WILLIAM T. MAYO, CHAIRMAN, JERRY W. CARTER AND EDWIN L. MASON, AS MEMBERS OF AND AS COMPRISING THE FLORIDA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, APPELLANTS,
v.
NATIONAL TRUCK BROKERS, INC., ET AL., 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 upheld a circuit court's declaration that a 1967 statute increasing annual license renewal fees for truck brokers was unconstitutional because its title failed to adequately disclose that it would increase such fees, violating Florida's constitutional requirement that legislation embrace only one subject properly expressed in its title.
The statute is unconstitutional because its title is defective and misleading, failing to adequately disclose that the act would increase annual license fees, thereby violating Section 16, Article III of the Florida Constitution. The trial court properly proceeded despite informal service on the State Attorney, as the spirit of the statute requiring notice to the Attorney General or State Attorney was satisfied when the State Attorney received actual notice and waived formal service.
“Each law enacted in the Legislature shall embrace but one subject and matter properly connected therewith, which subject shall be briefly expressed in the title”
Statement of the constitutional requirement that the Public Service Commission's statute violated
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe Public Service Commission enacted Chapter 67-319, which increased annual license renewal fees for National Truck Brokers, Inc. and similar entitie…
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 Constitutional Law cases and more on FLexlaw
This is an appeal by the Public Service Commission from a final declaratory judgment of the Circuit Court of Leon County, holding that Chapter 67-319, Laws of Florida, Acts of 1967, to the extent that it increases the annual license renewal for the plaintiffs, National Truck Brokers, Inc., et al, to be invalid and unconstitutional as violative of the provisions of Section 16, Article III, Fla.Const., F.S.A.,1 relating to the title to the act.
The trial court determined that the language in the title to the act, viz. “relating to application fees, certificate fees, permit fees, and filing fees’‘ imposed under the provisions of the questioned act was defective and misleading and insufficient to place the plaintiffs or other interested persons on notice that the body of the act provided for increasing the annual license fees of the plaintiffs, Brokers. The well-reasoned decision of the chancellor below amply sustains his conclusions that the act is violative of the above provision of the Florida Constitution.
Appellants question that portion of the questioned judgment holding that the plaintiffs had sufficiently complied with the requirements of F.S. Section 86.091, F.S.A., relative to serving a copy of the complaint upon the Attorney General or the State Attorney of the judicial circuit in which the action was filed. In that portion of the questioned decree the trial court held:
“ * * * the State Attorney has been duly apprised of the contents of the complaint, though not formally served by the sheriff or his deputy, and he has informed the Court he does not desire or intend to file any pleadings or attend any hearings in this cause. Therefore, the objects of Sec. 86.091 have been accomplished. It is deemed that the State Attorney has waived formal service of the complaint if that be required and of participating in hearings in this cause.”
*13It is obvious from the provisions of Chapter 86 that neither the Attorney General nor the State Attorney of the circuit in which the action is pending are necessary parties in the strict sense of that expression. The statute merely provides that where the constitutionality of a statute, charter, order or franchise is raised in a declaratory judgment action that a copy of the complaint shall be served on the Attorney General or State Attorney and such officers shall be entitled to be heard. While the better practice would be for the complaint to be served in the manner provided by law for the service of process, and such fact shown in the proceedings, we think the spirit of the statute was complied with under the above-quoted excerpts from the final declaratory decree. The State Attorney, after having received a copy of the complaint, advised the court that he had waived final service and did not desire to participate further in the hearing. This he had the right to do. Moreover, the defendants, Public Service Commission, was not adversely affected by such action and their right to raise this point is, at best, questionable.
Affirmed.
ERVIN, C. J., and ROBERTS, THOR-NAL, ADKINS, BOYD and CALDWELL (Retired), JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Dickinson, 286 So. 2d 529 (Fla. 1973)…mphasis supplied.) Vending machines are not listed under either the elimination of exemptions or the extension of taxation to new subjects. A new tax not mentioned in the title is unconstitutional and invalid. Mayo v. National Truck Brookers, Inc., 220 So. 2d 11, 12 (Fla.1969). To adopt Szabo’s contention would be to imply the use of an unconstitutional procedure by the Legislature. Vending machines were excluded from the title because the Legislature was fully cognizant of the fact that the Act did not imp…
-
Tormey v. Moore, 824 So. 2d 137 (Fla. 2002)…ses more than one subject and because the title and the exhaustive indexing of every section except the contested section make the title “affirmatively misleading.” Physical Therapy, 665 So. 2d at 1131; see also Mayo v. National Truck Brokers, Inc., 220 So. 2d 11 (Fla.1969) (invalidating an act as “affirmatively misleading” to the extent that it increased license fees because the title to the act specified and listed the types of fees which would be increased and did not include license fees); Christensen v.…
-
In re Amendments to the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, 52 So. 3d 579 (Fla. 2010)…with section 86.091, Florida Statutes, the Florida Attorney General or applicable state attorney has the discretion to participate and be heard on matters affecting the constitutionality of a statute. See, e.g., Mayo v. National Truck Brokers, Inc., 220 So. 2d 11 (Fla.1969); State ex rel. Shevin v. Kerwin, 279 So. 2d 836 (Fla.1973) (Attorney General may choose to participate in appeal even though he was not required to be a party at the trial court). The rule imposes a new requirement that the party challeng…
Previewing 3 of 8 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence