VINCENT D. WYMAN, ET AL., AS THE CITY COMMISSION OF CORAL GABLES, ETC., ET AL.,
v.
STATE, EX REL. T. B. COX
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 ordering a municipality to pay bondholders. The court found that the municipality's procedural arguments against payment were not supported by the record before the appellate court.
Yes, the City Commission could be compelled to pay the bondholders. The appellate court must assume the lower court's judgment was correct in the absence of a bill of exceptions.
“The writ of error is addressed to a judgment awarding peremptory writ of mandamus in a proceeding brought to coerce the payment of certain bonds of the municipality.”
Describes the nature of the case and the lower court's decision being reviewed.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceA relator sought a writ of mandamus to compel the City Commission of Coral Gables, its Clerk, and Treasurer to pay outstanding bonds. The city argued …
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.
The writ of error is addressed to a judgment awarding peremptory writ of mandamus in a proceeding brought to coerce the payment of certain bonds of the municipality.
The contention is, in short, that the Court can not require the City Commission, the City Clerk and the City Treasurer to pay out the money available because the City Charter required certain procedure to be followed in the paying out of funds, which procedure, it is contended, was not followed.
The order of the Judge recites:
■ “And it further appearing to the Court from the testimony heretofore taken in this cause that there was on hand in the general fund of the City of Coral Gables at the close of its business on May 26, 1932, the date upon which the alternative writ of mandamus was served upon ■respondents the sum of $923.81, which is applicable to the indebtedness so owing by the said Vincent D. Wyman, Roscoe Brunstetter, M. B. Garris', Paul D. McGary and F. E. Bryant, as and constituting the City Commission of the City of Coral Gables, Florida, to the relator and which should be paid to the relator on account of his indebtedness,” etc.
It, therefore, appears that the judgment was rendered on testimony ^aken. No bill of exceptions is before us' and, therefore, we must assume that the judgment is correct and affirm the same.
It is so ordered.
Affirmed.
*226Ellis, P, J., and Terrell and Buford, J. J., concur.
Whitfield, C. J., and Brown and Davis, J. J., concur in the opinion and judgment.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Bennett v. Leon, 389 So. 2d 9 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. Wyman v. State, 120 Fla. 224, 162 So. 476 (1935); Nelson v. Lindsey, 151 Fla. 596, 10 So. 2d 131 (1942); State v. Wynn, 158 Fla. 182, 28 So. 2d 253 (1946); Victor v. Stierheim, 380 So. 2d 1319 (Fla.3d DCA 1980).…