THE STATE OF FLORIDA
v.
ORANGE COUNTY, A POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
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 affirmed a lower court's validation decree for refunding bonds, directing the county to transmit the bonds to the State Board of Administration for disposal. The court found the validation proceedings legal and authorized, even though the bonds had not yet been executed or disposed of before the constitutional amendment's effective date.
Yes, the validation decree remains valid. The court held that since the validation proceedings were legal and authorized, and the decree was entered before the constitutional amendment's effective date, the subsequent execution and disposal of the bonds could proceed under the established validation.
“Since the legality of the validation proceedings up to and including the final decree of validation are not challenged and they are such as the State Board of Administration is authorized to conduct the decree appealed from is affirmed with directions that the circuit court enter an order requiring that the bonds be by the Board of County Commissioners transmitted to the State Board of Administration to be disposed of in accordance with the proceeding of the Board of County Commisisoners as affirmed by the Circuit Court.”
This quote establishes the court's decision to affirm the validation decree and outlines the specific directions for the transmission and disposal of the bonds.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe State of Florida initiated validation proceedings for refunding bonds. A final decree of validation was entered before the effective date of Secti…
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
This is a companion case to State of Florida v. Special Road and Bridge District No. 9 of Polk County, decided and opinion filed this date; the questions of law being identical are ruled by what we said in our opinion in that case. In the instant case, the validation proceedings had proceeded to final decree of validation which was entered prior to the effective date of Section 16, Article IX of the Constitution but the refunding bonds had not been executed and disposed of.
Since the legality of the validation proceedings up to and including the final decree of validation are not challenged and they are such as the State Board of Administration is authorized to conduct the decree appealed from is affirmed with directions that the circuit court enter an order requiring that the bonds be by the Board of County Commissioners transmitted to the State Board of Administration to be dis*44posed of in accordance with the proceeding of the Board of County Commisisoners as affirmed by the Circuit Court.
Affirmed with directions.
BUFORD, C. J., BROWN, CHAPMAN, THOMAS, ADAMS and SEBRING, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Stranahan v. Hillsborough Cnty., 154 Fla. 658 (Fla. 1944)…This holding squares with State v. Special Road and Bridge District Number 9 of Polk County, 153 Fla. 44, 13 So. (2nd) 801, wherein we considered and set out the purpose of Section 16, Article IX of the Constitution. See also State v. Orange County, 153 Fla. 43, 13 So. (2nd) 805. Under the holdings of these cases, if the bonds were issued prior to July 1, 1931, and in other respects meet the requirements of Harwell v. Hillsborough County, supra, as herein stated, that is sufficient. We therefore conclude…
-
Fletcher v. Bd. OF Pub. Instruction OF Gadsden Cnty., 160 Fla. 428 (Fla. 1948)…. The bonds in question were issued and validated prior to January 1, 1948, by special tax school district, No. 5, so the date of their delivery makes no difference. They were the obligation of the District that issued them. State v. Orange County, 153 Fla. 43, 13 So. (2nd) 805, and State v. Special Road and Bridge District No. 9, Polk County, Florida, 153 Fla. 44, 13 So. (2nd) 801, are persuasive but not directly in point. The validating decree was free from error and is affirmed. Affirmed. THOMAS, C.…