STELLWAGEN

v.

TUCKER

Citator

Cited By

• Nat'l Container Corp. v. State, 138 Fla. 32 (Fla. 1939)
  …, leaving future acts to be the subjects of new prosecutions or proceedings. This is a salutary jurisdiction, especially where a nuisance affects the health, morals or safety of the community.’ ‘‘In Coosaw Min. Co. v. South Carolina, 144 U. S. 550, 36 L. Ed. 537, 12 Sup. Ct. Rep. 689, it was said by this Court, through Mr. Justice Harlan, after citing English and American cases: “ ‘Proceedings at law or by indictment can only reach past or present wrongs done by the appellant, and will not adequately prote…
• Dorsey v. State, 402 So. 2d 1178 (Fla. 1981)
  …or control the words of the act, unless they are doubtful or ambiguous. Yazoo & Mississippi Valley Railroad v. Thomas, 132 U.S. 174, 188, 10 S.Ct. 68, 73, 33 L.Ed. 302 (1889). Accord, Coosaw Mining Co. v. South Carolina, 144 U.S. 550, 12 S.Ct. 689, 36 L.Ed. 537 (1892); Association of American Railroads v. Costle, 562 F. 2d 1310 (D.C.Cir.1977); Hughes Tool Co. v. Meier, 486 F. 2d 593 (10th Cir. 1973); In re Camden Shipbuilding Co., 227 F.Supp. 751 (D.Me.1964); Idaho Commission on Human Rights v. Campbell, 9…
• Jurgensen v. Fairfax Cnty., 745 F.2d 868 (4th Cir. 1984)
  …or controlling in the construction of the Act.” Hughes Tool Company v. Meier, 486 F. 2d 593, 596 (10th Cir.1973). Again, this is but a restatement of the rule enunciated in Coosaw Mining Co. v. South Carolina, 144 U.S. 550, 563, 12 S.Ct. 689, 692, 36 L.Ed. 537 (1892), where the Supreme Court said the preamble could only be resorted to “to aid in the construction of the enacting clause, when any ambiguity exists.” The enabling section of the State FOIA is clear and unambiguous. Moreover, the purpose of th…