HUBBARD CONST. CO.
v.
CITY OF ORLANDO
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.
Hubbard Construction Company challenged the validity of a Florida special act authorizing the City of Orlando to finance public improvements by assigning special assessment liens to private contractors as full payment, rather than using municipal funds. The Florida Supreme Court upheld the statute and the city's proposed contract, finding the arrangement constitutional and the liens assignable under proper statutory authority.
The statute is valid and constitutional. The city may assign municipal improvement liens to private contractors under proper statutory authority, and the assignee may enforce such liens in his own name to the same extent as the original municipal holder, subject to the same priorities and interest provisions. The arrangement does not constitute an unconstitutional exercise of municipal taxing power because the debt or obligation rests solely on property owners, not the municipality.
“The improvement liens are to be assigned to the contractor without recourse and the contractor agrees to accept the liens in full payment of the work performed, in lieu of cash and in lieu of any other promise or arrangement to pay by the city. The certificates create no direct or indirect debt or obligation on the part of the municipality, but the debt or obligation is that of each owner of the property to be improved, secured by a lien to pay to the contractor his proportionate costs of the improvement.”
Establishes the core mechanism by which the statute avoids creating municipal debt while still financing improvements through private contractors.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe City of Orlando proposed to improve certain streets and, pursuant to Chapter 29362 of the 1953 Florida Special Acts, to levy municipal improvement…
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 Special Assessment Liens cases and more on FLexlaw
SEBRING, Justice.
This appeal brings here for review a final decree of the Circuit Court of Orange County upholding the validity of a certain contract for public improvements proposed to be executed under the authority of Chapter 29362, Laws of Florida, Special Acts of 1953.
The act in question provides for the letting of contracts by the City of Orlando for the construction of certain public improvements by private parties and for the sale by the municipality of special assessment liens on abutting property as full payment therefor, as follows:
“Section 1. Municipal Improvements Defined. As herein used the term ‘Municipal Improvement’ shall be construed to mean the opening, widening, laying out, paving, grading, extending, digging, construction, alteration or discontinuation of any park, street, highway, alley or other way, ditch, drain or gutter, or the laying, construction, repairing, changing, vacating, enlarging, diminishing or improving of any sewer within the City of Orlando.
“Section 2. 'Contracts for Construction of Municipal Improvements. The City of Orlando is authorized to enter into and agree upon the terms of can-tracts with private parties for the installation, accomplishment or construction of municipal improvemeni s as hereinabove defined. In such cases such private parties may do all of the work in accordance with specifications prescribed by the City, or in the alternative, may contract to do certain specified parts of the work to be done in conjunction with the City itself.
“Section 3. Financing Municipal Improvements. In consideration of the work to be done by such private parties the City may sell or agree to sell to such private contracting parties any or all of the municipal improvement liens assessed by the City against abutting property for benefits to such property resulting from the municipal improvements so constructed. Said liens shall be evidenced by special assessment lien certificates and shall be assigned by the City without recourse against the City in the event of failure of payment. Said liens may be enforced by the party to whom assigned or anyone holding under him as any other liens are enforced in equity, or the City may agree to enforce such liens for and in behalf of the holder thereof.”
By the complaint for declaratory decree filed in the cause it appears that pursuant to this act the City of Orlando proposes to improve certain streets in the municipality and “to obligate itself under the provisions of said Act to levy 'municipal improvement liens’ against abutting property for the total cost of such improvements and to unequivocally obligate itself to the [contractor] to assign such liens without recourse, and [the contractor] to agree to accept such ‘municipal improvement liens’ in full payment for the work performed by [the contractor] in constructing said improvements. That under the terms and provisions of said contract [the city] will preclude and prohibit any exercise of its power to levy and collect ad valorem taxes to meet any obligation under the terms or conditions of the above mentioned contract * *
Upon the complaint and answer the court below entered its final decree in which it found: (1) that Chapter 29362, Laws of Florida, Special Acts 1953, was validly enacted and did not contravene any provisions of the Constitution of Florida; (2) that the procedure for the assignment of municipal improvement liens described in the complaint was legal, and, if followed, would create a valid contract between the parties; (3) that Chapter 29362 is supplemental to the other provisions of the charter of the City of Orlando, and municipal improvement liens properly issued under these provisions of the City charter are assignable under Chapter 29362 and, when assigned by the city without recourse, are enforceable by the assignee in his own name; (4) that while said liens are not technically negotiable instruments they are transferable as dioses in action and become enforceable by the ultimate holder thereof in his own name; (5) that the municipal liens assignable under Chapter 29362 carry with them all the priorities accorded such liens under othe.r provisions of the charter of the City of Orlando, including priority over other liens upon the property involved except County and City taxes and will carry with them the interest rates fixed by other provisions of the city charter for municipal improvement liens; (6) that the assessment of said liens and the assignment thereof pursuant to Chapter 29362 and the proposed agreement between the city and the contractor would not constitute an unconstitutional exercise of the municipal taxing power of the City of Orlando in violation of section 6, Article IX of the Constitution of Florida, F.S.A.
We find no error in the decree appealed from. See City of Orlando v. State, Fla., 67 So. 2d 673. The proposal set out in. the complaint herein provides for the levy of liens against the abutting property for the total cost of the improvements. The City does not obligate itself to pay for any portion of the costs incident to such improvements. The improvement liens are to be assigned to the contractor without recourse and the contractor agrees to accept the liens in full payment of the work performed, in lieu of cash and in lieu of any other promise or arrangement to pay by the city. The certificates create no direct or indirect debt or obligation on the part of the municipality, but the debt or obligation is that of each owner of the property to be im proved, secured by a lien to pay to the contractor his proportionate costs of the improvement to the whole project in which his property is involved. Each arrangement or proposal for the construction of a particular public improvement, such, for example, as the paving of a street, is to rest upon its own bottom without involvement in any sort of fiscal program contemplating wide spread improvements and long range financing.
The question is raised in briefs as to the power of the City of Orlando to assign the lien certificates which will be created as the result of the contemplated improvements and to authorize the contractor to sue thereon in his own name in the event there is a default.
We think that this question must be resolved in favor of such action. The assignability of municipal assessment certificates in general was considered fully in the case of Buffum v. Stokes, 101 Fla. 984, 133 So. 75, 77, wherein this Court decided that the City of Tampa, pursuant to specific statutory authority, could assign its paving lien certificates, and that “the conferring of the power by statute authorizing a lien holder to sue and enforce such lien in his own name” was proper. The effect of the ruling in that case was to limit an earlier decision against assignability, Marshall v.
C. S. Young Construction Co., 94 Fla. 11, 113 So. 565, 55 A.L.R. 662, to the situation where the assignment was made without statutory authority, and to permit an assignee, under circumstances closely analogous to those involved in the Orlando situation, to enforce the lien in the same manner and to the same extent as the original municipal holder, subject to the same priority and interest provisions as would be applicable to such liens held by the City.
The decree appealed from should be affirmed.
It is so ordered.
ROBERTS, C. J., and TERRELL, THOMAS, HOBSON, MATHEWS and DREW, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Cnty. Collection Servs., Inc. v. Charnock, 789 So. 2d 1109 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001)…33 So. 75, 77 (1931)(holding that “[t]he conferring of the power by statute authorizing a lienholder to sue and enforce [a governmental paving lien] in his own name violates no provision of the constitution”); Hubbard Constr. Co. v. City of Orlando, 67 So. 2d 675 (Fla.1953)(en banc)(stating that the effect of Buffum was to limit Marshall’s prohibition against the assignability of paving lien certificates “to the situation where the assignment was made without statutory authority”). Following the court’s deci…
-
State v. Dixie Drainage Dist., 167 So. 2d 553 (Fla. 1964)…LIFIED ELECTORS RESIDING WITHIN TPIE DISTRICT? While the exact question here is one which this Court has not considered previously, the decisions of this Court in City of Orlando v. State, 67 So. 2d 673, Hubbard Construction Co. v. City of Orlando, 67 So. 2d 675, and State v. Town of Tavares, 96 So. 2d 135, relating to special assessment bonds issued by municipalities within this State are controlling. We perceive no distinction between bonds issued by a municipal corporation payable solely from special ass…
Authorities Cited
- Marshall v. C. S. Young Constr. Co., 94 Fla. 11 (Fla. 1927)
- City of Orlando v. State, 67 So. 2d 673 (Fla. 1953)
- Buffum v. Stokes, 133 So. 75 (Fla. 1931)