Skip to main content
· 1/15/1905

City of Pensacola v. Southern Bell Telephone Co.

Citations

  • 49 Fla. 161

Syllabus

<p>1. A declaration alleging in substance that an ordinance was adopted hy the city of .Pensacola providing that telephone companies using the streets for its poles and wires should pay two dollars annually per pole to the city, and that the defendant, a telephone company, was so using the streets, but refused to pay the said sum, is not obnoxious to demurer (a) because the declaration does no.t show that the city had authority to rent the streets, or (h) because it does net allege that the pole rental was reasonable in amount.</p> <p>2. Under the statute laws providing a provisional government for municipalities, a city which is given a provisional form of government can only act on the passage of ordinances as provided by the statute so as to hind the city by contract, and where a resolution is adopted hy the board of commissioners, .the president of said board being present and assenting to such resolution, and signing and approving the minutes of the meeting, hut the said resolution was not after its adoption submitted to the president of the hom'd in his capacity as mayor, for his consideration as such mayor, and for his rejection or approval thereof as mayor as required by law, such resolution was not adopted in the manner provided for the adoption of ordinances.</p> <p>3. A pica which in .\\bstance sets up that while the city ’of Pensacola vas under a provisional government as provided by a resolution was adopted by the hoard of llio president of the board presiding at the jr:.'-':.!.’ at which the resolution was adopted, and consenibig to sii.-h adoption, and signing and approving the minutes nf the meeting, under which resolution the defendant teitvoone company erected its poles and stretched its wires in the stisets, and which provided that the city might use the poles for its fire alarm system, of which ¡privilege the city availed itself, and was thereby estopped from enforcing an ordinance subsequently adopted providing a charge of two dollars per pole a

Judges: Carter, Cockrell, Hocker, Shackleford, Taylor, Whitfield

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.