WATERFRONT DEVELOPERS, INC., APPELLANT,
v.
THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, THE MIAMI BEACH REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, AND CARNER-MASON ASSOCIATES, LTD., 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.
The court held that the trial court properly entered summary judgment for the defendants.
The plaintiff, acting on behalf of a partnership or as a citizen-taxpayer, initiated an action without all necessary parties or alleging special injur…
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.
PER CURIAM.
This appeal questions the propriety of a final summary judgment for the defendants. We affirm.
An action on behalf of a partnership, or joint venture, requires all partners, or joint venturers, to be parties to the action. Deal Farms, Inc., v. Farm & Ranch Supply, Inc., 382 So. 2d 888 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980); Aronovitz v. Stein Properties, 322 So. 2d 74 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975); Elting Center Corporation v. Diversified Title Corp. 306 So. 2d 542 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975). To maintain an action as a citizen-taxpayer, special injury, apart from that suffered by the citizenry as a whole, must be alleged, Godheim v. City of Tampa, 426 So. 2d 1084 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983); Paul v. Blake, 376 So. 2d 256 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979). Additionally a release by one partner of a partnership claim is a release as to all partners. Pettigrew & Bailey v. Pickle, 429 So. 2d 340 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Section 620.60 Florida Statutes (1981).
The appellant has also urged error in certain protective orders. We find no abuse of discretion in the entry of the first instance, Rosaler v. Rosaler, 442 So. 2d 1018 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Atrio v. Consolidated Industries, Inc. v. Southeast Bank, 434 So. 2d 349 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Abelson v. Bosem, 329 So. 2d 330 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976), and second, under the ultimate holding in this case, if there was error (which we do not find) it would now be moot. Therefore for the reasons above stated the final summary judgment under review be and the same is hereby affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Paul v. Al Blake, 376 So. 2d 256 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979)
- Aronovitz v. Stein Props., 322 So. 2d 74 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975)
- Deal Farms, Inc. v. Farm & Ranch Supply, Inc., 382 So. 2d 888 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980)
- State v. Piccirilli, 426 So. 2d 1084 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983)
- Jones v. State, 434 So. 2d 349 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)
- Godheim v. City OF Tampa, 426 So. 2d 1084 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983)
- Abelson v. Arie Lionel Bosem, 329 So. 2d 330 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976)
- Rosaler v. Rosaler, 442 So. 2d 1018 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)
- Pettigrew & Bailey v. Cecyl L. Pickle, 429 So. 2d 340 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)
- Elting Ctr. Corp. v. Diversified Title Corp., 306 So. 2d 542 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974)