STATE, EX REL. HAVANA STATE BANK, A CORPORATION,
v.
JOHN B. RODES, CHAIRMAN, W. C. KLINGENSMITH, A. FORTENBERRY, C. SWEET SMITH AND A. A. DUNN, AND CONSTITUTING THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF BREVARD COUNTY, 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 discharged a rule in contempt against county commissioners, finding their certificate of compliance with a mandamus writ was a bona fide attempt to comply and had not been challenged. This case clarifies the procedure for challenging compliance with mandamus orders.
Yes, the court held that the respondents' certificate of compliance was sufficient because it demonstrated a bona fide attempt to comply with the writ and was not challenged by the relator.
“The answer to the rule in contempt in this case sets up an honest and bona fide attempt on the part of respondents to comply with the commands of the peremptory writ of mandamus, therefore the return is held sufficient, the exceptions to same overruled and the rule in contempt discharged, without prejudice to the right of relator to seek other and further relief to collect what is its due.”
This quote summarizes the court's decision to discharge the contempt rule.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceRespondents, the Board of County Commissioners of Brevard County, filed a certificate of compliance with a peremptory writ of mandamus on August 13, 1…
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
The answer to the rule in contempt in this case sets up an honest and bona fide attempt on the part of respondents to comply with the commands of the peremptory writ of mandamus, therefore the return is held sufficient, the exceptions to same overruled and the rule in contempt discharged, without prejudice to the right of relator to seek other and further relief to collect what is its due.
In mandamus cases a certificate of compliance with the commands of a peremptory writ of mandamus stating detailed particulars of compliance, should be filed by respondents within the time fixed by the court. If the certificate of compliance so filed is not deemed sufficient or is claimed to be untrue, a further and better showing of compliance should be moved for by relator.
An insufficient certificate of compliance to a peremptory writ of mandamus, like any other insufficient pleading in a mandamus' case, is subject to being stricken or quashed on relator’s motion. See: State, ex rel. Travelers’ Indemnity Co., v. Knott, 114 Fla. 820, 155 Sou. Rep. 115.
In this case the certificate of compliance heretofore filed by respondents has stood unchallenged in form or substance, since August 13, 1934, the date of filing same. Such certificate shows a bona fide attempt at compliance with the the peremptory writ. And it has not been averred against as being false in the particulars wherein compliance has been returned as made.
*290Contempt rule discharged
Whitfield, C. J., and Brown, J., concur.
Ellis, P. J., and Terrell and Buford, J. J., concur in the opinion and judgment.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Bemis v. Loftin, 127 Fla. 515 (Fla. 1937)…n the particular jurisdiction where the challenged decree was entered in the first place. Bryant v. Bryant, 101 Fla. 179, 133 Sou. Rep. 635; Cone v. Cone, 102 Fla. 793, 136 Sou. Rep. 466; State, ex rel. Willys, v. Chillingworth, Judge, 124 Fla. 274, 168 Sou. Rep. 249. Compare Miami Bank & Trust Co. v. Mahlstedt, 107 Fla. 282, 144 Sou. Rep. 659; Kroier v. Kroier, 95 Fla. 865, 115 Sou. 753; Chisholm v. Chisholm, 98 Fla. 1196, 123 Sou. 694. A collateral attack on the other hand, is an attempt to avoid defeat or ev…1 / 2
-
In re Est. of Seymour J. Kant v. Kant, 272 So. 2d 153 (Fla. 1972)…to challenge a decree or judgment of divorce between their father and their mother rendered in a suit to which they were not parties. Rawlins, et al. v. Rawlins, et al., 18 Fla. 345 (1881). And in State ex rel. Willys v. Chillingworth, 124 Fla. 274, 168 So. 249 (1936) this Court held in an opinion written by the late revered Mr. Justice Terrell that a testator’s daughter had a right to challenge a divorce decree granted to the putative widow of her father from her prior husband on the ground of intrinsic f…
-
Martz v. Riskamm, 144 So. 2d 83 (Fla. 1st DCA 1962)…NALD K., C. J., and STURGIS, J., concur. . Dye v. Dolbeek, 114 Fla. 866, 154 So. S47 (1934). . Grammer v. Grammer, 80 So. 2d 457 (Fla.1955). . Bemis v. Loftin, 127 Fla. 515, 173 So. 683 (1937); State ex rel. Willys v. Chillingworth, 124 Fla. 274, 168 So. 249 (1936). . Corbett v. General Engineering & Machinery Co., 160 Fla. 879, 37 So. 2d 161 (1948). . Walter Denson & Son v. Nelson, 88 So. 2d 120 (Fla.IOSG). . Section 735.11, F.S.1957, F.S.A.: “(1) Any creditor or claimant against the estate of a de…
Previewing 3 of 10 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence