Treadway v. TerrellTreadway v. Terrell
*1 whаt that verdict be. no reason should there was Certainly for the court to instruct the a verdict of jury guilty hand, would defendant, be desirable for other on nor that verdict of not would be desirable for State. guilty however, The desire of parties, influence have no should whatever the result aof deliberations. The jury’s jury always free extent that each should left juror may the. follow dictates his conscience in mind and arriving at his verdict. He should reason his with fellow jurors, he but should not be coerced outside by matters the evidence. must be It judgment reversed. sois ordered.
Reversed.
Whitfield, Brown, J., J., P. concur. J.,
Davis, J., Terrell, Ellis and concur in the J. оpinion judgment. al.,
C. B. et Treadway, constituting Depart ment, al., Umpire, Terrell, et as Board of Glenn Arbitration.
En Banc. Opinion Filed January *2 Hamlin, P. Meginnis, Carter Roy B. A. Paul and Waller ; & for Petitioners Pepper, Adair, P. Clarence
Henry G. John M. Mc- Ashby, Nutt, Respondents; Butler,
/. Turner Bedell George C. and Robert H. Ander- son, amici curiae.
Statement. organic P. J. stat provision, following Whitfield, utes are pertinent to the matters involved proceedings in this clause:
“Provision be made general suit bringing the State as to here liabilities now existing originating.” Constitution; State, after Sec. Art. Love, 333, 126 rel., ex Fla. So. 374. 384). (No.
“Chapter at Suits to Be Authorizing Equity Law “An Act Brought and Against the Maintained Depart- ment of the State of Floridа on Which Has Claim Any Arisen 7, 1923, Since Under Contract for Done Work June or Which Hereafter May Under Contract for Work Arise Done and Time in Limiting the Which Suits Be May Brought, and That Providing Against Said Such .Suits Cognizable Shall Be Only *3 of the Courts State Florida Providing and Process How Be Shall Upon Served Department. Said State Road “Whereas, Chapter 9312, Florida, 1923, Laws Acts of ‘An Act entitled Department the State relating to Road im- certain posing upon Department duties conferring certain upon 7, powers 1923, in approved same/ June ,and Section 4 thereof, provided that at law suits equity might be against maintained Depart- State Road ment on claim any under done; arising for work nn (cid:127) (cid:127) (cid:127) and, .
“Whereas, the'Supreme Florida, Court of opinion by its 1930, 14, filed did determine February that the so authority conferred Section 4 of said to maintain Act such suits expressed was not in the title Act, to said that for that reason the granted so authority by said Act to maintain such and, suits ineffectual; was
“Whereas, the intention of the Legislature in and by Sec- tion 4 of said was to authorize Act such suits to be brought against the Road Department said State in the manner therein form stated from and after the time when said Chapter Florida, effect, Laws took and it inis public legislative intent effective, should be the said defect in notwithstanding Chapter title 1923; Laws Now, Acts therefore, Legislature “Be It Enacted State : Florida 1. at brought
“Section Suits law bemay equity State against Department maintained Florida on arisen since any claim which has June 7, 1923, done, or which here- under contract after under contract shall be arise for work done. A claim 7, 1923, to have arisen since instance deemed any June where the work done date. Pro- completed was after said vided, that no suit tort shall be maintained sounding against Department. State Road
“Section against Department Suits this upon prior claim time when Act any arising this Act shall can become law commenced within only Act year one from and after this be- the-time when shall come a law.
“Section 3. Suits Act after time upon claim when can this Act shall become only commenced within completion two from of the work done. years and after actions brought against the, “Section 4. and suits All *4 Department provisions Act courts, the State of Flor- cognizable shall be only process ida. Service in suits be the Chairman said State upon made of thе shall members, or, absence, other upon two
Department, his Department. take upon becoming 5. This Act effect “Section shall » a law. approval without the of the Governor.” “Became 15022, Acts of 1931.) (Chapter Compiled of the General Laws:
Provisions before or after suit parties controversy there- any “All upon make a rule may of court of arbitration to which any desire they may to submit such controversy.” Sec. C. (2855) G. L.
“An arbitration made a may parties be rule of court filing the court which would have jurisdiction of the con- if it troversy arbitration, were not a statement submittеd to signed writing each party agreement ÍA arbitration, be matters submitted to and the name of the arbitrators, arbitrator or and an umpire selected them. The clerk the court (or court if it no clerk) have shall record statement in court, minutes of the thereupon the arbitrator or arbitrators umpire shall the powers have hereinafter specified.” Sec. 4553 (2856) G. L. C.
“The award shall be in writing, signed aby majority of arbitrators, or arbitrators umpire, shall state the adjudication full, and shall filed in the recorded court of which the arbitration a rule.” 4556 (2859) Sec. C. G. L.
“If any record, award be so entered of much thereof as the payment decrees either money by have shall party force and effect a judgment from the day entering award, upon which execution issued in cases of judgment entered; so duly far award relates to the performance act, other lawful party failing to comply with said shall be award considered in contempt, order by the of court shall be to prison, committed there to remain without he bail until shall with the comply order of court in premises.” Sec. (2863) G. L.
In appears Prohibition it proceedings that the following declaration was Deсember filed and other pro- 1931^ ceedings had. *5 “In the Circuit Court of the Second Cir- Judicial
cuit of County, Florida for No. Leon Florida. Depart- Plaintiff,
“C. F. Lytle, State Defendant. ment the Florida, State Damages $250,000.00. at Law, “Action
“Declaration. “C. plaintiff F. by Adair, Cooper Knight & Os- Lytle, borne, undersigned his sues The State attorneys, herein, defendant for:
“1. payable Money' defendant to the by plaintiff for work done plaintiff and materials furnished for the by at defendant the defendant’s request.
“2. And a plaintiff for second count the sues de- fendant for payable the defendant to the money plaintiff by for paid plaintiff money for the defendant at the by dеfendant’s request.
“3. And a for third count defendant plaintiff sues the money for payable plaintiff the defendant by to the received the defendant use money plaintiff. for the by “4. for a count And fourth plaintiff defend- sues the ant for the defendant money payable plaintiff for found to be from the due defendant money plaintiff on accounts them. stated between And count
“5. fifth plaintiff defendant sues on, to-wit, for that heretofore March, the 2nd A. day D. date made bearing between defendant, plaintiff said contract copy being herewith and A’ filed marked ‘Exhibit made refer- hereof, plaintiff agrеed ence a do certain part to as referred ‘said (hereinafter work’) by furnishing the labor described and performing specified materials and *6 ,in contract, might extra work said including deemed or desirable defendant necessary complete to said by contract, fully contemplated by consideration of the payment plain- defendant to the by tiff specified described and in and money sums contract, specified said contract at the times same, thereafter the work’ plaintiff of ‘said and the did been approved theretofore having Engineer contrаct, was, defendant prior to com-' according suit, mencement accepted duly finally defendant; that the amount which became due and payable, the defendant to the for ‘said as' plaintiff so done work’ Million, Sixty-six aforesaid was sum One Thousand Five Hundred Thirty-four ($1,066.- Dollars 74/100 534.74) the defendant became and was indebted to the therefor; plaintiff said sum and although the has plaintiff performed prescribed all conditions on his part, all events have happened, elapsed, and all times have entitle the plaintiff payment sum, the plaintiff has often requested same, the defendаnt yet de- pay fendant paid thereof, not part has said sum or any except the sum Eight Fifty-six Thousand, Hun- Hundred Five dred Thirty-four and Dollars paid by (856,534.74) 74/100 the defendant to prior to the 18th of' plaintiff day July, A. D. Thousand; the plaintiff
“And claims Two Hundred Fifty Dollars ($250,000.00). Cooper Adair,
“Knight, Osborne, & “Attorneys for Plaintiff.” “Bill Particulars Hereto Attached. upon of Contract
“Copy sued filed herewith.” “The State Dr. Lytle.
“To C. F. bridge on construction “Amount owing *7 Bradenton Manatee between across River non-payment from and Palmetto the contents of concrete for one-third of of in construction seals in coffer-dam 35,000.00 piers for bridge..!.........................................$ because his not owing C. F. of Lytle “Balance for con- payment not recеived full having and abutments crete construction piers for Manatee River built bridge of across 35,000.00 Department........................ the State Road his F. because of owing Lytle “Balance piers construction of building Manatee bridge abutments in across concrete seals River without use of coffer-dams.........................,.................... 125,000.00 for reduction “Amount C. F. Lytle owing on surface of height roadway being River after Manatee bridge across the State Road constructed to for grade made on Department, being reduction 5,000.00 requisition................................................ con- polishing “Amount for cost owing built Manatee River across bridge crete 10,000.00 Department....................... for Road er- moneys for Lytle “Amount to C. F. owing on freight to him charged roneously, him in not or used by ordered materials 3,300.00 project of road known construction 213,300.00 Due............................$ “Total Amount First, Second, Third as to Particulars “Bill Declaration. Counts Fourti-i Florida, Dr. the State Department “The State Lytle. C. F.
“To “To amount due the defendant, State of
to the plaintiff, C. F. Lytle, complete performance plaintiff of contract 2nd, March dated hereto attached A,’ as ‘Exhibit made between parties $1,066,534.74 amount “By paid defendant to plaintiff
account 856,534.74 indebtedness.... foregoing “Balance due 210,000.00 defendant to plaintiff............$
“Bill of Particulars Fifth: Count Declaration.
“Agreement. *8 made and into Agreement, 18th day “This еntered April, of A. and between by C. F. Sioux Lytle, of D. City, Iowa, part, party of the first and the of the second the party Florida, of State of part.
“Witnesseth : “A. Whereas, That certain sums are the claimed by part to of first be due to him the of the party by party the in part second for and connection the construction by with the part of the first of a over Man- party bridge and across Florida, atee in County, River and and Manatee also for in the construction connection with of a certain road known Project as and certain cause in is now the pending Florida, County, Circuit Court Lеon for the recovery ** * sums; said Agreed by “Now, Therefore, and It Between Said Is : Parties Follows action at be
“2. That law shall continued all and stayed except such as necessary proceedings carry the under the statutes of Agreement, out this Florida, claims, and that all and accounts legal demands dispute between for work parties the contract under arising done, work, any, if value the and including quantity done all involved the first part, and matters by party done action at for work arising and disposition, shall be final adjustment submitted for composed of two settlement Arbitration Board of Umpire; Arbitrators an
“3. Moriarity, That shall be now Arbitrators Moines, Iowa, Des who has lately State of City been selected an part, Arbitrator of the first party L, Wilson, Beach, Miami State of .City P. Florida, who been as an Arbitrator party has selected Terrell, part, Umpire Judge shall be second been Umpire who selected as parties has jointly hereto, claims, in dis- legal all accounts demands and parties between under contract for pute work, done, if any, and value of including quantity in- legal the first part done matters party action at under contract for work volved law arising Board, are arbitration of done referred hereby made a rule of to arbitration is hereby the submission stat- County, the Circuit Court for Leon cases pro- made and the State of Florida as utes of ; vided *9 care- Umpire shall go That the Arbitrators and said “4. claims, demands each item said into the merits
fully done, includ- for work accounts under contract and arising work, the any, done by if value of and ing quantity in said part, into involved first all matters and party au- complete law, power, have full at shall and action and all and determine any hear and jurisdiction and to thority de- accounts, action, claims or causes of matters, disputed hereto parties arising between mands for work done and the same be completely might as fully heard and a appro- determined court of law or equity priate pleadings in in proper filed due course action any duly ;and or suit for that purpose, shall call for such instituted evidence as shall deem a determi- proper they necessary nation thereof; n Agreement “5. Arbitration and authority This provided Arbitration Board of for herein shall extend include an upon and lawful set-off or counter award presented claim out by the ** * mentioned; herein project .of a careful ‘TO. After full consideration of the claims and asserted involved in action at law the and said matters report findings, Arbitration make Board of shall of its said conclusive, report shall be final shall be which said and hereto, upon parties performed fully and shall be binding error either the said of writ of subject right parties, party.
- Arbitrators, A or a “11. decision the two decision Umpire, .one Arbitrators shall deemed rendered, ex- Board, no decision shall be decision of the but that pur- at a called for said Board cept duly meeting members of said pose, except knowledge with the of all Board. Arbitration shall reach
“12. When the said Board duplicate, thereon in it an decision execute award shall to the attor- one award shall be delivered copy shall, (5) five upon either for each neys party, party en- other, move above days notice to the entitled cause now judgment Court for entry titled award, any, amount of if such court for pending cause made, shall be entered bemay judgment Florida State of the statutes of in accordance with intention of it provided, being cases made .the *10 parties hereto agreement shall be made rule of court provisions accordance with the the statutes * ** the State of Florida. part Whereof, the first party “In Witness hereunto seal, has set his party hand part second these presents has caused to be executed Chairman and and has its seal to caused be here- Secretary affixed, unto year first above written. day Lytle “C. F. (Seal),
“Party of the Part. First
“State of the State of C. B. “By Chairman, Its Treadway, “Party of Second Part.
“Attest; Secretary. Its
“(Seal).”
The award aswas follows: $28,846.72 Allowance on Item One........................................ 29,239.84 Allowance on Item Two........................................ Item Three is disallowеd. 3,480.00 on Item
Allowance Four........................................ Five is Item disallowed. 3,300.00 Six............................................
Allowance Item $64,866.56 Total allowed............................................ total allowance is deducted From this 11,179.19 counter Department’s claim of............ $53,687.37 a net of............................ allowance Leaving at the allowed rate “Interest on the amount awarded is cent, 18, 1927, to date of annum from per per July six at date the same from latter judgment entry payment. rate to date *11 from interest on the award
“In the matter of allowing arbi- the the 18, 1927, judgment, to date of July entry not to. agree trator, Wilson, dissents and does Mr. L. P. interest to herein reference with expressed views as um- the arbitrator, and Moriarity, Mr. the are those of C. herein matters discussed Terrell. All other pire, Glenn and expression both arbitrators are unanimous umpire.” Court, having in Prohibition A was issued by rule to Arbitration reference Board of power to award Department, agency. interest the State Moriarty, made the umpire were and C. by by Motions arbitrators, Lytle, F. respondent, and C. one of upon in grounds: the Rule Prohibition quash Cause that it from Rule to Show appears That “(a) power its Arbitration and it Board of had was Florida, 1931, 15022, to allow Chapter Laws duty in opinion it its interest which allowed and has award award. and awarded its decision Chapter Laws it of said purpose was “(b) That Department amen- State Road make tort, claim to actions able, except sounding done to the same extent like now amenable under F. Lytle, respondent, that the respondent place said circumstances thereby at same actions Department on the level as Act. scope within law or equity suits opinion in and Arbitration its Board of That said “(c) allowed counter has decision and award respondent, against the claim of thereof has allowed allowance Lytle, C. F. claim. counter upon to Show Cause Rule аppears it from said That
“(d) the provisions Agreement of Arbitration clothed said Board of Arbitration interest, with discretion to allow if in the judgment Board such allowance was necessary to compensate said respondent, C. for the Lytle, F. injury sustained, by him and said Board has made such determi- *12 nation. That under the
“(e) Agreement of Arbitration the and Statute Laws the to-wit, of State of Sections 2855- 2863, Revised General Statutes 4552-4560, of (Sections Compiled Laws, General upon Agree- which the said 1927,) ment founded, Arbitration the of Arbi- said Board tration had the power to allow of said re- demand spondent, Lytle, C. F. for interest that such event Board its discretion determine that should such allow- ance should made or part for any compen- just sation respondent, claims, Lytle, C. F. said his and discretion such has been exercised said affirmatively by Board.
“(f) appears That it from Rule to said Show Cause the allowance of said Board Arbitration by opinion and decision its said said and and and award proper.” was answer, respondent, Lytle, F. avers:
By suit was to re- respondent “That instituted this said upon said State Department cover of and from Road respondent contract for work claims of. this th¿ 7th, 1923, to-wit, the construction of. done after June to in of said bridge paragraph said road referred said and completed accepted prior That Rule. said was and 18th, 1927, payment to and sums demand for July respondent prior on and due the were made respondent 18th, and said State Road then Department July to part refused to all pay any and there thenceforward or claims respondent of this and denied liability * * * all or part of them. any 18th, 1927, at re- “That all since said July times spondent sought has obtain upon to hearing diligently of his beginning said claims from merits very been to them to disinter- ready has submit willing any dеtermination, board or tribunal for their re- ested 18th, 1927, since made jpeatedly has known July Department. through- willingness Road But said State period Department State denied out said has obligations validity said claims them, part same, or any pay the merits them refused submit court the time other until when said Arbitration tribunal 18th, 1933, negotiated April dated between Agreement was * * * Department. respondent and *13 * * * the said upon denies interest respondent “This that 18, 1927, part thereof, or was principal sum from July respondent Board Arbitration to this by allowed motion. on the avers the fact to be own contrary its And respondent to this by that the interest allowed was a after and opportunity of Arbitration full hearing, Board briefs been duly by be heard after had filed to ought that to allowed respondent interest asserting that awarded, State by asserting interest, to' or interest, no ought be allowed no such awarded, duly such matter had been submitted and after * * * Arbitration for decision. parties both by said Board allegations respondent denies of said “And this admitted to be true.” herein Rule save those Wilson, L. answer filed P. one separate A was arbitrators, in of his dissent grounds which he stated amount of the award. interest on to thе allowance of
853 (after making foregoing statement).— Whitfield, J. A writ of prohibition here a sought restrain is Board Arbitration from entering judgment a under statute to become judgment the Circuit Court, predicated upon award, an insofar requires Department, it the State Road agency, State interest on the amount net of an pay from which date on award such amount should have paid been for work done contract under with the State Department, upon no statute author- ground izes a judgment against the State for on interest the claims litigation. No question of the State in an liability action for tort involved is here. State is not
“A liable to on debts, its interest unless pay consent to has been do an Act its so manifested of its Legislature, or lawful executive Carolina, 211, officers.” United North v. 136 States U. S. 920, 10 Ct. 34 Ed. 336. Law Sup. an interest against
Where award of State would be invalid, it so adjudged trial court appeal. Mitchell, Hawkins Fla. See v. So. 311. See Kennedy, also Board Public Instruction Fla. 250; 59
147 So. C. J. against interest bemay adjudged law If others, cases some classes and not agency State not issue it should unless is prohibition shown that writ of there the facts no jurisdiction award the case agency cоnsid- being *14 ; all under which ered if the facts claim for and the interest made, are in the record on is not shown for suggestion writ denied, the be writ unless under the prohibition, of should State in against cannot be awarded the agency interest law the class one case the nature or of the involved. of of any Dept., Rd. 96 Fla. See Crill St. So.
