Supreme Court of Florida, 1930

Jordan v. State Ex Rel. Davis

Supreme Court of Florida · Decided August 2, 1930 · Whitfield, Ellis, Strum, Brown, Buford, Terrell

129 So. 747; 100 Fla. 494 (Southern Reporter)

Cases that cite this one

17 later published cases cite this decision.

State Ex Rel. Harrell v. Cone (Fla. 1937)
County of Manatee v. Davidson (Fla. 1938)
Anderson v. Board of Public Instruction (Fla. 1931)
Wernle v. Bellemead Development Corporation (Fla. 1975)
The City of Coral Gables v. Crandon (Fla. 1946)
State Ex Rel. Baldwin v. Coleman (Fla. 1941)
State Ex Rel. Baker v. Gray (Fla. 1938)
State Ex Rel. Pierce v. Gustafson (Fla. 1937)
State Ex Rel. Himes v. Culbreath (Fla. 1937)
State Ex Rel. Levine v. Bailey (Fla. 1936)
Latham v. Hawkins (Fla. 1935)
Barrow v. Smith (Fla. 1935)
State Ex Rel. Landis v. Williams (Fla. 1933)
Carlton Ex Rel. Duval County v. Fidelity & Deposit Co. (Fla. 1933)
Knight v. B. P. I., Co. of Hillsborough (Fla. 1931)
State Ex Rel. White v. Foley (Fla. 1938)
Stripling v. Thomas (Fla. 1931)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam.

— This Court affirmed a judgment in mandamus proceedings in which Chapter 13605, Acts of 1929 was sustained as a valid general law, Jordon v. State, 128 So. R. 35. On rehearing the validity of the statute is challenged on a ground that has a basis in the record but was not presented or considered at the former hearing.

*495 Chapter 13605, Acts of 1929, purports to change the existing general statutes relating to the number of names to be annually selected and placed in the jury box for the-county judges’ courts, Sections 4465, 4471, Comp. Gen. Laws, by increasing the number from not less than two hundred nor more than three hundred,, to not less than 750 in counties having a population between 40,000 and 43,000, leaving the smaller number to be chosen in the larger as well as the smaller counties. Even if Chapter 13605 be a general law, the classification upon which it is predicated has no reasonable basis in the subject regulated and is purely arbitrary, rendering the act invalid.

Reversed.

Whitfield, Ellis, Strum, Brown and Buford, J. J., concur. Terrell, C. J., not participating.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.