STATE, EX REL. BENJAMIN AXLEROAD,
v.
FRED P. CONE, AS GOVERNOR
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.
Benjamin Axleroad sought mandamus to compel Governor Fred P. Cone to countersign salary warrants that the Comptroller had drawn following a prior favorable mandamus judgment. The Florida Supreme Court denied the petition, holding that the judiciary lacks power to direct or coerce the Governor in the exercise of administrative functions.
The judiciary lacks power to direct or coerce the Governor in the exercise of any administrative function. The court may only advise the Governor concerning his duty regarding executive powers and duties when requested to do so under the Constitution.
“The validity to the petitioner's claim, at least to the amount for which the Comptroller was required to draw his warrants and in the amount for which he has' drawn his warrants in compliance with the judgment, supra, has been finally and affirmatively adjudicated.”
Establishes that the court had already determined Axleroad was entitled to the salary in the prior proceeding.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAxleroad was entitled to salary payments under Chapter 13887, Acts of 1929, as amended. In a prior mandamus proceeding (State ex rel. Axleroad v. Lee)…
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 Judicial Review Of Executive Action cases and more on FLexlaw
This cause is before us on petition for
alternative writ of mandamus' to coerce the Governor of Florida to countersign a warrant drawn by the Comptroller on the State Treasurer to pay to the relator the salary due him by the State of Florida under the provisions of Chapter 13887, Acts of 1929, as amended by Chapter 16997, Acts of 1935, in the sum of $1770.80.
The validity of relator’s claim was tested in mandamus proceedings in this Court, see State, ex rel. Axleroad v. Lee, 132 Fla. 512, 181 Sou. 9, and the Comptroller, as respondent therein, was ordered to draw his warrant, or warrants, for the amount due the relator at the date of institution of that suit.
The Comptroller complied with that order and drew and signed four warrants on the State Treasurer for the sum of $208.33 each and one warrant for $104.16, and presented the same to the Governor to be countersigned under the provision of Section 24, Article IV of the State Constitution. Sec. 135 R. G. S., 165 C. G. L.
The Governor declined to countersign the warrants and this petition in mandamus was filed in this Court.
The validity to the petitioner’s claim, at least to the amount for which the Comptroller was required to draw his warrants and in the amount for which he has' drawn his warrants in compliance with the judgment, supra, has been finally and affirmatively adjudicated.
The Judiciary is without power to direct or coerce the Governor in the exercise of any administrative function. See State v. Drew, 17 Fla. 67.
The Supreme Court may only advise the Governor concerning his duty in regard to his executive powers and duties *498when requested by him so to do under the provisions of Section 13, Article IV of the Constitution.
So the petition for alternative writ of mandamus must be denied.
So ordered.
Terrell, C. J., and Whitfield, Brown, Buford, Chapman, and Thomas, J. J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Forrest E. Nelson v. Lindsey, 151 Fla. 596 (Fla. 1942)…termine whether controlling organic law has been violated by a particular exercise of such a purely legislative or purely executive power to the injury of rights secured by the dominant Constitution. See State v. Governor, 17 Fla. 67, State v. Cone, 137 Fla. 496, 188 So. 93; State v. Coleman, 115 Fla. 119, 155 So. 129. Where the law confers discretionary administrative authority upon officials or boards and makes the exercise of such discretion a prerequisite to action taken, such action will not be contro…
-
Kirk v. Baker, 229 So. 2d 250 (Fla. 1969)…is exempt from attachment because of his privilege, his immunity protects his subordinates and agents’’ (emphasis added). Mr. Mager is Legal Counsel to tbe Governor and a member of the Governor’s staff. . See, e. g., State ex rel. Axleroad v. Cone, 137 Fla. 496, 188 So. 93 (1939) (judiciary is without power to direct or coerce the Governor in the exercise of any administrative function) ; State ex rel. Hardie v. Coleman, 115 Fla. 119, 155 So. 129, 92 A.L.R. 988 (1934) (Supreme Court not authorized to exami…
-
State of Fla. on the relation of Richard A. Pettigrew & Jerry Thomas v. Kirk, 243 So. 2d 147 (Fla. 1970)…retofore considered sacrosanct area of authority of the Governor to decline to countersign a state warrant for an official’s salary in Slaughter v. Dickinson (Fla.), 226 So. 2d 97 (1969) as contrasted with the view in State ex rel. Axleroad v. Cone, 137 Fla. 496, 188 So. 93 (1939). I see no objection to making only the Department of Business Regulations the respondent rather than the State Beverage Department, insofar as the issuance of beverage licenses on population bases is concerned, since the Departme…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- The State of Fla. ex rel. H. Bisbee, Jr. v. Geo. F. Drew, 17 Fla. 67 (Fla. 1879)
- State v. Lee, 132 Fla. 512 (Fla. 1938)