Andersen v. State Ex Rel. Stirk

143 So. 777, 106 Fla. 956, 1932 Fla. LEXIS 1152
Supreme Court of Florida·Decided October 8, 1932·No. 143 So.2d 777.·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinions

Per Curiam.

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.

*957 Buford, C.J., and Whitfield, Terrell and Brown, J.J., concur. Davis, J., concurs specially.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Andersen v. State Ex Rel. Stirk, 143 So. 777, 106 Fla. 956, 1932 Fla. LEXIS 1152 (Fla. 1932).

143 So. 777 (Andersen v. State Ex Rel. Stirk) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State Ex Rel. Simmons v. Harris
161 So. 374 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1935)