Case Name: HYGEMA v. CITY OF SEBRING et al.
Court: Florida Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1936-06-13
Citations: 169 So. 366
Docket Number: 
Parties: HYGEMA v. CITY OF SEBRING et al.
Judges: WHITFIELD, C. J., and ELLIS, TERRELL, BUFORD, and DAVIS, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter
Volume: 169
Pages: 366–367

Head Matter:
HYGEMA v. CITY OF SEBRING et al.
Supreme Court of Florida.
June 13, 1936.
Rehearing Denied July 21, 1936.
W. L. Long, of Sebring, for appellant.
W. H. Nollman, of Sebring, for appel-lees.
Peter O. Knight, of Tampa, James Hardin Peterson, of Lakeland, Francis P. Fleming, of Jacksonville, Allen Clements, Jim Clements, and J. A. Franklin, all of Ft. Myers, Fred R. Wilson, of Sanford, Murray Sams, of De Land, E. Noble Calhoun, of St. Augustine, James Messer, Jr., of Tallahassee, Ernest E. Mason, of Pensacola, Ralph A. Marsicano, of Tampa, Sumter Leitner, of Arcadia, W. G. Vaughn, of Melbourne, Leon J. C. Hartón, of Daytona Beach, J. M. Austin, of Leesburg, J. W. Watson, Jr., of Miami, Wm. M. Madison, of Jacksonville, Russell Snow, of Cocoa, E. O. Deni-son, of Ft. Pierce, Thomas W. Butler, of Punta Gorda, and R. A. McGeachey, of Milton, as amici curiae.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
This cause having heretofore been submitted to the court upon the transcript of the record of the judgment herein, and briefs and argument of counsel for the respective parties, after a careful reading and inspection of the record it appears to the court that the city council of the city of iyebring, purporting to act under the authority of chapter 17118, Laws of Florida 1935, proposed a construction of a gas plant and distribution system and the financing of the cost thereof from the issuance of debentures payable solely from the revenue of such proposed gas plant and distribution system.
The circuit court granted the appellees' motion to dismiss the bill of complaint, which sought to restrain the city from proceeding with the project. After a careful consideration of the record, it is decided by the court that the principles of law involved are the same, and the case is controlled by the opinion and decision in the case of Kathleen Citrus Land Company, Appellant, v. City of Lakeland et al., Appellees (Fla.) 169 So. 356, this day decided, and upon the authority of which decision the order of the chancellor in this case is hereby reversed with direction to grant injunction unless and until the certificate proposed to be issued shall have been approved under the provisions of amended section 6 of article 9 of the Constitution.
Reversed.
WHITFIELD, C. J., and ELLIS, TERRELL, BUFORD, and DAVIS, JJ., concur.
BROWN, J., dissents.