GORDON HAYS, AS COUNTY JUDGE OF DESOTO COUNTY, ET AL.,
v.
STATE, EX REL. RALPH LOGAN
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 affirmed a lower court's judgment granting a peremptory writ of mandamus. The Court found the respondent's answer to the alternative writ was not sufficiently specific to defeat the relator's claim.
The Court held that the respondent's answer was not sufficiently specific to defeat the relator's claim and affirmed the lower court's decision to issue the peremptory writ.
“A return to an alternative writ of mandamus should, for the purpose of making an issue, set up a positive denial of the fact stated, or should state other facts sufficient to defeat relator's writ. A mere answer that a sum stated is not the correct amount is not sufficiently specific.”
This quote from a prior case, cited as authority, explains the standard for a sufficient return to a writ of mandamus.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThis case involves a writ of error to a judgment that granted a peremptory writ of mandamus. The relator moved for the peremptory writ notwithstanding…
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
—This writ of error is addressed to a judgment awarding the issuance of a peremptory writ of mandamus. This judgment was rendered in response to a motion made by the relator for the granting of the peremptory writ notwithstanding the answer or return. The judgment of the court below must be affirmed upon the authority of Canova v. State, 18 Fla. 572; Board of Commissioners v. Johnson & Co., 21 Fla. 578; State v. Seaboard Air Line R. Co., 92 Fla. 1139, 111 So. 735; Ray v. Wilson, 29 Fla. 342, 10 So. 613; State, ex rel. Burr, v. Seaboard, etc., R. Co., 92 Fla. 61, 109 So. 656.
“A return to an alternative writ of mandamus should, for the purpose of making an issue, set up a positive denial of the fact stated, or should state other facts sufficient to defeat relator’s writ. A mere answer that a sum stated is not the correct amount is not sufficiently specific.” Such was the holding in the Canova case, supra. The chancellor evidently followed this rule in granting the peremptory writ. The facts of the two cases are somewhat different but the principle underlying the Canova case appears to be applicable in this- case.
The Court does not deem it necessary or appropriate to express any views upon the question or questions involved in the equity case pending in the Circuit Court for DeSoto County, out of which this mandamus proceeding arose.
Affirmed.
Ellis, C. J., and Whitfield, Brown, Buford and Chapman, J. J., concur.
On Petition for Rehearing.
—The order heretofore made affirming the judgment awarding the peremptory writ of mandamus is adhered to, but is modified to the extent of permitting the court below to entertain, consider and rule upon an appli*802cation by the defendant County Judge, if seasonably made to the trial court, to set aside said judgment awarding the peremptory writ and allow him to file within such time as the court may see fit, an amended and more specific answer or return to the alternative writ, the sufficiency of such amended answer or return to be subject to be tested and ruled upon in accordance with the established procedure in mandamus proceedings.
Rehearing denied, and judgment of affirmance adhered to, but modified as above stated, and cause remanded.
Ellis, C. J., and Whitfield, Terrell, Brown, Buford and Chapman, J. J., concur.
On Petition for Rehearing.
Per Curiam.
—The order heretofore made affirming the judgment awarding the peremptory writ of mandamus is adhered to, but is modified to the extent of permitting the court below to entertain, consider and rule upon an appli cation by the defendant County Judge, if seasonably made to the trial court, to set aside said judgment awarding the peremptory writ and allow him to file within such time as the court may see fit, an amended and more specific answer or return to the alternative writ, the sufficiency of such amended answer or return to be subject to be tested and ruled upon in accordance with the established procedure in mandamus proceedings.
Rehearing denied, and judgment of affirmance adhered to, but modified as above stated, and cause remanded.
Ellis, C. J., and Whitfield, Terrell, Brown, Buford and Chapman, J. J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- State v. Seaboard Air Line Ry. Co., 92 Fla. 61 (Fla. 1926)
- Ray v. Wilson, 29 Fla. 342 (Fla. 1892)
- State v. Seaboard Air Line Ry. Co., 92 Fla. 1139 (Fla. 1927)
- Bd. Cnty. Comm'rs of Polk Cnty. v. Churchill E. Johnson & Co., 21 Fla. 578 (Fla. 1885)