A. N. NOLLE, APPELLANT,
v.
BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA, AND GEORGE G. BROCKETT, CHAIRMAN, JOHN B. RODES, A. FORTENBERRY, C. R. COPELAND, AND A. W. DONALDSON, CONSTITUTING THE PRESENT BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS IN AND FOR BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA; ALSO A. A. DUNN, COUNTY COMMISSIONER-ELECT, AND N. T. FROSCHER, CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT IN AND FOR BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA, 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 held that Brevard County could not issue county bonds in lieu of outstanding road and bridge district bonds without voter approval, because such bonds constituted original county bonds rather than refunding bonds under the amended Florida Constitution.
The court reversed, holding that the bonds could not be issued without voter approval because they were original county bonds, not refunding bonds. Refunding bonds could be issued without voter approval only when refunding bonds of the county itself, but the district bonds were not made county bonds by the statute merely authorizing county bonds to be issued in their lieu.
“Chapter 13937, Acts of 1929, does not make the outstanding road and bridge district bonds in Brevard County bonds of the county, but merely authorizes county bonds to be issued in lieu of such district bonds”
Establishes that the statutory authorization did not convert district bonds into county bonds
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceBrevard County sought to issue county bonds in place of existing road and bridge district bonds under Chapter 13937, Acts of 1929. The complainant, a …
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 Refunding Bonds cases and more on FLexlaw
The circuit judge sustained a demurrer to a bill of complaint seeking an injunction against the issue by the county of county bonds in lieu of road and bridge district bonds now outstanding in the county, under Chapter 13937, Acts of 1929, a contention of the *1694complainant below being that Section 6, Article IX, Constitution, as amended in 1930, forbids the issue of such bonds without the required approving vote of the electorate. The complainant, a citizen, resident and tax payer in the county, appealed.
Chapter 13937, Acts of 1929, does not make the outstanding road and bridge district bonds in Brevard County bonds of the county, but merely authorizes county bonds to be issued in lieu of such district bonds, the highways for which the district bonds were issued being a county purpose for which county bonds may be issued under legislative authority. State v. Brevard County, 99 Fla. 226, 126 So. R. 353.
Chapter 11855, Acts of 1927, authorizes a county to issue refunding bonds for the purpose of refunding any bonds # # * for payment of which the credit of said county is pledged; and amended Section 6, Article IX, Constitution, permits a county to issue refunding bonds without an approving vote of the electorate as therein required for the original issue of bonds; but such refunding bonds must be exclusively for the purpose of refunding bonds of the county, and bonds of a taxing district are not made bonds of a county by a statute which merely authorizes county bonds to be issued in lieu of district bonds and does not make the district bonds the bonds of the county. In such case the bonds to be issued by the county are as to the county, original and not refunding bonds, and under amended Section 6, Article IX, Constitution, the county has power to issue such bonds only after the same shall have been approved by a majority of the votes cast in an election in which a majority of the freeholders who are qualified electors residing in such county shall participate.
As the bonds in this case are not to be issued to refund bonds of the county, they cannot under amended Section *16956, Article IX, Constitution, be issued without the required approving vote at an election duly held for that purpose.
Reversed.
Strum and Buford, J. J. concur.
Terrell, C. J., and Ellis and Brown, J. J., concur in the opinion and judgment.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Cnty. of Citrus, 116 Fla. 676 (Fla. 1934)…a. 298, 134 Sou. Rep. 211; Ginsberg v. City of Daytona Beach, 103 Fla. 168, 137 Sou. Rep. 253; City of Jacksonville v. Ren [*681] froe, 102 Fla. 512, 136 Sou. Rep. 254; State v. City of Miami, 103 Fla. 54, 137 Sou. Rep. 261; Nolle v. Brevard County, 100 Fla. 1692, 131 Sou. Rep. 776; State v. City of Miami, 100 Fla. 1388, 131 Sou. Rep. 143; State v. Special Tax School District No. 5, Dade County, 107 Fla. 93, 144 Sou. Rep. 356; Stewart v. New Smyrna-Coronado Beach Special Road & Bridge District, 101 Fla. 823,…1 / 2
-
State v. City of Pompano, 136 Fla. 730 (Fla. 1938)…lusively for the purpose of refunding of the bonds or the interest thereon of such Counties, Districts, or Municipalities.” See Advisory Opinion, 94 Fla. 967, 114 So. 850; State v. City of Miami, 100 Fla. 1388, 131 So. 143; Nolle v. Brevard County, 100 Fla. 1692, 131 So. 776; Sullivan v. City of Tampa, 101 Fla. 298, 134 So. 211; Savage v. B. P. I. 101 Fla. 1362, 133 So. 341; State v. Special Tax School Dist., [*771] 107 Fla. 93, 144 So. 356; Scholtz v. McCord, 112 Fla. 248, 150 So. 234; State v. Citrus Coun…
-
State v. Cnty. of Sarasota Case No. 1. (Road & Bridge Refunding Bonds, 118 Fla. 629 (Fla. 1935)…that by a valid statutory assumption of payment of same have, in legal contemplation, become county wide obligations of the assuming county in substance, although continued as local or district obligations in form. Compare: Nolle v. Broward County, 100 Fla. 1692, 131 Sou. Rep. 776, with State v. City of Miami, 103 Fla. 54, 137 Sou. Rep. 261, and State v. City of Miami, 101 Fla. 292, 134 Sou. Rep. 608. Appellants’ objection that this entire county refunding [*644] bond plan and operation is being carried ou…
Authorities Cited
- State v. The Cnty. of Brevard, 99 Fla. 226 (Fla. 1930)