J. K. TIPPETT; RELATOR,
v.
W. T. WILLIAMS, J. N. HOLMES, J. W. LESTER, JOHN T. GUNN, AND W. T. WATKINS AS MEMBERS OF AND COMPOSING THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, FLORIDA, RESPONDENTS
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.
The Florida Supreme Court denied a motion for a peremptory writ of mandamus because the court was equally divided on the issue, a situation where such motions are typically denied.
No, when the members of the court are permanently and equally divided in opinion, and there is no prospect of immediate change in personnel, the motion should be denied.
“When it appears that the members of the Court are permanently and equally divided in opinion as to whether a motion should be granted or denied, and there is no prospect of -an immediate change in the personnel of the Court, the motion should be denied.”
This quote explains the court's reasoning for denying the motion due to an equal division among the justices.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceRelator J. K. Tippett sought a peremptory writ of mandamus against the Board of County Commissioners of Hillsborough County, Florida. The case was hea…
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.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Peremptory Writ Of Mandamus cases and more on FLexlaw
Per Curiam.
This cause coming on to be heard upon motion of counsel for. relator for a peremptory 0writ of mandamus and same having been duly considered upon briefs and argument of counsel for the respective parties, Mr. Chief Justice Terrell, Mr. Justice Whitfield and Mr. Justice Buford are of the opinion that the motion for peremptory writ of mandamus should be denied while Mr. Justice Ellis, Mr. Justice Strum and Mr. Justice Brown are of the opinion that the said motion should be granted. When it appears that the members of the Court are permanently and equally divided in opinion as to whether a motion should be granted or denied, and there is no prospect of -an immediate change in the personnel of the Court, the motion should be denied. Therefore, it is considered, ordered and adjudged that the motion for a peremptory writ-of mandamus in this cause be and the same is hereby denied on the authority of State ex rel. Hampton v. McClung, 47 Fla. 224, 37 So. R. 51.
Terrell, C. J., and Whitfield, Ellis, Strum, Brown and Buford, J. J.-, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- The State of Fla. ex rel. Hiram J. Hampton v. McClung, 47 Fla. 224 (Fla. 1904)