FRANK RHYNE AND BERTHA RHYNE, APPELLANTS,
v.
CITY OF WILTON MANORS, APPELLEE
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.
The court held that it lacks jurisdiction to hear the appeal because the plaintiffs sought equitable relief after a prior certiorari proceeding was denied.
Plaintiffs filed a petition for writ of certiorari and injunctive relief against a zoning ordinance. The circuit court denied both the certiorari peti…
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.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Writ Of Certiorari cases and more on FLexlaw
DOWNEY, Judge.
In August 1976 Mr. and Mrs. Rhyne filed in the circuit court a petition for writ of certiorari and for injunctive relief, the thrust of which was to prevent enforcement of a zoning ordinance of the City of Wilton Manors. The circuit court held a hearing on the petition for writ of certiorari and denied the petition. No appeal was taken from said order. Subsequently, another hearing was held on the claim for injunctive relief and that remedy was also denied. From the order denying injunctive relief this appeal was perfected.
Although initially we questioned the jurisdiction of this court to consider this appeal, that question was postponed until consideration of the case on the merits. Upon further consideration we are persuaded that we do not have jurisdiction to entertain the appeal.
In a very similar situation it was held in Dade County v. McArthur Jersey Farm Dairy, Inc., 214 So. 2d 362 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1968), that a taxpayer could not maintain an action seeking simultaneous certiorari and equitable relief, nor could the taxpayer seek equitable relief after maintaining a certiorari proceeding. We followed McArthur in Charles Sales Corp. of West Palm Beach v. Maxwell, 224 So. 2d 752 (Fla. 4th DCA 1969), and we see no reason to deviate from the principle involved in those cases.
Accordingly, this appeal should be, and is hereby DISMISSED.
BERANEK and GLICKSTEIN, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
James S. Starkey and wife v. Okaloosa Cnty., 512 So. 2d 1040 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987)…First, they contend that Okaloosa County was barred by the doctrine of election of remedies from simultaneously seeking judicial and legislative relief, citing Klondike v. Blair, 211 So. 2d 41 (Fla. 4th DCA 1968), and Rhyne v. City of Wilton Manors, 392 So. 2d 992 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981). We disagree, for this doctrine applies only to remedies available in a judicial proceeding and does not bar simultaneous legislative action. Second, appellants argue that there is no evidence to support the trial court’s findin…
-
Turcotte v. City OF Coconut Creek & Seminole Props. II, Inc., 88 So. 3d 296 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012)…er v. City of Miami, 575 So. 2d 218 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991) (affirming entry of summary judgment for the city on the basis that the prior certiorari proceeding was res judicata of the issues raised in the original action); Rhyne v. City of Wilton Manors, 392 So. 2d 992 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981) (holding that appellants could not maintain an action seeking simultaneous certiorari and equitable relief, nor could they seek equitable relief after maintaining a certiorari proceeding). Affirmed. POLEN, HAZOURI and LEVI…
Authorities Cited
- Dade Cnty. v. McARTHUR Jersey Farm Dairy, Inc., 214 So. 2d 362 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968)
- Charles Sales Corp. OF W. Palm Beach v. Maxwell, 224 So. 2d 752 (Fla. 4th DCA 1969)