State v. Gray, (1943)
Court: Supreme Court of Florida
Number:
Visitors: 6
Judges: TERRELL, J.:
Attorneys: J. Tom Watson, Attorney General, and Lawrence A. Truett,
Assistant Attorney General, for relator.
R.A. Gray, in pro. per. for respondent.
Filed: Jul. 30, 1943
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: On petition of the Relator alternative writ of mandamus was directed to respondent commanding him to strike from the provisions of Chapter 21805, Acts of 1943, certain spurious, redundant, and invalid language and to omit said language from the act when compiling the bound volume of the General Acts of the Legislature of 1943, or to show cause why he refuses to do so. In his return to the alternative writ, respondent admits all the material allegations thereof but he says in defense that he decl
Summary: On petition of the Relator alternative writ of mandamus was directed to respondent commanding him to strike from the provisions of Chapter 21805, Acts of 1943, certain spurious, redundant, and invalid language and to omit said language from the act when compiling the bound volume of the General Acts of the Legislature of 1943, or to show cause why he refuses to do so. In his return to the alternative writ, respondent admits all the material allegations thereof but he says in defense that he decli..
More
I concur in the view that said amendment No. 3 should not have been included in the enrolled bill, as it was not adopted by the Legislature, but mandamus only lies to compel the performance of a clear legal duty. I know of no constitutional or statutory provision giving the Secretary of State the authority to strike from any bill or act of legislature any part thereof, especially after it has been approved by the Governor and filed in the Secretary of State's office.
THOMAS and SEBRING, JJ., concur.
Source: CourtListener
