JONES
v.
STATE EX REL. BOARD OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION OF CHARLOTTE COUNTY ET AL.
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 trial court's order granting mandamus to compel the superintendent of public instruction to execute a contract with a nominated supervisor-principal. The court held that state law requires an affirmative nomination by the superintendent within a statutory timeframe, and a recommendation against a candidate does not satisfy this requirement.
The superintendent did not make an affirmative nomination as required by law. A recommendation against a candidate does not constitute an affirmative nomination required by statute. The Board was authorized to appoint a principal when no proper affirmative recommendation was made.
“There must be an affirmative recommendation as required by law.”
Establishes the core holding that the statute requires an affirmative nomination, not merely a negative recommendation.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe Board of Public Instruction of Charlotte County sought to compel Homer L. Jones, superintendent of Public Instruction, to execute a contract with …
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.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Mandamus cases and more on FLexlaw
TERRELL, Justice.
We are confronted with an appeal from an order denying a motion to quash and granting a motion for peremptory writ of mandamus, despite the return wherein the Board of Public Instruction of Charlotte County, hereinafter referred to as the Board, seeks to coerce Homer L. Jones as superintendent of Public Instruction to execute a contract with Leon R. Luckenback as supervisor-principal of Charlotte High School for the school term 1953-1954.
The question presented involves the interpretation of certain sections of the School 'Code, particularly Sections 230.23 (7) (c), 230.33(7) (c) and 230.43(1), Florida Statutes 1949, F,S.A. The intent and purpose of these statutes was fully discussed in Bradshaw v. Pinkston, Fla., 53 So. 2d 525. Further discussion of them for the purpose of this case becomes unnecessary.
The controversy for solution turns on the proposition of whether or not the superintendent of Public Instruction made an affirmative recommendation to trustees or the Board to fill the position of supervising principal for Charlotte High School for the school term 1953-1954 within the time required by the statute, Section 230.33(7) (c).
When such nomination is made the law requires the Board to employ the person so nominated unless they see fit to reject him for cause. The parties are in disagreement as to whether or not the nomination was made. In issuing the peremptory writ notwithstanding the return, the trial court held in effect that no affirmative nomination was made by the trustees or the Board within the time required by law. Appellant contends that since he recommended that Luckenback not be appointed and later nominated another, he met the requirements of the law.
It is conclusive that the Board could not act on an adverse recommendation and we construe the holding of the trial court to mean that no recommendation was made by the trustees or the superintendent as the law requires. In such a situation the Board was authorized to appoint a principal. A recommendation against some one leaves the field open for the Board to appoint. There must be an affirmative recommendation as required by law. Bradshaw v. Pinkston, Fla., 53 So. 2d 525 concludes the point.
The judgment appealed from is therefore affirmed.
ROBERTS, C. J., and SEBRING and MATHEWS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Maxwell v. Bd. OF Pub. Instruction OF Broward Cnty., 119 So. 2d 312 (Fla. 2d DCA 1960)…ecommended Paige Harper only if an additional year of probation was imposed.” We believe that the decision of the lower court should be affirmed upon the authority of Jones v. State ex rel. Board of Public Instruction of Charlotte County, Fla.1953, 67 So. 2d 320. A mandamus action was brought by the Board of Public Instruction of Charlotte County and others to compel the county superintendent to execute a contract of employment with a person appointed by the County Board of Public Instruction as Supervising…