THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
DADE COUNTY, APPELLEE
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.
Florida appealed a decree validating Dade County Port Authority's proposed bond issue for constructing hangars and office buildings for National Air Lines. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the lower court's judgment, finding the issues were conclusively settled by a prior decision involving the same lease agreement.
The court affirmed the decree validating the bond issue, holding that the questions raised were conclusively determined by the prior decision in State v. Dade County and required no further argument.
“[QUOTE REDACTED — failed verbatim audit (paraphrase, not verbatim). See original_text for the text as originally displayed.]”
Establishes that prior precedent conclusively resolves the issues in the current appeal
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceDade County Port Authority proposed a bond issue to construct additional hangars and an office building for National Air Lines pursuant to a lease agr…
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 Motion To Affirm cases and more on FLexlaw
TERRELL, Acting Chief Justice.
This appeal is from a decree validating a proposed bond issue of Dade County Port Authority. The purpose of the bonds is to construct addjtional hangars and an office building for National Air Lines pursuant to the same lease agreement we were confronted with in State v. Dade County, Fla., 62 So. 2d 404. The said lease agreement provided for additional construction from time to time upon request of National Air Lines.
The appeal having been perfected, appellee moves to affirm the judgment as provided by 30 F.S.A. Rule 38 of the Rules of this Court. We have examined the record and in our opinion the questions raised are concluded by State v. Dade County, supra. Since this is the case, it is manifest that they require no further argument so it becomes appropriate to invoke the provisions of Rule 38 to affirm the judgment. Cooksey v. Zimmerman, Fla., 85 So. 2d 593.
The motion to affirm is accordingly-granted on authority of Cooksey v. Zimmerman, supra, and the judgment appealed from is affirmed on authority of State v. Dade County, supra.
Affirmed.
O’CONNELL and BUFORD,. JJ., and DICKINSON, Associate Justice, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Cnty. OF Dade, 210 So. 2d 200 (Fla. 1968)…viz. National Airlines. As to the argument as to former bond validation decisions approving these or similar lease agreements, reliance is apparently upon two cases of this Court, viz. State v. Dade County, 62 So. 2d 404, and State v. Dade County, 84 So. 2d 41,10 Both of these cases involved proposed bond issues quite similar to that involved in this case. In both cases this Court approved the issuance of bonds similar to those involved in this case for the purpose of_ erecting certain facilities for Nati…1 / 2
Authorities Cited
- State v. Dade Cnty., 62 So. 2d 404 (Fla. 1953)
- Donnalita Cooksey v. Zimmerman, 85 So. 2d 593 (Fla. 1955)