# Schultz v. State ex rel. Swearingen

> Supreme Court of Florida · October 18, 1920 · 80 Fla. 564

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/4920365

## Case

- **Full name:** F. William Schultz, L. B. Hatch, M. C. Burton, Lewis Combs, J. W. Harvey, and James G. Campbell, in Error v. The State of Florida, ex rel. Van C. Swearingen, Attorney General, in Error
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Florida
- **Decided:** October 18, 1920
- **Citations:** 80 Fla. 564; 86 So. 428
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion of the court by West
- **Judges:** Browne, Ellis, Taylor, West, Whitfield
- **Cited by:** 7 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/4920365

## Opinion text

West, J.
An information in the nature of a quo warranto was filed in the name of the Attorney General to test the validity of the organization of the village of Sarasota Heights in Manatee County as a municipal corporation.
*565 Demurrer to the information was overruled. Pleas setting up the facts upon which respondent relied as authority for the exercise of the functions of a municipality were filed and the case was submitted on the merits upon an agreed statement of facts.
There was a finding that the pretended municipality of Sarasota Heights had not been legally organized and had no legal existence and judgment was rendered ousting such pretended municipality from the exercise of the functions and powers of a municipality.
Writ of error was taken from this court and an order of supersedeas was thereupon entered by the trial court.
Subsequently Chapter 8345, Acts of 1919, Laws of Florida, was passed, enacting that the incorporation of the municipality of Sarasota Heights be validated and legalized, and the ordinances enacted by the town council of such municipality and all acts done by its officers were ratified and validated.
The alleged defects in the organization havnig been corrected by this curative act and the municipality having in all respects been made valid, the judgment is reversed for appropriate action in the court below upon the authority of Givens v. County of Hillsborough et al, 46 Fla. 502 , 35 South. Rep. 88 ; Craner v. Comm’rs Volusia County et al, 54 Fla. 526 , 45 South. Rep. 455 ; Charlotte Harbor & N. Ry. Co. v. Welles et al., 78 Fla. 227 , 82 South. Rep. 770 ; Board Comm’rs. v. Forbes Pioneer Boat Line, 80 Fla., 86 South. Rep. 199.
Reversed.
Browne, C. J., and Taylor, Whitfield and Ellis, J. J., concur.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/4920365. Public record. Not legal advice.