Wyman v. State Ex Rel. Cox
This text of 162 So. 476 (Wyman v. State Ex Rel. Cox) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The writ of error is addressed to a judgment awarding peremptory writ of mandamus in a proceeding brought to coerce the payment of certain bonds of the municipality.
The contention is, in short, that the Court can not require the City Commission, the City Clerk and the City Treasurer to pay out the money available because the City Charter required certain procedure to be followed in the paying out of funds, which procedure, it is contended, was not followed.
The order of the Judge recites:
■ “And it further appearing to the Court from the testimony heretofore taken in this cause that there was on hand in the general fund of the City of Coral Gables at the close of its business on May 26, 1932, the date upon which the alternative writ of mandamus was served upon ■respondents the sum of $923.81, which is applicable to the indebtedness so owing by the said Vincent D. Wyman, Roscoe Brunstetter, M. B. Garris', Paul D. McGary and F. E. Bryant, as and constituting the City Commission of the City of Coral Gables, Florida, to the relator and which should be paid to the relator on account of his indebtedness,” etc.
It, therefore, appears that the judgment was rendered on testimony ^aken. No bill of exceptions is before us' and, therefore, we must assume that the judgment is correct and affirm the same.
It is so ordered.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
162 So. 476, 120 Fla. 224, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wyman-v-state-ex-rel-cox-fla-1935.