¶1 (dissenting). — It seems to me that writ of prohibition was not the proper remedy, and that -the rule nisi should be quashed sua sponte. The lower court had jurisdiction to rule on all of the questions raised, and if it ruled erroneously, the Relator had an adequate remedy by writ of error. See Eberhardt v. Barker, 140 So. 633; Curtis v. Albritton, 101 Fla. 853, 132 So. 677; Crill v. State Road Dept., 96 Fla. 119, 117 So. 795.
111 Fla. 621
149 So 610
State Ex Rel. Crabtree v. Porter
Decided August 2, 1933
Supreme Court of Florida · decided 1933-08-02
Relies on Crill v. State Road Department · Curtis v. Albritton · Curtis v. Albritton as Cir. Judge
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1933-08-02
How this case has been cited
Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently November 1974
6 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
View the full empirical analysis of this case →