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLEE

Fla. | 1919-06-01
Taylor, Whitfield and Ellis, J. J., concur., Browne, C. J., dissents.
78 Fla. 665 Florida Supreme Court (1919)

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.

Synopsis

The Florida Supreme Court denied a rehearing, clarifying that its prior decision regarding a court of equity's lack of jurisdiction to dismantle a railroad without state assent does not conflict with a U.S. Supreme Court case.


Holding

No, a court of equity in Florida does not have jurisdiction to order a railroad dismantled, its property sold and removed, and its operation as a common carrier discontinued without the assent of the State.


Key Quotes

“We held on the former appeal in this case that a court 'of equity in this State has no jurisdiction in a suit brought by a trustee for bondholders against 'a common carrier to foreclose a trust deed upon the properties of such railroad company given to the trustee to secure the payment of the indebtedness of the railroad company, without the assent of the State, to order the railroad dismantled, its property sold and removed, and its operation as a common carrier discontinued.”

This quote summarizes the court's prior holding regarding the lack of equity jurisdiction.

Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

This case involved a trustee for bondholders seeking to foreclose a trust deed on a railroad company's properties. The core issue on appeal was whethe…

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.


Opinion of the Court
West, J.

West, J.

— Upon an application for rehearing the case of Brooks-Scanoln Co. v. Railroad Commission of Louisiana, 40 Sup. Ct. Rep. 183, has been called to the attention of the Court with the suggestion that it holds to the contrary of the conclusion reached in this case on the present appeal and upon the appeal when the case was here upon a former hearing (State ex rel., R. R. Commission et al., v. Bullock, Circuit Judge, 78 Fla., 321, 82 South. Rep. 866). There is no conflict in the two cases. We held on the former appeal in this case that a court 'of equity in this State has no jurisdiction in a suit brought by a trustee for bondholders against 'a common carrier to foreclose a trust deed upon the properties of such railroad company given to the trustee to secure the payment of the indebtedness of the railroad company, without the assent of the State, to order the railroad dismantled, its property sold and removed, and its operation as a common carrier discontinued. No such question as this was passed upon by the Supreme Court of the United States in the case of Brooks-Scanlon Co. v.

R. R. Commission of Louisiana. Supra, the expressed views of this court are not out of harmony with the conclusions reached in that case. State ex rel., Burr et al., v. Tavares & Gulf R. R. Co., 78 Fla. 329, 82 South. Rep. 833. Petition for rehearing denied.

Taylor, Whitfield and Ellis, J. J., concur. Browne, C. J., dissents.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw