State v. Richards
| Decision Date | 26 July 1905 |
| Citation | 39 So. 152,50 Fla. 284 |
| Parties | STATE ex rel. SUNDAY v. RICHARDS, Tax Assessor. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
In Banc. Error to Circuit Court, Escambia County; Charles B Parkhill, Judge.
Application by the state, on the relation of John Sunday, for writ of mandamus to W. W. Richards, tax assessor. From an order denying the writ, relator brings error. Affirmed.
Syllabus by the Court
A writ of mandamus may, in the exercise of a sound judicial discretion of the court, be issued to enforce the performance of a legal duty imposed by law upon a ministerial officer where such duty does not involve the exercise of discretion of judgment by the officer, and the relator has a clear legal right to have such duty performed, and there is no other adequate remedy provided by law.
A writ of mandamus will not be awarded when it is evident that substantial rights of parties not before the court are involved.
Where another adequate legal remedy is provided by law, the court in its discretion will not grant a writ of mandamus.
A writ of mandamus will not lie to compel a tax assessor to place lands upon the tax rolls, where the lands have been previously sold to the state for nonpayment of taxes and they are not included in the lists of lands certified by the Comptroller to the assessor for assessment; it not being shown that an application under the law has been made to the Comptroller for relief.
In mandamus proceedings, the alternative writ takes the place of a declaration at law, and it is essential that it should show a clear prima facie case in favor of the relator.
The alternative writ in mandamus proceedings must show a clear prima facie case in favor of relator. In order to make out a prima facie case, the writ should allege all the essential facts which show the duty and impose the legal obligation on the respondent to perform the acts demanded of him, as well as the facts that entitle the relator to invoke the aid of the court in compelling the performance of such duty or obligation.
COUNSEL Blount & Blount and E. D. Beggs, for plaintiff in error.
W. H Ellis, Atty. Gen., and L. J. Reeves, for defendant in error.
The plaintiff in error, as relator, filed in the circuit court for Escambia county a petition praying for an alternative writ of mandamus, in which it is alleged that John Sunday, of Escambia county, Fla., was on January 1, 1905, and for a long time prior to and ever since that date was, has been, and is now the owner of several certain and described pieces of real estate situated in the city of Pensacola, Escambia county Fla.; that W. W. Richards is the tax assessor of said county; that on the 5th day of January, 1905, relator presented his return of said property to said tax assessor, and requested him to assess the same on the assessment roll for said Escambia county for the year 1905, in the name of relator, but said W. W. Richards, unmindful and regardless of his duty in the premises as such tax assessor as prescribed by law, failed and refused, and still refuses, to receive said return of said property for assessment, and to assess the same in the name of relator as the owner thereof, for the year 1905, and alleges and claims that his reason for failing and refusing so to do is that said lands have been certified or sold to the state of Florida for the taxes of previous years (the date of each such sale or certification, the number of the certificate, and the description of the several pieces of property being given), and that said lands were not included in any list furnished by the Comptroller to said assessor as provided by law; and that, in conformity with the law and under special instruction from the Comptroller of the state of Florida, he cannot enter said property on the said assessment roll. The petition then alleges that the said lands were certified or sold to the state of Florida as alleged and claimed by the said W. W. Richards as aforesaid, but that each and all of said sales and certifications of said lands were and are illegal and void, for reasons set out in the petition. It is further alleged that the several parcels of lands have been, each year since the said respective sales or certifications thereof, assessed or attempted to be assessed by the tax assessor of said Fscambia county upon the assessment roll of said Escambia county until the year 1902, and the taxes which were assessed against the same paid or the property sold by the tax collector to satisfy the same; that not until the year 1902, or after, did the tax assessor of said Escambia county fail or refuse to assess any of said lands upon the assessment rolls of said Escambia county, because of such sales or certifications, or because of any requirement of law or special instruction from the Comptroller of the state of Florida; that it is the duty of said W. W. Richards, as such tax assessor, to assess said lands as stated; that relator is without remedy in the premises, except by mandamus. A writ of mandamus is prayed against the said W. W. Richards, as tax assessor as aforesaid, commanding him to assess the said lands on the assessment roll for said Escambia county for the year A. D. 1905, and assess the said property upon said assessment roll in the name of relator as the owner thereof.
