FLORIDA EAST COAST RAILWAY COMPANY, A FLORIDA CORPORATION, AND SEABOARD COAST LINE RAILROAD COMPANY, A VIRGINIA CORPORATION, APPELLANTS,
v.
METROPOLITAN DADE COUNTY, MIAMI SHORES VILLAGE, CITY OF HIALEAH, AND CITY OF MIAMI SPRINGS, APPELLEES
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.
Two railroad companies appealed a summary judgment upholding Metropolitan Dade County ordinances that prohibit train horn blowing during nighttime hours at designated grade crossings. The appellate court reversed, finding genuine issues of material fact existed regarding the constitutionality and legality of the ordinances.
The appellate court held that the trial court erred in granting summary judgment because genuine issues of material fact existed regarding the legality and constitutionality of the ordinances that had not been eliminated by the movant. Summary judgment is only appropriate in the complete absence of any genuine issues of material fact.
[1] A summary judgment is appropriate only when there is a complete absence of genuine issues of material fact.
[2] The burden is on the party moving for summary judgment to demonstrate that no genuine issues of material fact exist and that the opposing party cannot prevail.
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“a summary judgment should only be granted in the complete absence of any genuine issues of material fact”
Establishes the fundamental standard for summary judgment that the trial court violated
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceFlorida East Coast Railway Company and Seaboard Coast Line Railroad Company challenged Metropolitan Dade County Ordinances Nos. 81-561 and 82-18, whic…
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 Burden On Interstate Commerce cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellants Florida East Coast Railway Company and Seaboard Coast Line Railroad Company seek review of an adverse summary final judgment entered in an action filed by them against Metropolitan Dade County seeking injunctive relief against the enforcement of Metropolitan Dade County Ordinances Nos. 81-561 and 82-18, which prohibit railroads from blowing, activating or permitting to be blown any horn or whistle from their trains during the hours of 7:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. at nine designated railroad grade crossings.2
The appellants alleged in their complaint that the ordinances create an unreasonable burden on interstate commerce, are violative of due process and equal protection of law, and are in conflict with sections 316.-1575 and 338.21, Florida Statutes (1981), and Chapter 350, Florida Statutes (1981).
The County filed an answer and a motion for summary judgment. Numerous affidavits were filed. Upon consideration of the pleadings and affidavits the trial court entered summary final judgment in favor of the County. Appellants urge reversal of the summary judgment on the ground that the trial court erred in entering such judgment because there were genuine issues of material fact to be tried regarding the legality and constitutionality of the ordinances. We agree and reverse.
It is a well settled rule that a summary judgment should only be granted in the complete absence of any genuine issues of material fact. Holl v. Talcott, 191 So. 2d 40 (Fla.1966). The burden of the movant for summary judgment is not simply to show that the facts support its own theory of the case, but rather to demonstrate that the facts show that the party moved against cannot prevail. Burkett v. Parker, 410 So. 2d 947 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982); Mejiah v. Rodriguez, 342 So. 2d 1066 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977). The moving party has the burden of conclusively showing the absence of genuine issues of material fact. Wills v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 351 So. 2d 29 (Fla.1977); Seinfeld v. Commercial Bank & Trust Co., 405 So. 2d 1039 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981). If the existence of such issues or the possibility of their existence is reflected in the record, or the record raises even the slightest doubt in this respect the judgment must be reversed. Snyder v. Cheezem Development Corp., 373 So. 2d 719 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979); Mejiah v. Rodriguez, supra.
The record on appeal discloses that there are genuine issues of material fact which have not been eliminated by the mov-ants for summary judgment. Accordingly, the judgment appealed is reversed.
Reversed.
. Sec. 21-27.3, Code of Metropolitan Dade County, Florida.
. Also challenged by appellants was Ordinance No. 82-23, which amended sec. 21-27.3 of the Code by permitting the Board of County Commissioners to apply the provisions of 21-27.3 to railroad grade crossings “by resolution, after public hearing” rather than by ordinance.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (19 total)
-
Garcia v. First Cmty. Ins. Co., 241 So. 3d 254 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018)…emonstrate that the facts show that the party moved against cannot prevail.’” Afre Marble Corp. v. Twin Stone Designs & ---PAGE 6--- Installations, Inc., 44 So. 3d 193, 194 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010) (quoting Fla. E. Coast Ry. Co. v. Metro. Dade County, 438 So. 2d 978, 980 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)). Once the movant establishes that there are no genuine issues of material fact, “‘the opposing party must come forward with counterevidence sufficient to reveal a genuine issue. It is not enough for the opposing party m…
-
Braidi Trading Co. v. Anthony R. Abraham Enters., Inc., 469 So. 2d 955 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985)…l court. It is a well settled rule that a summary judgment should only be granted in the complete absence of any genuine issues of material fact. Holl v. Talcott, 191 So. 2d 40 (Fla.1966); Florida East Coast Railway Co. v. Metropolitan Dade County, 438 So. 2d 978 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983). If the existence of such issues or the possibility of their existence is reflected in the record, or the record raises even the slightest doubt in this respect, the judgment must be reversed. Florida East Coast Railway Co. v. Met…
-
Piedra v. City OF N. BAY Vill., 193 So. 3d 48 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016)…ce, of a genuine issue of material fact, thus precluding summary judgment; - See Wills v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 351 So. 2d 29 (Fla.1977); Sun Chevrolet, Inc. v. Crespo, 613 So. 2d 105 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993); Florida East Coast Ry. v. Metro. Dade County, 438 So. 2d 978 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983). Accordingly, we reverse the final summary judgments entered in favor of the City, Groundskeepers, and Alfaro, and remand the cause for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. Reversed and remanded. . We address solely…
Previewing 3 of 19 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Gory Roofing Tile Mfg., Inc. v. Davison, 191 So. 2d 40 (Fla. 1966)
- Wills v. Sears, 351 So. 2d 29 (Fla. 1977)
- Watkins DRY Wall, Inc. v. Drummond Court Corp., 373 So. 2d 719 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979)
- Snyder v. Cheezem Dev. Corp., 373 So. 2d 719 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979)
- Mejiah v. Olivio Rodriguez & Integon Indem. Corp., 342 So. 2d 1066 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977)
- Burkett v. Don L. Parker and wife, 410 So. 2d 947 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982)
- Rodger Sheets v. Sheets, 405 So. 2d 1039 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981)
- Seinfeld v. Commercial Bank & Tr. Co., 405 So. 2d 1039 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981)