State, Ex Rel. v. Porter , 111 Fla. 621 ( 1933 )

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. 2d 633; Curtis v. Albritton, 101 Fla. 853, 132 So. 2d 677; Crill v. State Road Dept., 96 Fla. 119, 117 So. 2d 795.