CITY OF LAKELAND, ET AL.,
v.
JOHN C. RAY

Fla. | 1934-04-24
114 Fla. 603 Florida Supreme Court (1934) Positive Treatment
Also reported at: 154 So. 324
Cited by 3 cases

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

This case involves a bondholder suing the City of Lakeland, alleging the city officials were mismanaging public funds designated for bondholder benefit under a specific statute. The court affirmed the lower court's decision to overrule the city's motion to dismiss the bill.


Holding

Yes, a motion to dismiss should be overruled if there is any equity in the bill, following the same principle as overruling a general demurrer under old practice.


Key Quotes

“Where there is any equity in a bill a motion to dismiss should be overruled on the same principle a general demurrer under the old practice was overruled.”

This quote establishes the legal principle used by the court to affirm the lower court's decision.

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

A bondholder of the City of Lakeland filed a lawsuit against the city and its officials. The bondholder alleged that the city officials were improperl…

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
Per Curiam.

Per Curiam.

— Appellee, a bondholder of the City of Lakeland, brought this suit for injunction and other relief against the municipality and its officials, alleging that the city officials were wrongfully dealing with certain public funds which, under Chapter 9298, Acts of 1923, the statute under which the bonds were issued, it was contended were required to be collected and applied for complainant’s benefit. The Chancellor overruled a motion to dismiss the bill and reserved for future consideration all other questions relating to the scope and extent of relief, if any, to be granted.

Where there is any equity in a bill a motion to dismiss should be overruled on the same principle a general demurrer under the old practice was overruled. The order appealed from is therefore affirmed on the- authority of *604City of Winter Haven v. Summerlin, decided at the present term.

Affirmed.

Davis, C. J., and Ellis and Terrell, J. J., concur. Whitfield, P. J., and Brown and Buford, J. J„ concur in the opinion and judgment.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Dreka v. Whitehair, 140 Fla. 802 (Fla. 1939)
    …ch are well pleaded, as being true, which must be done on motion to dismiss, the bill is not without equity, and the order appealed from must be and is hereby reversed, and the cause remanded for appropriate proceedings. See City of Lakeland v. Ray, 114 Fla. 603, 154 So. 324; Lathers Land Co. v. New York Life Insurance Co., 115 Fla. 639, 155 So. 723; Mather v. Florida National Bank of Jacksonville, 132 Fla. 891, 182 So. 301; Adams v. Sanford Growers’ Credit Corporation, 135 Fla. 513, 186 So. 239. It is so…

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw