REINHOLD CONSTRUCTION, INC., APPELLANT,
v.
CITY OF VERO BEACH, FLORIDA, APPELLEE
REINHOLD CONSTRUCTION, INC., APPELLANT,
CITY OF VERO BEACH, FLORIDA, APPELLEE
451 So. 2d 528
Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (1984)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
AFFIRMED.
LETTS, J., concurs.
ANSTEAD, C.J., concurs specially with opinion.
BERANEK, J., dissents with opinion.
Concurrence
ANSTEAD, Chief Judge,
specially concurring:
I agree that there is competent, substantial evidence in the record to support the trial court’s factual determination that the City acted properly within the authority of its public bidding ordinance in awarding a construction contract to a bidder who submitted a bid slightly higher than that of the appellant.
Dissent
BERANEK, Judge,
dissenting:
I respectfully dissent. I believe the City Council awarded the public works contract to a contractor other than the lowest responsible bidder for the reason that the successful contractor was a local firm. Hometown location was not one of the criteria listed in the solicitation for bids. Furthermore, it was not one of the criteria to be considered in determining the lowest responsible bidder as set forth in the city ordinance. I would reverse. See Adolphus v. Baskin, 95 Fla. 603, 116 So. 225 (1928).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Staff v. Trafalgar Developers OF Fla., Inc., 518 So. 2d 981 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988)…, 500 So. 2d 745 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987). Also, it is improper for a trial court to assess court costs without notice and opportunity for a hearing where, as here, the request for costs is presented after the conclusion of the trial. See Waite v. Hewitt, 451 So. 2d 528 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984). Additionally, since the supreme court ruling in Florida Patient’s Compensation Fund v. Rowe, 472 So. 2d 1145 (Fla.1985), it is essential that the trial court determine the reasonableness of the assessment of attorney’s fees again…
-
Novartis Pharms. Corp. v. Carnoto, 837 So. 2d 1127 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003)…ees and costs. Appellant also argues that the hearing held by the trial court was not a full evidentiary hearing to which it is entitled. On the record before us, we conclude that appellant has demonstrated grounds for reversal. See Waite v. Hewitt, 451 So. 2d 528 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984). Cf. Am. Indem. Co. v. Comeau, 419 So. 2d 670 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982); Posner v. Flink, 393 So. 2d 1140 (Fla. 3d DCA), rev. denied, 402 So. 2d 612 (Fla.1981). [*1130] Accordingly, we reverse and remand for an evidentiary hearing in th…
Authorities Cited
- Adolphus v. Baskin, 95 Fla. 603 (Fla. 1928)