THE FARMERS & BANKERS LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, A CORPORATION,
v.
LAKE HANCOCK IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT, A BODY CORPORATE, AND HERBERT N. CASEBIER, AS RECEIVER OF LAKE HANCOCK IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT
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.
The Florida Supreme Court held that bondholders of an improvement district are entitled to a levy to cover outstanding bonds and interest, even if the initial assessment was insufficient. The court found that the district's taxing power, limited by ascertained benefits, could be exercised to satisfy the general obligation bonds.
Yes, bondholders are entitled to a levy on all parcels of land within the district, limited by the amount of benefits previously ascertained, to produce sufficient funds to pay outstanding bonds and interest. This right cannot be abrogated in a manner that abrogates the contract contained in the bond.
“Therefore the bond holders of outstanding bonds are entitled to a levy on all parcels of land in the district, within the limitation of the amount of the benefits heretofore found and determined to exist, to produce a sufficient fund to pay the outstanding bonds and interest thereon.”
Establishes the entitlement of bondholders to a further levy to cover the debt.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe Farmers & Bankers Life Insurance Company, a bondholder, filed a bill alleging that the assessment previously made by the Lake Hancock 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 General Obligation Bonds cases and more on FLexlaw
The bill shows that an amount equal to the ascertained benefits has not been assessed. The assessment heretofore made was to provide the payment of a bond issue in the sum of $100,000.00. There does not remain sufficient funds arising from the assessment heretofore made to pay off the bonded indebtedness.
The bonded indebtedness was and is the general obligation of the district and has behind it the full taxing power of the district which is limited only' by the amount of the benefits found and determined before the bonds were issued.
Therefore the bond holders of outstanding bonds are entitled to a levy on all parcels of land in the district, within the limitation of the amount of the benefits heretofore found and determined to exist, to produce a sufficient fund to pay the outstanding bonds and interest thereon. This right of the bond holders could not be taken from them in such manner as to abrogate the contract contained in the bond. It is therefore our conclusion that the bill contains equity. The petition for certiorari is granted and the order dismissing the bill of complaint is quashed.
It is so ordered.
CHAPMAN, C. J., TERRELL, and BUFQRD, JJ., concur.
ADAMS, J., concurs specially.
concurring specially:
I concur in the foregoing opinion and judgment but in so doing I do not understand that the opinion modifies our opinion in Moran v. State ex rel. Montgomery, 111 Fla. 429, 149 So. 477.
CHAPMAN, C. J., TERRELL and BUFORD, JJ., concur.
ADAMS, J.,
concurring specially:
I concur in the foregoing opinion and judgment but in so doing I do not understand that the opinion modifies our opinion in Moran v. State ex rel. Montgomery, 111 Fla. 429, 149 So. 477.
CHAPMAN, C. J., TERRELL and BUFORD, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Moran v. State, 111 Fla. 429 (Fla. 1933)
- Jimenez v. Spicola, 111 Fla. 570 (Fla. 1933)