CITY OF CLEARWATER, APPELLANT,
v.
UNITED STATES STEEL CORPORATION, APPELLEE

Fla. 2d DCA | 1984-12-28
No. 84-391
SCHEB, A.C.J., SCHOONOVER, J., and BENTLEY, E. Randolph, Associate Judge, concur.
462 So. 2d 1171 Florida District Court of Appeal, Second District (1984) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 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.


Holding

The court held that the trial court did not err in denying the City's motion for relief from summary judgment.


Facts & Procedural History

The City of Clearwater appealed an order denying its motion for relief from a prior summary judgment that bound it to an annexation contract and enjoi…

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, City of Clearwater, Florida, appeals from an order denying its motion for relief from summary judgment. We affirm.

In 1979, the Circuit Court in and for Pinellas County, Florida, entered a summary judgment determining that the City of Clearwater was bound by a contract of annexation between it and appellee’s predecessor in interest. The summary judgment enjoined the city from enforcing an ordinance that would rezone property belonging to appellee, United States Steel. This court affirmed that summary judgment on March 5, 1980.

On January 24,1984, the appellant filed a motion for relief from summary judgment pursuant to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.540(b). The appellant sought relief from the summary judgment on the grounds that the judgment was void, prospective application of the judgment was no longer equitable, and equity commanded relief from the final summary judgment. This motion was denied and a timely notice of appeal was filed.

We find that the court did not err in denying appellant’s motion for relief from the summary judgment on the particular grounds set forth in appellant’s motion and therefore affirm.

SCHEB, A.C.J., SCHOONOVER, J., and BENTLEY, E. Randolph, Associate Judge, concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • …was void, that prospective application of the judgment was no longer equitable, and that equity commanded relief from the judgment. The trial court denied the city’s motion and this court affirmed in City of Clearwater v. United States Steel Corp., 462 So. 2d 1171 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985). The city had also filed on January 24, 1984, a separate action seeking a declaratory judgment by the court that conditions had changed since the entry of the original summary judgment and that the city therefore had the power to…

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw