STATE, EX REL. MAXIE SMITH,
v.
W. M. HAMILTON, FRANK D. GILL, AND MRS. LEE MACOMB
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.
This case concerns a quo warranto proceeding challenging an election for special tax school district trustees. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the dismissal of the action, holding that the relator, whose term had expired and who was not elected in the subsequent election, lacked standing to challenge the election's legality when the Attorney-General was not a relator.
No, the relator does not have the right to maintain the action. The constitutional provision requiring officers to hold over after their term expires does not apply to district officers, and the relator, having no claim to the office and the Attorney-General not being a relator, lacks standing.
“An election for trustees having been held for the succeeding two years, and the relator not claiming to have been elected at such election, as her own successor, but alleging that the election held was illegal and unauthorized, such relator has now no right to maintain this action against respondents who are shown to have been elected in the alleged illegal election, the Attorney-General or other proper official not being a relator in the .action.”
This quote explains why the relator lacked standing to bring the quo warranto action.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe relator, Maxie Smith, initiated a quo warranto proceeding to challenge the election of respondents as special tax school district trustees. Smith'…
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.
In quo warranto proceedings brought by an individual relator upon the refusal of the Attorney-General to consent to the use of his name as relator, Section 5447 (3582), et seq., C. G. L., it appears that the two-year term of office of the relator, claiming to be a special tax school district trustee, expired soon after this *382action was begun, Section 10, Article XII, of the Constitution, Section 708 (567), C. G. L., Section 14, Article XVI, of the Constitution, requiring State, county and municipal officers to continue in office after the expiration of their respective terms until their successors are duly qualified, is not applicable to district officers. An election for trustees having been held for the succeeding two years, and the relator not claiming to have been elected at such election, as her own successor, but alleging that the election held was illegal and unauthorized, such relator has now no right to maintain this action against respondents who are shown to have been elected in the alleged illegal election, the Attorney-General or other proper official not being a relator in the .action.
The judgment dismissing the action is affirmed on writ of error.
Whitfield, C. J., and Ellis, Terrell, Brown, Buford, and Davis, J. J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Holbrook, 129 Fla. 241 (Fla. 1937)…e subject to removal by the State Board [*249] of Education for cause, State, ex rel. Land, v. Blake, 110 Fla. 178, 148 Sou. Rep. 566, but that they are not State or county officers within the meaning of Sec. 14 of Art. 16, Const. State v. Hamilton, 123 Fla. 381, 166 So. 742. Finally, it is contended that said special Act violates Section 1 of Article XII of the Constitution of Florida, which section reads as follows: “The Legislature shall provide for a uniform system of public free schools and shall prov…