STATE, EX REL. ONA MARY CLIFTON, ET VIR.,
v.
CITY OF DAYTONA BEACH, ET AL.
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 dismissed a writ of error in a mandamus case, holding that an order quashing an alternative writ of mandamus is interlocutory and not final, and that such an order was improperly recorded in the chancery order book rather than in the Circuit Court's minutes as required for law cases.
An order quashing an alternative writ of mandamus is interlocutory and not final, and therefore does not support a writ of error. Additionally, such an order must be recorded in the Circuit Court's minutes as a law case matter, not in the chancery order book, and the order in question was never legally entered of record because it was recorded only in the chancery order book.
“An order quashing an alternative writ of mandamus is interlocutory and not final in character. Such an order consequently does not support a writ of error, which lies only to a proper final judgment in a mandamus case.”
Establishes the primary holding that the order appealed from was not final and therefore could not support a writ of error.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceOna Mary Clifton and others sought a writ of mandamus against the City of Daytona Beach and various officials. An alternative writ of mandamus was iss…
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 Mandamus Proceeding cases and more on FLexlaw
— In this case the writ of error should be dismissed for the following reasons: (1) An order quash*385ing an alternative writ of mandamus is interlocutory and not final in character. Such an order consequently does not support a writ of error, which lies only to a proper final judgment in a mandamus case. Such a final judgment would be one of dismissal of the proceeding predicated upon the Court’s order granting the motion to quash the alternative writ. But until the proceeding is finally dismissed and the respondents discharged there is no final judgment, even though the original alternative writ has been quashed on motion.
(2) A mandamus proceedings is one at law, not a proceeding in chancery. An order quashing an alternative writ of mandamus has no place in the chancery order book. It should be recorded in the minutes of the Circuit Court as in law cases. In the present case the order granting a motion to quash an alternative writ of mandamus is made the subject matter appealed from. It affirmatively appears in the transcript that such order was recorded only in the chancery order book and not in the Circuit Court’s minutes as required by law, therefore, it has never been legally entered of record in the court below..
There being nothing to appeal from, the writ of error is dismissed, but without prejudice to further appropriate proceedings in the Circuit Court accompanied by the proper substitution of any officials who may have been elected to succeed the officials originally named as respondents, it appearing that several changes have transpired with respect to the official status of respondents since the original order quashing the alternative writ of mandamus was entered.
Writ of error dismissed without prejudice.
Whitfield, Ellis, Brown and Buford, J. J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State of Fla. ex rel. Raymond E. Mott v. Scofield, 120 So. 2d 825 (Fla. 2d DCA 1960)…ative writ of mandamus, without a provision that the petition be dismissed. Huie v. Lewis, Fla.1954, 71 So. 2d 498; State ex rel. Collins v. Rogers, 1939, 139 Fla. 557, 190 So. 701; State ex rel. Clifton v. City of Daytona Beach, 1934, 114 Fla. 384, 154 So. 165; State ex rel. Rhodes v. Goodson, 1913, 65 Fla. 475, 62 So. 481; and State ex rel. Lullaby Nursery v. City of Miami, Fla.App.1958, 107 So. 2d 385. For the reason that the order appealed from is interlocutory and not final, we must dismiss the appea…
-
State v. City of Daytona Beach, 119 Fla. 381 (Fla. 1935)…Buford, J. This is the second appearance of this case in this Court. See State, ex rel. Ona Mary Clifton, etc., v. City of Daytona Beach, et al., 114 Fla. 384, 154 Sou. 165. At that time the writ of error was dismissed because it was not taken nor applied to a final judgment. Pursuant to the suggestion contained in the last paragraph of the opinion, on the mandate going down, the relator amended the alter…
-
State of Fla. ex rel. Lorene Ware v. City OF Miami, 107 So. 2d 385 (Fla. 3d DCA 1958)…rguments of council, it is “Ordered and Adjudged that said motion be denied and that the alternative writ of mandamus heretofore issued be quashed.” In moving to dismiss, appellee cited State ex rel. Clifton v. City of Daytona Beach, 114 Fla. 384, 154 So. 165, in which the Supreme Court held that an order granting a motion to quash an alternative writ of mandamus-was interlocutory and not final in character, saying: “Such a final judgment would be one of dismissal of the proceeding predicated upon the co…