Not complete...
"The priciples proclaimed in the Declaration of Rights of the State Constitution and in the due process and equal protection clauses of the Federal Constitution are paramount, insuperable commands to all governmental officers or agencies who exercise delegated power or authority, whether under the form of law, or ordinances or resolutions, substantive or procedural, and whether of state, county, municipal, or other nature, and whether of legislative, executive, judicial, or other character. Const. Fla. Declaration of Rights, §§ 1, 4, 12; U.S.C.A. Const. Amend. 14." (State ex rel. Lawson v. Woodruff, 184 So. 81, Oct. 21, 1938.)
"Phrase "due process of law," when applied to substantive rights as distinguished from procedural rights, means that a state or municipality is without right to deprive a person of life, liberty or property by an act having no reasonable relationship to any proper governmental purpose. U.S. C.A.Const. Amend. 14; F.S.A.Const.1885 Declaration of Rights, § 12." (State of Florida ex rel. George B. Furman v. Philip E. Searcy, ?? ?? ??, July 30, 1969.)
"A poilice officer was deprived of procedural due process when city failed to comply with provisions of its charter for removal of the policemen and instead sought to remove him in manner which allegedly comported with the Law Enforcement Officers' Bill or Rights. West's F.S.A. § 112.531 et seq." (Ragucci v. City of Plantation, hn. 4, 407 So.2d 932, Dec. 2, 1981.)
"As for what is due process the Supreme Court held in Board of Regents v. Roth, 408 U.S. 564, 569-570, 92 S.Ct. 2701, 2705, 33 L.Ed.2d 548 (1972):
"The requirmements of procedural due process apply only to the deprivation of interests encompassed by the fourteenth Amendment's protection of liberty and property. When protected interests are implicated, the right to some kind of prior hearing is paramount. (Foornotes omitted.)
"Section 15 of the [City's] Charter clearly fulfilled the requirements of Roth, supra, by providing a pre-termination adjudicatory hearing. It was not the intent of the legislature by its enactment of the Law Enforcement Officers Bill of Rights to take from appellant, who had property interest in his employment, the procedural due process which Section 15 provided and to substitute in its place an advisory hearing whether pre- or post-termination. Accordingly, appelant was deprived of procedural due process by noncompliance with section 15 of the City's Charter and is entitled to be reinstated..." (Ragucci v. City of Plantation, 407 So.2d 932, 935, Dec. 2, 1981.)
"Due process property right may be created by termination provisions in statute where statute lists specific grounds for discharge or states that employee can be discharged only for just cause. U.S.C.A. Const. Amend. 14." (Sutor v. Cochran, hn. 5, 687 So.2d 897, Jan. 29, 1997.)
"Rights based on state law may be rescinded constitutionally so long as elements of procedural, not substantive, due process are observed. U.S.C.A. Const. Amend. 14." (Sutor v. Cochran, hn. 6, 687 So.2d 897, Jan. 29, 1997.)
"The constitutional requirements of "due process of law" are not satisfied by a hearing if person whose life, liberty or property is at stake, is not permitted to interpose reasonable and legitamate defenses." State ex rel Paoli v. Baldwin et al., 31 So.2d 627, hn. 1 (S.C.Fla. 1947)