STATE OF FLORIDA, EX REL. THOMAS N. CURINGTON, JR.,
v.
O. P. SWOPE, AS CHAIRMAN OF THE FLORIDA REAL ESTATE COMMISSION, AND O. P. SWOPE, H. BRYANT MERRITT, AND JOHN R. WRIGHT, AS AND CONSTITUTING THE FLORIDA REAL ESTATE COMMISSION
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
A person under twenty-one, whose disabilities of non-age have been removed by court decree, is eligible to apply for examination to become a real estate salesman. The court denied the motion to quash the writ of mandamus.
The relator, a minor who obtained a decree removing his disabilities of non-age, applied to take the examination for a real estate salesman license un…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
This matter is before us on a motion to quash an alternative writ of mandamus issued by this court. The sole question raised by the writ and motion is whether a person who has not yet reached the age of twenty-one years, but who has obtained a decree removing his disabilities of non-age, under the laws of this State, is entitled to file an application, under section 475.17, Florida Statutes, 1941, and be examined as to his qualifications to become a real estate salesman.
In the case of State ex rel. Lamson v. Baker, Circuit Judge, 25 Fla. 598, 6 So. 445, it was held that a minor who had his disibilities of' non-age removed by decree of court was entitled to be examined for a license to practice law, under a practice act which required as one of the conditions of admission to practice that such applicant should be at least twenty-one years of age. We can see no difference in principal between that situation and the one confronting us in the proceeding at bar.
The motion to quash is therefore denied and the respondent is hereby required to file its answer or return to the alternative writ within ten days from the adoption and entry of this opinion and judgment; and in default thereof it is ordered that a peremptory writ be issued in accordance with the prayer of the alternative writ.
*278It is so ordered.
THOMAS, C. J., TERRELL and CHAPMAN, JJ., concur.