From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mechlow v. Vocelle; Moaba v. Vocelle

Supreme Court of Florida. En Banc
Jun 29, 1945
22 So. 2d 631 (Fla. 1945)

Opinion

June 29, 1945

Cases of original jurisdiction — mandamus.

Hoffman Durant, Carl T. Hoffman, N.J. Durant and Sam C. Matthews, for relators.

J.W. Watson, Jr., for respondents.


Both these cases involve the question of whether or not Ordinance No. 1526 as amended by Ordinance No. 2735, as further amended by Ordinance No. 2161, authorizes the City of Miami to limit the number of liquor distribution places within the City in view of the provisions of the State Beverage Act.

In our view, this question was answered by us in William D. Singer, et al., v. Scarborough, et al., 20 So.2d 126, decided December 5, 1944. So the motion for peremptory writ of mandamus notwithstanding the return is granted on authority of the last cited case. See also City of Miami v. Paul Kichinko, decided this date.

It is so ordered.

CHAPMAN, C. J., TERRELL, BUFORD, ADAMS and SEBRING, JJ., concur.

BROWN and THOMAS, JJ., dissent.


Summaries of

Mechlow v. Vocelle; Moaba v. Vocelle

Supreme Court of Florida. En Banc
Jun 29, 1945
22 So. 2d 631 (Fla. 1945)
Case details for

Mechlow v. Vocelle; Moaba v. Vocelle

Case Details

Full title:JOSEPH MECHLOW v. JAMES T. VOCELLE, as Director of the State Beverage…

Court:Supreme Court of Florida. En Banc

Date published: Jun 29, 1945

Citations

22 So. 2d 631 (Fla. 1945)
22 So. 2d 631

Citing Cases

City of Miami v. State

Counsel for appellant pose four questions here for adjudication, but our study of the transcript and…

State v. City of Miami

30 Am. Jur. 314-15, par. 108. Our previous holdings are cited and relied upon as applicable to the…