An alternative writ of mandamus issued, to which a copy of the petition was attached as a part thereof. The respondent moved to quash the alternative writ on the following grounds:
(1) That the relator has not, in and by his petition, made or stated such a cause as doth or ought to entitle him to the relief prayed for.
(2) That the petition shows no right in relator to the relief prayed for.
(3) That the petition shows no legal duty upon the respondent to do the acts which the petition and writ seek to compel him to perform.
(4) That the petition seeks to compel the performance of acts specifically forbidden by statute.
(5) That the relator has other complete and adequate remedies.
(6) That it appears from the petition that the relator has been guilty of inexcusable laches.
(7) That it appears from the petition that the relief sought is inequitable.
(8) That these proceedings substantially and in effect constitute an action against the state of Florida.
(9) That the relator had a complete and adequate remedy, which has been lost by laches.
The motion was granted, and the alternative writ was quashed, and a writ of error was taken to the present term of this court. The following errors are assigned: (1) The court erred in granting the motion of respondent to quash the alternative writ of mandamus; (2) in granting the order quashing the alternative writ of mandamus; (3) in rendering judgment in favor of respondent.
A writ of mandamus may, in the exercise of a sound judicial discretion of the court, be issued to enforce the performance of a legal duty imposed by law upon a ministerial officer, where such duty does not involve the exercise of discretion of judgment by the officer, and the relator has a clear legal right to have such duty performed, and there is no other adequate remedy provided by law. Towle v. State ex rel. Fisher, Sheriff, 3 Fla. 202; State v. Crawford, 28 Fla. 441, 10 So. 118, 14 L. R. A. 253.
The petition alleges that the tax assessor refuses to assess the lands because said lands have been certified or sold to the state of Florida for the taxes of previous years. and that said lands were not...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State ex rel. West v. Gray
...Public Instruction of Dade Co. v. State, 150 Fla. 213, 7 So.2d 105; Crawford v. Gilchrist, 64 Fla. 41, 59 So. 963; State ex rel. Sunday v. Richards, 50 Fla. 284, 39 So. 152; and Florida Cent. & P. R. Co. v. State, 31 Fla. 482, 13 So. 103, 20 L.R.A. 419. And see State ex rel. Andrews v. Gray......
-
State Ex Rel. Harrington v. City of Pompano
... ... State, 129 ... Fla. 834, 177 So. 290 ... It has ... also been held that: ... 'A ... writ of mandamus will [136 Fla. 763] not be awarded when it ... is evident that substantial rights of parties not before the ... court are involved.' State v. Richards, 50 Fla ... 284, 39 So. 152, headnote 2 ... By the ... addition of rural lands the municipal limits of Pompano were ... increased from 1,530 acres to 15,650 acres. According to the ... official census the population of the Town of Pompano in 1925 ... was 1,750; that of the City of ... ...
-
State ex rel. West v. Gray
...Public Instruction of Dade Co. v. State, 150 Fla. 213, 7 So.2d 105; Crawford v. Gilchrist, 64 Fla. 41, 59 So. 963; State ex rel. Sunday v. Richards, 50 Fla. 284, 39 So. 152; and Fla. Cent. & P. R. Co. v. State, 31 Fla. 482, 13 So. 103, 20 L.R.A. 419. And see State ex rel. Andrews v. Gray, 1......
-
State Ex Inf. Barker v. Kansas City Gas Company
... ... comply with the writ of mandamus prayed for, if issued. As ... that company is not a party here, this proceeding must ... necessarily be dismissed. Merrill on Mand., secs. 234-5; ... State ex rel. v. Cottengin, 172 Mo. 134; 19 Am. & Eng. Ency. Law (2 Ed.), p. 753-b; State v. Richards, ... 50 Fla. 284; McKinnen v. Wolfe, 50 So. 511; ... People ex rel. v. Stewart, 77 A.D. 181; People ... ex rel. v. Common Council, 78 N.Y. 33; High Ex. Rem., ... sec. 48. (5) Especially can the rights of third parties not ... be invaded by a writ of mandamus in this State since they can ... ...