Andersen v. State Ex Rel. Stirk
Opinions
The facts are similar, and the principles of law stated in the case of Andersen, et al., v. State ex rel. Bauer, heretofore decided in the foregoing opinion, 143 So. 775, are controlling in this case. But as the amounts commanded to be paid to the relator in this case, exceeds the amounts the respondents' aver they have on hand and under their control, with which to make the commanded payment, the final order granting the peremptory writ herein must be reversed. The effect of the trust referred to in the return of the respondents, purporting to confer rights upon third persons in certain funds, cannot be determined in mandamus. See State of Florida ex rel. v. Trustees I. I. Fund, 20 Fla. 402; State ex rel. Sunday v. Richards, 50 Fla. 284, 39 So. 1521; State ex rel. McKinnon v. Wolfe, 58 Fla. 523, 50 So. 511.
Reversed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
143 So. 777 (Andersen v. State Ex Rel. Stirk) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.