JIM FAIR, PETITIONER,
v.
JAMES ANTISTA, ET AL., RESPONDENTS

Fla. | 1984-09-13
No. 65693
OVERTON, ALDERMAN, McDONALD and EHRLICH, JJ., concur., BOYD, C.J., specially concurs with an opinion, in which SHAW, J., concurs., ADKINS, J., dissents.
461 So. 2d 1344 Florida Supreme Court (1984) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases
Topics
Legal Remedies Adjudication Of Incompetency Right To Vote Ministerial Duty

Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Legal Remedies cases and more on FLexlaw

Opinion of the Court

Upon consideration of the Petition for Writ of Mandamus, it is ordered by the Court that said petition be and the same is hereby denied.

OVERTON, ALDERMAN, McDONALD and EHRLICH, JJ., concur. BOYD, C.J., specially concurs with an opinion, in which SHAW, J., concurs.

ADKINS, J., dissents.

Concurrence
BOYD, Chief Justice,

BOYD, Chief Justice,

concurring specialty-

I concur in the Court’s denial of the petition for writ of mandamus. Although I believe that the factual allegations of the petition do state a case of wrongful deprivation of fundamental rights, I must nevertheless conclude that the petitioner Mr. Fair has failed to bring his action against the proper defendant.

Mr. Fair’s pro se petition, filed in forma pauperis, asks us to direct the respondent officers of the Florida Department of State to maintain uniformity in the application of the election laws, as is the Department’s duty, under section 97.012(1), Florida Statutes (1983), by ensuring that any adjudication of incompetency is lawful and valid before a citizen is denied the right to vote. Mr. Fair alleges that he was adjudicated incompetent by a court lacking jurisdiction to make such a judgment. But his petition does not show how the Department of State is involved nor what action the Department could take to correct the wrong alleged to have been done to him. At the very least, the petition fails to allege a clear ministerial duty of the Department to take action beneficial to Mr. Fair. Mr. Fair’s grievance is against the court alleged to have wrongfully adjudicated him incompetent. There are legal remedies available for the redress of the alleged wrong done to him, but he must proceed against the proper parties.

SHAW, J., concurs.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • In re Amendments to the Florida Small Claims Rules, 682 So. 2d 1075 (Fla. 1996)
    …s form has been modified to reflect recent changes in the statutory rate of interest calculated on final judgment amounts. . The last time we changed the jurisdictional limit was over twelve years ago. See Florida Bar re Rules of Summary Procedure, 461 So. 2d 1344 (Fla.l984)(raising jurisdictional limit from $1,500 to $2,500).…
  • The Fla. Bar: in re Rules of Summary Procedure, 461 So. 2d 1344 (Fla. 1984)
    …In response to petitions filed subsequent to our release of the 1984 revision of the Rules of Summary Procedure, The Florida Bar In Re Rules of Summary Procedure, 461 So. 2d 1344 (Fla.1984), we make the following changes: Rule 7.010(a) is amended to read as follows: Rule 7.010. Title and scope (a) Title. These rules shall be cited as Small Claims Rules and may be abbreviated “SCR.” These rules shall be construed to implem…

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw