BIENNIAL REPORT OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
------~
---- -----
607
To Honorable J. Lee Ballard.. Hotel Commissioner:
When we consider the history of Chapters 509, 510 and 511, Florida
Statutes, 1941, and each and every section thereof, we find that the
major portion of each of said chapters was derived from Chapter 16042,
Laws of Florida, Acts of 1933. We also find that all sections of Chapter
510, Florida statutes, 1941, except Section 510.01, were derived from said
Chapter 16042. Section 511.01, Florida Statutes, 1941, was derived from
and in substantially the same as Section 6, Chapter 16042, Laws of
Florida, Acts of 1933, which was substantially the same as Section 3,
Chapter 6952, Laws of Florida, Acts of 1915. Sections 510.01 and 511.42,
Florida Statutes, 1941, are the only sections in Chapters 509, 510 and
511, Florida Statutes, 1941, which were not directly affected by the defi­
nitions in said Sections 3 and 6 of the 1915 and 19'33 acts above men­
tioned at the time of the adoption of the statutes. The definition in
Section 510.01 does not seem to be broad enough to embrace the subject
matter expressed in Sections 510.02, 510.04 and 510.06 therein contained.
"As statute incorporated into a code is presumed to be incorporated
without change even though it is reworded and rephrased and in the
organization of the code its original sections are separated. Where, how­
ever, the legislative intent is clear that a change in the law is intended,
the new provision prevails. In case of ambiguity it is permissible to re­
sort to the prior legislative history of the act, the form and language
of the prior statute, prior interpretation and all matters in pari materia
in order to arrive at the true meaning of the code provision." (2 Suther·
land Statutory Construction, 3rd. Ed., 255, Section 3709). In construing
a codification of existing laws it should be presumed that no substantial
change was intended, in the absence of positive evidence of an intent
to change the law. (59 C. J. 1099, Section 648). If there is any con­
flict between two sections of a statute or code, the one which was derived
from the older law will fall and the one derived from the subsequent law
will govern. (Hillsborough County v. Jackson, 58 Fla. 210, 50 So. 423
and Lykes Bros. Inc. v. Bigby, 155 Fla. 580, 21 So. 2d. 37).
When the above statutes, laws and authorities are considered to­
gether, it seems clear that Section 511.01, Florida Statutes, 1941, is the
governing definition as to what constitutes a hotel under Chapters 509,
510 and 511, Florida Statutes, 1941, and not Section 510.01.
HOTELS
October 25, 1946.-046-441.
EVICTION OF TENANTS-CONFLICT WITH OPA
QUESTION: Does the Office of Price Administration through its
area rent control offices within the State of Florida have any legal
right to require a landlord in the State of Florida to establish grounds
upon which federal law will permit said landlord to remove or evict
tenants who are violating the provisions of Chapter 510, Section 510.08,
Laws of Florida, before said violators can be evicted?
To Honorable J. Lee Ballard, state Hotel Commissioner:
Chapter 22(}23, Laws of Florida, 1943, re-enacted as Section 510.08,
Florida Statutes, 1941, is a statute penal in its nature, condemning
certain prescribed conduct on the part of hotel or apartment house
guests as a misdemeanor and providing a penalty for the commission of
certain acts as a breach of the peace. The statute further directs the
arrest of offending guests by peace officers and their summary eviction
from the hotel or apartment house premises. There is nothing in the
provision of the Act of Congress creating the federal agency known as
"Office of Price Administration" which would indicate an intention on
the part of Congress to cause a cloak of protection to be cast around a
I
.
.,<,.:J&~'.".. .
608
BIENNIAL REPORT OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
miscreant guilty of a violation of the criminal laws of the state and
absolve him from arrests and punishment without first securing the
consent of the federal authorities to his apprehension. Any such exer­
cise of statutory or rule making power would not be justified under
organic law.
Your question is therefore answered in the negative; that is, that in
all cases where a person who is a guest of a hotel, apartment house. or
other establishment described in the act of the legislature under con­
sideration, violates the provisions of the statute referred to, he may
be summarily evicted, with or without the assistance of a peace officer,
without first obtaining the consent of the federal authorities employed
in the administration of "Office of Price Administration."
January 14, 1946.-046-15.
UNDESIRABLE GUESTS-EJECTION
I
be ( I
wot,
or
san
evic
'510
plie
the
safl
par
con
dis]
Hin
"gu
QUESTION: Is Chapter 22023, Laws of Florida, 1943, providing for
ejection of undesirable guests by hotels, apartment houses and like enter­
prises a constitutional enactment?
To Honorable J. Lee Ballard, state Hotel Commissioner:
Chapter 22023, Laws of Florida, 1943, constitutes and is a statutory
declaration of the common law governing the relationship existing be­
tween innkeepers and guests. A strict compliance with the provisions
of the statute by an innkeeper would not constitute deprivation of a guest
of his libetry or property without due process.
It is competent for hotel keepers to enforce rules for the maintenance
of order within the hotel, and if a guest is guilty of misconduct which is
offensive to other guests or which would bring the hotel into disrepute,
the hotel keeper may cause the removal of the guest, using only such
means or force as is reasonably necessary to accomplish the purpose.
It must be understood, however, that resort to the provisions of the
statute is justified only under conditions that fall within the scope of the
prOVisions of the act, which does not authorize or justify the exercise
by the hotel keeper of arbitrary or unreasonable authority.
Ma:
ing
toil
tiOI
apa
To.
April 16, 1946.-046-149.
GUESTS'--EVICTION AS UNDESIRABLE
QUESTION: What is the lawful procedure to be followed by a
manager, or other person in charge or authority of a hotel or an apart­
ment or rooming house, in the eviction of a guest who ha3 in such
hotel, apartment or rooming house become intoxicated or whose conduct
has become immoral or who is profane and leWd. or whose continued
guest status WOUld, in the opinion of such manager or person, be detri­
mental to such hotel, apartment or rooming house?
To Honorable J. Lee Ballard, state Hotel Commissioner:
My answer to your question is that such manager or person in au-'
thority should (1) notify such guest orally or in writing, preferably the
latter, to the following effect: "You are hereby notified that this estab­
lishment no longer desires to retain you as its guest and you are requested
to leave at once and to remain after receipt of this notice is a misde­
meanor under the laws of this state," and at the same time tendering any
unused portion of payment made in advance; (2) afford the guests a
reasonable time within which to depart; (3) upon failure of the guest to
abide by the notice, the manager or such person in authority may use only
such force as is necessary to eject such guest or any policeman, constable.
deputy sheriff, sheriff or other law enforcement officer of this state may
see)
toil
floc
not
the
hot
slet
be
des,
as
Fel::
sell
jec1