STATE EX REL. ELLA NEILL, RELATOR,
v.
J. M. LEE, AS STATE COMPTROLLER, RESPONDENT
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.
Assistant Secretary to the Governor sought mandamus to compel the Comptroller to pay the difference between her former and new salary after her reassignment within the Governor's office. The Florida Supreme Court denied relief, holding that the Governor has discretionary authority to adjust employee compensation within appropriated lump sums.
The Governor has discretionary authority to hire, fire, raise or lower the compensation of employees in his office and to reassign them to other work. The relator's claim is not controlled by the Williams case, and the petition for mandamus is denied.
“The Governor is authorized to hire and fire, to raise or lower the compensation of any employee of his office, or to reassign them to other work in his discretion”
Establishes the core holding that the Governor has discretionary authority over employee compensation and job assignments within his office
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceRelator Ella Neill was employed as Assistant Secretary to the Governor at $350 per month. On December 1, 1939, she was reassigned to work in the same …
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.
*539Order
Relator was employed as Assistant Secretary to the Governor at a salary Of $350 per month. On December 1, 1939, she was reassigned to work in that office at a salary of $200 per month. Relying on State ex rel. Williams v. Lee, decided October 31, 1939, she seeks to compel the Comptroller to draw his warrant' to pay her $870.97, the difference between her salary of $350 and $200 per month from December 1, 1939, to May 27, 1940.
Relator’s claim is not ruled by the Williams case, Williams is Marshal of the Supreme Court at a stated monthly compensation fixed by the Legislature. In the 1939 appropriation bill, the Legislature included an amount sufficient to raise the Marshal’s salary for the succeeding biennium, said amount being included in a lump sum for salaries of this department. This Court can change the Marshal within its discretion. Whether or not it can raise or lower his compensation within the lump sum appropriated is not necessary to decide as no controversy has arisen on that point. .
Relator was an employee in the Governor’s office. It has been a legislative practice for years to make a flat appropriation for salaries to pay employees of that office. The Governor is authorized to hire and fire, to raise or lower the compensation of any employee of his office, or to reassign them to other work in his discretion, which the petition shows was done in this case.
The petition is therefore denied.
It is so ordered.
Terrell, C. J., Whitfield, Brown and Thomas, J. J., concur.
Justices Buford and Chapman not participating as authorized by Section 4687, Compiled General Laws of 1927, and Rule 21-A of the Rules of this Court.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Ball v. Yates, 158 Fla. 521 (Fla. 1946)…tion [is] now complete,” and expressing the view that “the verdict is not supported by the evidence adduced in support of the allegations of the declaration and the motion for a new trial should have been granted . . .” Ball v. Yates, 145 Fla. 537, 200 So. 701. The reference in the opinion to the completeness of the picture suggests the latter part of the statute, Section 4363, supra, now designated as Section 54.17, Laws of Florida, 1941, and F.S.A., further providing that: “If, after all the evidence…1 / 2