JAMES A. TREAT, AS MAYOR-COMMISSIONER, H. W. BARNUM, ET AL., AS COMMISSIONERS, ETC., ET AL. (OF CITY OF WINTER PARK, FLORIDA),
v.
STATE, EX REL. EDITH B. MITTON, ET VIR.

Fla. | 1936-02-29
Ellis, P. J., and Terrell, and Buford, J. J., concur., Whitfield, C. J., and Brown and Davis, J. J., concur in the opinion and judgment.
123 Fla. 118 Florida Supreme Court (1936)
Also reported at: 166 Sou. 324

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.

Synopsis

The Florida Supreme Court affirmed a lower court's judgment awarding a writ of mandamus to compel city officials to levy taxes for bond payments. While affirming, the court granted leave to amend the writ to reflect current fiscal realities.


Holding

No reversible error was made to appear. The judgment awarding the peremptory writ of mandamus is affirmed, but with leave to amend the alternative writ and modify the judgment and peremptory writ to reflect relief as it may now be made available.


Key Quotes

“The writ of error brings for review judgment awarding peremptory writ of mandamus requiring plaintiffs in error to levy and assess taxes to produce a fund to pay certain bonds, general obligations of the municipality of which Relator was owner and holder.”

This quote describes the core of the case and the relief sought by the relator.

Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

The relator, a bondholder, sought a writ of mandamus to compel the Mayor-Commissioner and other city commissioners of Winter Park, Florida, to levy an…

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.


Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam.

Per Curiam.

The writ of error brings for review judgment awarding peremptory writ of mandamus requiring plaintiffs in error to levy and assess taxes to produce a fund to pay certain bonds, general obligations of the municipality of which Relator was owner and holder.

There are two assignments of error, as follows r

“1. The Court erred in overruling the Motion to Quash filed to the Alternative writ.
“2. The Court erred in overruling the Motion to Quash filed to the amended Alternative Writ.”

No reversible error is made to appear under either assignment.

The peremptory writ was issued November 30th, 1934, and required certain budget entries and certain levies to be made for the fiscal year 1934-1935. The time in which the things were required to be done having passed, the judgment will be affirmed, but with leave to amend the alternative writ and thereupon modify the judgment and the peremptory writ of mandamus so as to record the relief prayed as and when it may now be made available.

So ordered.

Ellis, 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

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw