Case Name: W. J. MEREDITH, James G. Martin, and A. R. Ohmart, Appellants, v. CITY OF WINTER HAVEN et al., Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1944-04-22
Citations: 141 F.2d 1019
Docket Number: No. 10402
Parties: W. J. MEREDITH, James G. Martin, and A. R. Ohmart, Appellants, v. CITY OF WINTER HAVEN et al., Appellees.
Judges: Before SIBLEY, HUTCHESON, and McCORD, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: Federal Reporter 2d Series
Volume: 141
Pages: 1019–1020

Head Matter:
W. J. MEREDITH, James G. Martin, and A. R. Ohmart, Appellants, v. CITY OF WINTER HAVEN et al., Appellees.
No. 10402.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
April 22, 1944.
For former opinion, see 141 F.2d 348.
D. C. Hull, Erskine W. Landis, John L. Graham, and J. Compton French, all of DeLand, Fla., for appellants.
Giles J. Patterson, of Jacksonville, Fla., and Harry E. King, of Winter Haven, Fla., for appellees.
Before SIBLEY, HUTCHESON, and McCORD, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
As ground for a rehearing the case of State v. Pinellas County, 143 Fla. 557, 197 So. 127, is particularly pressed upon us. In that case the bonds to be refunded had "deferred interest coupons", which were not provided for in the new series about to be validated. It is true the court held the deferred interest coupons would not thereafter be collectible, but the reason given is not that they were originally and totally void, but that the bonds which bore them had been duly called under a provision for calling them "at par and the accrued interest at the rate then prevailing as en- forcible and collectible." No part of the deferred interest was payable on the call, as in our case. We remain convinced that our conclusion is according to law and justice.
Petition for rehearing denied.