STATE, EX REL. FRED H. DAVIS, ATT'Y GEN'L, ET AL.,
v.
CITY OF POMPANO
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 reversed a quo warranto judgment challenging the validity of a 1927 special act purporting to extend the City of Pompano's boundaries. The Court held that the legislature cannot arbitrarily extend municipal boundaries to include sparsely settled, undeveloped territory without regard to the constitutional requirement that municipalities serve aggregated communities of people.
The Court reversed the lower court's judgment and held that the 1927 legislative extension of boundaries was invalid because it included territory that was sparsely settled, undeveloped land not needed for habitation or municipal purposes, contrary to the constitutional requirement that municipal extensions serve an aggregated community of people.
“the objects and purposes of such establishment or extension is to provide for an aggregation or community of people, and not simply an indiscriminate location of territory without regard for the requirements of the inhabitants”
Establishes the constitutional standard that municipal extensions must serve a community of people, not merely include territory indiscriminately.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe Town of Pompano attempted to annex certain territory in 1925 without legislative authority. In 1927, the legislature passed a special act attempti…
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 Municipal Incorporation cases and more on FLexlaw
This case is before us on writ of error to a judgment in quo warranto proceedings brought to contest the validity of Chapter 13324, Special Acts of the Legislature of 1927.
It is needless for us to discuss the principles of law involved in this case because, as it appears to us, they have all been settled adversely to the contentions of the defendant in error in the opinions and judgments in the cases of State, ex rel. Davis v. Town of Lake Placid, opinion filed April 13, 1933, reported 147 Sou. 468, and State, ex rel. Davis v. City of Largo, opinion filed May 2, 1933, reported 149 Sou. 420.
Especially is the holding of this Court in the latter case applicable here.
In that case we said:
“Undoubtedly, under the provisions of Section 8 of Article VIII of the Constitution of Florida, the Legislature has the power to establish municipalities, and to extend boundaries. But in exercising such authority it should at all times be kept in mind that the objects and purposes of such establishment or extension is to provide for an aggregation or community of people, and not simply an indiscriminate location of territory without regard for the requirements of the inhabitants. A sparsely settled area, chiefly used- for groves, farms or gardens, or which is wild, unimproved, and vacant land and not needed for habitation or municipal purposes is not ordinarily within the meaning or purpose of the Constitution. A most enlightening and interesting history and analysis of this subject is given in the opinion of Justice Whitfield in the case of State, ex rel. *248v. Avon Park, 149 Sou. 409, delivered at the present term of this Court. While under the facts in the Avon Park case it was held that quo warranto was not the proper remedy under that writ unless further amended, the case now under consideration is somewhat different.”
The facts in the case now before us are in all essentials parallel with the facts in the Largo case, except this: The Town of Pompano in 1925 attempted to annex certain territory without legislative authority. By the Act of 1927 it was attempted to annex a vast additional territory, including the lands of the co-relators.
The court below held that the attempted annexation of 1925 was void, but as these same lands were included in the legislative attempted annexation or extension of boundaries in 1927, the action of the City Council in 1925 became immaterial.
For the reasons stated, the judgment should be reversed with directions that the circuit court enter a judgment of ouster against the respondents as to the entire territory, except that which was included in the corporate limits of the Town of Pompano prior to 1925.
Whitfield, Ellis and Terrell, J. J., and Barns, Circuit Judge, concur.
• Davis, C. J., disqualified.
Brown, J., absent and not participating because of illness.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
The City of Winter Haven v. A. M. Klemm & Son, 132 Fla. 334 (Fla. 1938)…he municipality. State v. Sarasota, 92 Fla. 563, 109 So. 473; State v. Stuart, 97 Fla. 69, 120 So. 335, 64 A. L. R. 1307; State v. Avon Park, 108 Fla. 641, 149 So. 409; State v. Lake Placid, 109 Fla. 419, 147 So. 468; State v. Pompano, 113 Fla. 246, 151 So. 485; State v. Fort Lauderdale, 102 Fla. 1019, 136 So. 889; State v. Homestead, 100 Fla. 361, 130 So. 28; State v. Largo, [*368] 110 Fla. 21, 149 So. 420; Olds v. State, 101 Fla. 218, 133 So. 641. The Constitution commands that when a municipality is ab…
-
State v. Town of Boynton Beach, 129 Fla. 528 (Fla. 1937)…1, 139 So. 377, on rehearing 108 Fla. 635, 146 So. 836; State, ex rel. the Attorney General, v. City of Avon Park, 108 Fla. 641, 149 So. 409; State, ex rel. Davis, v. City of Largo, 110 Fla. 21, 149 So. 420; State, ex rel. Davis, v. City of Pompano, 113 Fla. 246, 151 So. [*534] 485; City of Winter Park v. State, ex rel. Attorney General, 119 Fla. 343, 161 So. 386. A careful reading of these cases discloses that in those instances when the Legislature has palpably abused its prerogative by incorporating lan…
-
State v. City of Pompano, 136 Fla. 730 (Fla. 1938)…onds issued by the City of Pompano under charter authority before a judgment of ouster in quo warranto excluded the jurisdiction of the city from a large area annexed to the original municipality by Chapter 13324, State, ex rel., v. City of Pompano, 113 Fla. 246, 151 So. 485. The judgment of ouster is upon the ground that the added area was sparsely settled and not needed for habitation or municipal purposes, and that Chapter 13324 is invalid insofar as it added such area to the city limits, such addition o…1 / 5
Previewing 3 of 8 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- State v. The City of Avon Park, 108 Fla. 641 (Fla. 1933)
- State v. The City of Largo, 110 Fla. 21 (Fla. 1933)
- State v. Town of Lake Placid, 109 Fla. 419 (Fla. 1933)