State ex rel. Pensacola & Louisville Railroad v. VanNess
Supreme Court of Florida
This cause came before the Supreme Court by petition for a writ of mamdamus to compel Judge YanNess, of the First Judicial Circuit, to try certain causes.
Read the full summary
This cause came before the Supreme Court by petition for a writ of mamdamus to compel Judge YanNess, of the First Judicial Circuit, to try certain causes. The respondent set forth, for the reason of his making an order declining to hear the cause, that the parties complainants in the said causes were related to the wife of the respondent within the ninth degree. ; Respondent set forth the statute of December 6, 1862, which provides “that no Judge shall sit or preside in any cause to which he is a party, or in which he is interested, or in which he would be excluded from being a juror by…
1Opinion of the CourtWestcott, J.
A mandamus does not lie in this case. The only duty which the Judge had to perform was the exercise of his judicial discretion and judgment in the matter of'determining his qualification. This he has done,' and this,writ does not lie to make him reverse his decision, even though it be wrong.
2Cited by5 opinions
- State ex rel. Colcord v. YoungSupreme Court of Florida · 1893
- State ex rel. Moody v. BarnesSupreme Court of Florida · 1889
- State ex rel. Hughes v. WalkerSupreme Court of Florida · 1889
- Territory ex rel. Scott v. StuartHawaii Supreme Court · 1915
- Fong, Auditor v. Sapienza, JudgeHawaii Supreme Court · 1951