Skip to main content
· 1/25/1917

City of Sanford v. State ex rel. Preston

Citations

  • 73 Fla. 69

Syllabus

<p>Quo Warranto, And Not Mandamus, Is Proper Remedy To Determine Disputed Question of Title to Office.</p> <p>It is well .settled both in England and America that “when an office is’ already filled by an actual incumbent, exercising the functions of the office de facto and under color of right, mandamus will not lie to compel the admission of another claimant, or to determine the disputed question of title. In all such cases the party' aggrieved, who seeks an adjudication upon his alleged title and right of possession to the office, will be left to assert his rights by the aid of an information in the nature of a quo warranto, which is the only efficacious and specific remedy to determine the questions in dispute.”</p>

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • expressing doubt that failure to maintain a “safe and clean house” and other shortcomings constitute specific abuses within the meaning of the statute

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.