Opinion

State v. County of Brevard

  • 99 Fla. 226
  • 126 So. 353
Court
Supreme Court of Florida
Filed
Feb 1, 1930
Status
Published
Author
Brown
On the bench
Whitfield, Terrell, Ellis, Brown, Buford, Strum
Cited by
10 cases

The opinion

Brown, J.

(concurring) :

As the taxes to be imposed for the payment of these-bonds are

ad valorem

taxes, as for a county purpose, I am inclined to the view that the first sentence of Sec. 5,'Art. IX, of the Constitution applies. I would have serious, doubts of the validity of this Act if it were compuulsory in its nature, but it merely

authorizes

the county to issue these bonds. There is no question here of an excise tax, or of the power of the Legislature to levy such a tax as a cóunty tax and to require the application of the proceeds, thereof to certain designated county purposes, including road district bonds as to road districts in the county, as was involved in the case of Amos v. Mathews, decided at the present term.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.