UNITED TEACHERS OF DADE AND UTD TOWERS, INC., APPELLANTS,
v.
SAVE BRICKELL AVENUE, INC., ETC., ET AL., APPELLEES

Fla. 3d DCA | 1979-09-26
No. 79-402
Before HENDRY, HUBBART and KE-HOE, JJ.
378 So. 2d 296 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1979) Negative Treatment
Cited by 31 cases

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.

Synopsis

The Third District Court of Appeal held that a final judgment from a circuit court in an original certiorari proceeding involving a zoning matter is reviewable by appeal as a matter of right to a district court of appeal, not merely by certiorari. The court denied the appellees' motion to dismiss the appeal.

Holding

A final judgment of a circuit court entered on review of administrative action in an original certiorari proceeding quashing a zoning resolution is appealable as a matter of right to a district court of appeal under Article V, Section 4(b)(1) of the Florida Constitution and Fla.R.App.P. 9.030(b)(1)(A). The district court has jurisdiction to review such judgment by appeal, not certiorari, because appeal is the adequate remedy available.

Headnotes

[1] A final judgment entered by a circuit court in an original certiorari proceeding involving a zoning matter is reviewable by appeal in a district court of appeal.

[2] District courts of appeal have jurisdiction to hear appeals as a matter of right from final judgments or orders of trial courts, including those entered on review of admi…

Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence
Key Quotes

“District courts of appeal shall have jurisdiction to hear appeals, that may be taken as a matter of right, from final judgments or orders of trial courts, including those entered on review of administrative action; not directly appealable to the supreme court or a circuit court.”

This constitutional provision directly supports the holding that the district court has appeal jurisdiction over the circuit court's final judgment in the certiorari proceeding.

Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence
Facts & Procedural History

United Teachers of Dade and UTD Towers, Inc. appealed a final judgment from the Circuit Court for the Eleventh Judicial Circuit. The circuit court had…

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.

Topics
Jurisdiction Of District Courts Of Appeal District Courts of Appeal Adequate Remedy On Appeal Certiorari

Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Jurisdiction Of District Courts Of Appeal cases and more on FLexlaw

Opinion of the Court
HUBBART, Judge.

HUBBART, Judge.

The central issue presented by this motion to dismiss the instant appeal is whether a final judgment entered by a circuit court in an original certiorari proceeding involving a zoning matter is reviewable by appeal or certiorari in a district court of appeal. We hold that such final judgment is reviewable here by appeal and deny the motion to dismiss.

The appellants United Teachers of Dade and UTD Towers, Inc. have filed a timely notice of appeal seeking review in this court of a final judgment entered by the Circuit Court for the Eleventh Judicial Circuit of Florida, in an original certiorari proceeding involving a zoning matter. The final judgment under review granted a petition for a writ of certiorari filed by the appellees Save Brickell Avenue, Inc. and quashed a zoning resolution previously passed by the City of Miami Commission. The appellees by their motion to dismiss contend that this court has no jurisdiction to entertain the case by appeal and that the appeal should, accordingly, be treated as a petition for a writ of certiorari. We cannot agree.

Article V, Section 4(b) of the Florida Constitution establishes the jurisdiction of the district courts of appeal and provides in pertinent part as follows:

“(1) District courts of appeal shall have jurisdiction to hear appeals, that may be taken as a matter of right, from final judgments or orders of trial courts, including those entered on review of administrative action; not directly appealable to the supreme court or a circuit court. * * *

(2) * * *

(3) * * * A district court of appeal may issue writs of certiorari . .” [emphasis added]

The above constitutional provisions are tracked by Fla.R.App.P. 9.030(b)(1)(A), (2). In the instant case, ye have for review a final judgment of the circuit court entered on review of administrative action in an original. certiorari proceeding which quashed á zoning resolution passed by a city commission. All agree that this judgment is not directly appealable to the Supreme Court or the circuit court. Under the above constitutional provision [Art. V, § 4(b)(1)] as implemented by Fla.R.App.P. 9.030(b)(1)(A), it follows that such final judgment is appealable as a matter of right to a district court of appeal. This result is supported by an unbroken line of authority in this state. Norman v. Pinellas County, 250 So. 2d 279 (Fla. 2d DCA 1971); City of Treasure Island v. Decker, 174 So. 2d 756 (Fla. 2d DCA 1965); Board of Adjustment of City of Ft. Lauderdale v. Kremer, 139 So. 2d 448 (Fla. 2d DCA 1962); Phillips v. County of Dade, 133 So. 2d 573 (Fla. 3d DCA 1961); Wexler v. Ring, 125 So. 2d 883 (Fla. 3d DCA 1961).

It is true, as urged by the appel-lees, that Fla.R.App.P. 9.030(b)(2)(B) provides that a district court of appeal may review by certiorari “final orders of circuit courts acting in their review capacity.” This rule, however, has reference to final orders entered by the circuit court in its appellate review capacity from which no appeal therefrom can be taken. To interpret the rule any broader would mean that a district court of appeal could review by both appeal and certiorari a final judgment similar to the one entered in the instant-case. Such would be contrary to the established law that certiorari can never lie where the petitioner has an adequate remedy by appeal. G. W. Development Corp. v. Village of North Palm Beach Zoning Board of Adjustment, 317 So. 2d 828 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975). As an appeal clearly .lies to review the final judgment herein, it follows that this court has no certiorari jurisdiction in this case.

We have considered the other grounds raised by the appellees to dismiss the instant appeal and strike appellants' brief and find them to be without merit. Accordingly, the motions to dismiss or quash the appeal and strike appellants’ brief are denied.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By (16 total)

  • City OF Deerfield Beach v. Vaillant, 419 So. 2d 624 (Fla. 1982)
    …ief Justice. We review the decision of the District Court of Appeal, Fourth District, in City of Deerfield Beach v. Vaillant, 399 So. 2d 1045 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981), which expressly conflicts with United Teachers of Dade v. Save Brickell Avenue, Inc., 378 So. 2d 296 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979). The sole issue before us is whether a final judgment of the circuit court reviewing administrative action is subject to appeal in the district court of appeal or whether this judgment is reviewable only by writ of certiora-ri. Th…
  • Allapattah Cmty. Ass'n v. City OF Miami, 379 So. 2d 387 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980)
    …sphere Equity Realty Co., Inc. v. Key Biscayne Property Taxpayers Ass’n, 369 So. 2d 996, 1001 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979). There is thus no obstacle to our consideration of the case on its merits. . See United Teachers of Dade v. Save Brickell Avenue, Inc., 378 So. 2d 296 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979). . While almost all of the cases which speak of this interest deal with the “usual” situation in which a governmental unit resists, in the name of neighborhood integrity, an attempt to liberalize the zoning of residential propert…
  • Cherokee Crushed Stone, Inc. v. City OF Miramar, 421 So. 2d 684 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982)
    …r the circuit court applied the applicable law and acted in accordance with established procedure” which is indicative of certiorari although the proceeding was described as an appeal. See also: United Teachers of Dade v. Save Brickell Avenue, Inc., 378 So. 2d 296 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979), the court stating: “We hold such final judgment [from the circuit court in an original certiorari proceeding] is reviewable here by appeal and deny the motion to dismiss.” And see Save Brickell Avenue, Inc. v. City of Miami, 393…

Previewing 3 of 16 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw