Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Lee v. Smith, (1933)

Court: Supreme Court of Florida Number:  Visitors: 2
Judges: WHITFIELD, J. —
Attorneys: Cary D. Landis, Attorney General, for Appellant; C. O. Andrews, and Guyte P. McCord, for Appellee.
Filed: Jun. 15, 1933
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: This is an appeal in equity from an interlocutory order granting a temporary injunction and overruling a motion to dismiss a bill of complaint filed by certain individuals as claimants to certain moneys in the hands of the Comptroller, in which it is alleged that the complainants below have a vested interest about to be disregarded by the Comptroller because of his interpretation of certain statutes deemed controlling with respect to the distribution of the moneys involved. Chapter 11954, Acts o
More

At first I was inclined to think the order of the court below should be affirmed, but after considering Mr. Justice ELLIS'S opinion and again studying the statutes involved, I have changed my mind, and concur in his conclusions. Chapter 11954, Sec. 1, bases the yearly compensation of the tax collector, not upon fees or commissions earned, but upon fees or commissions "collected," which means collected during the year. I do not think this principle is changed by Chapter 15798, which says that the tax collector shall not be entitled to any commission for the sale of property to the State until paid upon redemption or sale of the tax certificate. The Act of 1929, Chapter 14572, Sec. 4, provided that the tax collector "shall not be entitled to any commission for the sale of such property made to the State of Florida." The 1931 Act says that the commission shall not be payable until redemption or payment. So the commissions do not accrue until the time arrives.

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer