BREVARD COUNTY AND THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF THE COUNTY OF BREVARD, ETC., APPELLANTS,
v.
DAVID THEODORE KIMBALL AND MARION EDWARD LASSITER, APPELLEES
BREVARD COUNTY AND THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF THE COUNTY OF BREVARD, ETC., APPELLANTS,
DAVID THEODORE KIMBALL AND MARION EDWARD LASSITER, APPELLEES
388 So. 2d 648
Florida District Court of Appeal, Fifth District (1980)
Negative Treatment
Cited by 36 cases
Opinion of the Court
DAUKSCH, Chief Judge.
This is an appeal of an amended final judgment which declared section 25-21(f) of Brevard County Ordinance No. 78-01 to be unconstitutional as violating the due process clauses of the Florida Constitution and the fourteenth amendment to the United States Constitution and as an improper delegation of power because of its failure to provide adequate standards. The final judgment is reversed in part for those reasons set forth in Brevard County v. Bagwell, 388 So. 2d 645 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980) and the cause is remanded to the trial court.
REVERSED IN PART AND REMANDED.
ORFINGER and COBB, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (35 total)
-
Ruiz v. Leonard Steiner, M.D., 599 So. 2d 196 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992)…caused by the order was irreparable. See Carroll Contracting, Inc. v. Edwards, 528 So. 2d 951 (Fla. 5th DCA), review de [*198] nied, 536 So. 2d 243 (Fla.1988); Marshall v. Anderson, 459 So. 2d 384 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984); Travelers Indemnity Co. v. Hill, 388 So. 2d 648 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980). Especially in circumstances involving the denial of the right to take testimony of an alleged material witness, it has been recognized that such a denial cannot be remedied on appeal since “there would be no practical way to det…
-
United States Fid. & Guar. Co. v. Graham, 404 So. 2d 863 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981)…e. We are asked to review this order by certiorari. In seeking to invoke the certiorari jurisdiction of this court, petitioners rely on Gold Coast Raceway, Inc. v. Ehrenfeld, 392 So. 2d 1002 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981) and Travelers Indemnity Co. v. Hill, 388 So. 2d 648 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980). The requirements for certiorari review have oft been stated. There must be a departure from the essential requirements of law which will cause material injury that cannot be rectified on plenary appeal. The rationale for denying…
-
Medero v. Fla. Power & Light Co., 658 So. 2d 566 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995)…erial witness, it has been recognized that such a denial cannot be remedied on appeal since “there would be no practical way to determine after judgment what the testimony would be or how it would affect the result.” Travelers Indemnity Co. v. Hill, 388 So. 2d 648, 650 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980). The order under review departs from the essential requirements of law because the trial court made no finding, and there is nothing in the record before us, to rebut the suggestion by FPL’s own C.E.O. that Mr. Marshall is a…
Previewing 3 of 35 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Brevard Cnty. v. Bagwell, 388 So. 2d 645 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980)