There is the provision no Constitution the or statutes State the of from lia- expressing immunity State the payments for interest not to. bility Such immu- assented an is attribute of nity implied is law for sovereignty State; the benefit be waived immunity may statute, that is or' any manifested as way authorized by justice require to conserve welfare and honor may the State. contemplates legal against law that State claims course, that paid
shall be the State against due suits against the and the of interest claims State payment on will not in general rights. conserve necessary be property that also of some recognized
But legality against State that adjudicated be justice should claims bemay done. general the enactment
The Constitution authorizes to all liabilities laws State against “for suit bringing as laws originating.” hereafter Such may or now existing or against authorize State liabilities suits au- State; arise intendment against may an, the State claims of liability thorize adjudication part a incident legal interest or claims for as under contract for work those the State such the State is interest done, though payment even contract; statute or in the provided not expressly in proper State interest may liability implied authority, statutory adjudicated cases legal between would and just adjudication when such compensation to complete it is necessary parties, private contracts with justice to the administration of State. sue given, authority
Where statutory from payment implied immunity
855 upon obligations sovereign be State or may waived the payment of such interest be authorized may impliedly assented the statute; interest be awarded may on implied when statutory the nature authority on which suits claims maintained may and the object designed in suits the State or its permitting agencies warrant it.
Where there sue, not the statutory authority for generally matters sovereign its governmental affecting functions,, but upon claim for “any contract work done” for State specific au- agency having statutory thority to construction for for highways when, the State and pay dоne under con- tract, there are no pertinent limitations contained to sue or other the sub- authority statutes controlling as to payment of interest due on ject debts contracts made for the State agency, general authorized principles of applied proper liability obligation, comports cases of contract where to do so with to sue and will do statutory justice in authority case with and the law and equity consonant dignity sovereign. See Luckenbach honor of S. Nor- S. Co. v. 328, Tehkla, 341, 266 Barque, S. 45 wegian Sup. U. 112, 313; Mitchell, 2 69 Res v. Ct. L. Ed. Publica Dallas 101, Robertson, S. 307; 1 266 U. Ed. Miller v. S.) L. (U. Mail 243, 73, 265; York Cubа 45 Ct. 69 New & Sup. L. Ed. States, 945; Common- (2nd) v. United 16 Fed. S. S. Co. 1747, 323; Par- 24 Law. 72 S. Lyon, Ky. wealth v. W. 154, State, 1035; Chicago, 31 Y. N. menter v. E. N. O., Mundt, 530; 56 S. Common- P., Ry. v. St. Co. D. M. & Matter 386; 298; 12 Bush 59 C. Collins, (Ky.) wealth v. J. 405; 133; 5 C. Burke, 437, 84 N. City E. N. Y. J. State, 115 Neb. W. N. of Chadron *16 856
Interest
be an element
a
may
just compensation
340,
contract.
McMillan,
134,
Sullivan v.
37 Fla.
19 So.
Winfield,
53 A. S. R. 239; The
Co.
53
Grilling
v.
Bros.
589,
Warren,
Fla.
687;
578,
McMillan
So.
59 Fla.
v.
In case the statute “suits at law authorizes expressly or in against the Department equity 7, 1923, arisen Florida claim which has since June done, arise for work or which hereafter may contract under contract Depart- work done.” The State for, ment is authorized to contract and make specifically to fоr, the con- regulations such rules and be as may necessary roads, bridges. struction maintenance highways Section 1635 G. L. (1195) a suit main-
Under the above
be
statutory authority
may
a
against
involving claim
tained
past
incident
legal
for interest
a
to
for amounts
claims
unpaid for
done under a
within the
due and
make,
claim has
department
to
when the
authority
Arbitration has
7,
since
1923. The
arisen
Board
June
the statutes.
determine such claims under
jurisdiction
under the
particular claim should
allowed
Whether
Arbitration to de-
facts,
the Board of
statute
is
A
interest
review.
claim for
subject
termine
authorized
the Stаte that are
incident to
legal
be a
claims
may
Arbitration to de-
within the
jurisdiction
the Board
not be
In
a
Prohibition should
such a case writ of
termine.
in allowing
the exercise
jurisdiction
issued
restrain
rendered
judgment
for interest.
claim
denying
under Section
appellate proceedings
in proper
reviewed
900,
Payne McElya,
Fla.
V, Constitution.
v.
Article
902,
Interest was
claimed
specifically
in the
Court;
filed
Circuit
-but that
not
is
when
necessary
an
is claimed as
incident to the main claim and the
ad damnum clause
sufficient
amount
cover the
of in-
terest claimed. See Seaboard Air Line
Brown,
Railwаy
77 Fla.
In 405, 311, v. 34 Hawkins Fla. 16 the So. stat- to utory authority guarantee payment the of interest was limited payment coupons to the of interest upon stated bonds certain companies, issued railroad the and statute did not authorize the impliedly payment of interest from the State Trust after the Fund bonds had matured and the coupons paid. been had all In Bank National Duval County, v. 45 Jacksonville 894, 496, 457, 34 So. 3 Ann. Cases the au
Fla. statutory warrants were issued under which not county did thority the contemplate payment of interest thereon. Co.,
In Engr. Constrg. v. Charleston 101 Duval & County 509, 341, there no contract Fla. 134 So. was authorized to interest, there nor was statute any specifically allowing pay on claim against arising suit county “any done” in case. for work Sons, v. In B. Lewis 20 Fla. & County Jefferson 223, Hawkins, 362, So. Fla. County Jefferson county specific statutory were issued by bonds payable it that interest
authority, was and held was coupons matured, on bonds after county they though there was nо to interest express statutory pay authority matured, after the bonds no contract interest on pay on unpaid matured bonds or matured coupons.
In the cited, five Florida last appellate above direct cases to test proceedings were invoked validity awards against State and counties. The statute against suits De- authorizes partment claim under contract for work done any arising 7, 1933, bridge since road and contracts June construction the State author- which is make of such nature may payment ized to unpaid interest on the State may amounts due.and and, parties; to do justice between complete necessary intent, it be as- the absence of contrary statutory that, against sumed authorizing suits Department the statute intends that interest adjudged bemay it against cases where is to do necessary proper accomplish purposes complete justice State on claim' statute suits authorizing since under contract for done June enter a power No judgment jurisdiction lack contemplated, made to appear; shown herein to be *18 in should be and is ordered hereby the rule Prohibition quashed. in quashed. Rule Prohibition Ellis, Buford, J., J.,C. Davis, concur. Brown J. J., disqualified. Terrell, claim,” words, used (concurring).—The “any Brown, J. consideration, are very broad statute here are the statute in limited comprehensive, they only arise, must viz.: claim particulars, (1) certain named Depart- arisen, against or must have (2) done, ment, (3) a for work subsequently a claim would 1933, it not be such as must 7, and (4) June recovery. tort for its action an require sounding The. claims brought such must be which suits time within is.
859 provided Act, must be suits as are cog- nizable “at inor equity.” scope broad “claim” word has long recog- been far
nized—as as Coke, back the time of Lord who sаid that “the law, is the largest word demand word known to the save, That only claim.” “claim” word is broad enough to, cover, interest does well principal, as as unless the statute provided, had expressly plain otherwise to my 11 816, mind. See In McMillan, C. et Sullivan seq. J. 134, 145, Fla. So. it that “Whenever was held it is that at a particular time ought ascertained money have been paid, debt, satisfaction whether a or a as a compensation duty, breach or for a keep failure to contract, a attaches an incident.” is, therefore,
There no power showing lack of or impose jurisdiction judgment award interest, as principal. as well Administratrix, McGee, v. Bertha Ed. DeBrauwere Company. & 457. So. January Filed Opinion