JOY KIMBERL, APPELLANT,

v.

STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, A FOREIGN INSURANCE CORPORATION, AND JAMES RICHARD MANNING, APPELLEES

Citator

Cited By

• State v. Terry, 336 So. 2d 65 (Fla. 1976)
  …should be given mandatory effect. E. g., State v. Dixon, 283 So. 2d 1 (Fla.1973). Under the other view, mandatory language in the statute is construed to authorize, but not to require the procedure. E. g., Simmons v. State, supra; McBride v. State, 197 So. 2d 850 (Fla.App.1st Dist.1967). In Simmons v. State, supra, at 208, this Court said: The preservation of the inherent powers of the three branches of government — legislative, executive, and judicial — free from encroachment or infringement by one upon th…
• Johnson v. State, 308 So. 2d 38 (Fla. 1974)
  …uire the inclusion in the charge of the penalty for the offense for which the defendant was on trial.” This interpretation was buttressed by the later decisions in Holmes v. State, Fla. App.3d, 181 So. 2d 586 (1965), McBride v. State, Fla.App. 1st, 197 So. 2d 850 (1967). While it is true that Simmons, as contended by petitioner, also concerned itself [*40] with the propriety of the legislature s attempt to infringe on a trial court’s inherent power to perform its judicial function, (thus causing the infirmi…
• Williams v. State, 378 So. 2d 902 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980)
  …ourt in Tascano we disagree. Simmons v. State, 160 Fla. 626, 36 So. 2d 207 (1948), is [*904] sufficient authority to engage in the act of changing the meaning of a word or interpreting the meaning of the court’s rule. Simmons, like McBride v. State, 197 So. 2d 850 (Fla. 1st DCA 1967) and Holmes v. State, 181 So. 2d 586 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1965) are interpretations of statutory wording and these cases are based on the reasoning that the legislature may attempt to direct the procedure in the courts but it cannot mand…