Opinion
November 7, 1950. Rehearing Denied December 8, 1950.
Edgar W. Waybright, Sr., Jacksonville, for relators.
John W. Muskoff, Jacksonville, for defendants.
After the primary elections in May 1950, it was revealed that eleven vacancies existed in the Democratic County Executive Committee of Duval County, the reason being that no one was elected to these posts as the law provides. On June 7, 1950, the retiring chairman of the State Democratic Executive Committee filled each of said vacancies by appointment. On June 19, 1950, the newly elected Chairman of the State Democratic Executive Committee made other and different appointments to fill these vacancies.
This is a quo warranto proceeding brought by the appointees of the newly elected chairman against the appointees of the retiring chairman, challenging their authority to exercise the powers and duties of committeemen and committeewomen from their respective precincts.
The point for determination is whether the appointees of the retiring chairman of those of the newly elected chairman are authorized to exercise the powers and duties of county executive committeemen or committeewomen from Duval County.
The right to exercise the duties brought in question may be tested by quo warranto. State ex rel. Page v. Dannelly, 139 Fla. 320, 190 So. 593. The question with which we are confronted turns on the interpretation of the pertinent provisions of Section 102.07, F.S.A., paragraph one of which is as follows: "(1) The state executive committee of each political party shall consist of two members, a man and a woman, from each county in the state, who shall be elected for four years in the primary elections held in the year 1942 and every four years thereafter. The members of said executive committee shall, within thirty days after their election, meet and organize by electing from among their number a chairman and a vice-chairman, one of whom shall be a man and the other a woman, and such other officers as they may deem necessary or expedient. The outgoing chairman of the state executive committee of each party shall, not less than ten days before the first meeting, notify each newly elected member of said committee of the time and place of said meeting."
We cannot escape the conclusion that the statute quoted fixes the term of executive committeemen and committeewomen at four years, beginning with the primary election in 1942. County executive committeemen follow the same rule so their terms would necessarily expire at the primary elections in 1946, 1950, etc. The statute also requires them to meet and organize within 30 days after their election by electing a chairman and such other officers as they may deem expedient. The outgoing chairman of the State Executive Committee is required to notify each newly elected member of the time and place of said meeting.
Paragraph 4 of Section 102.07, F.S.A., in part provides, "that in the event of no election of committeemen or committeewomen, or of a vacancy occurring from any other cause in any county executive committee, the chairman of the state executive committee shall have the power to fill such vacancy by appointment from among the members of the party residing in the election district where such vacancy occurs."
Under the statute first quoted the term of office of the outgoing chairman expired at the date of the May primary in 1950 and the term of his successor, who was elected at said primary, commenced on that date. It is true that the statute authorizes the outgoing chairman to notify each newly elected member of the date for organizing the committee, but it clothed him with no other duty or power. Since he was out as a member of the committee he was out as chairman and had no power to fill vacancies on the county executive committee, such power being vested in the newly elected chairman of the State Executive Committee.
It follows that relators, the appointees of the newly elected chairman of the state executive committee, were the duly qualified committeemen from the precincts designated in their appointment and are entitled to act as such.
It is so ordered.
ADAMS, C.J., and THOMAS, SEBRING and HOBSON, JJ., concur.
CHAPMAN and ROBERTS, JJ., dissent.