E.O., APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES, APPELLEE

Fla. 2d DCA | 1990-01-12
No. 89-01096
LEHAN, A.C.J., and THREADGILL and PATTERSON, JJ., concur.
558 So. 2d 1030 Florida District Court of Appeal, Second District (1990) Positive Treatment
Cited by 38 cases

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

E.O. appeals from a final order of the Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services confirming her as a child abuser and denying her request that her name be expunged from abuse registry. This case is controlled by our opinion in B.R. v. Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services, 558 So. 2d 1027 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989). We therefore reverse and remand with directions to expunge the name of E.O. from the abuse registry.

LEHAN, A.C.J., and THREADGILL and PATTERSON, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By (18 total)

  • …Ass’n v. DeBenedictis, 480 U.S. 470, 501-01, 107 S.Ct. 1232, 1250, 94 L.Ed.2d 472, 498 (1987) (statute cannot be held facially invalid under takings clause unless it is shown to result in taking of all affected property); Glisson v. Alachua County, 558 So. 2d 1030, 1037 (Fla. 1st DCA) (to find statute facially invalid under takings clause, it must deprive every affected parcel of land of all economically viable use), review denied, 570 So. 2d 1304 (Fla.1990). Facial unconstitutionality under a just compensat…
  • Taylor v. Vill. OF N. Palm Beach, 659 So. 2d 1167 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995)
    …; Agins v. City of Tiburon, 447 U.S. 255, 260, 100 S.Ct. 2138, 2141, 65 L.Ed.2d 106, 111-12 (1980); Beacon Hill Farm Assocs. II Ltd. Partnership v. Loudoun County Bd. of Supervisors, 875 F. 2d 1081, 1084-85 (4th Cir.1989); Glisson v. Alachua County, 558 So. 2d 1030, 1036-37 (Fla. 1st DCA), review denied, 570 So. 2d 1304 (Fla.1990). In a facial takings claim, the landowner maintains that the mere enactment of the regulation constitutes a taking of all affected property without adequate procedures to provide pro…
    1 / 2
  • …s were unripe, requiring it to dismiss all of them. The ripeness requirement, however, does not apply to facial takings, as the mere enactment of the regulation constitutes the taking of all economic value to the land. See Glisson v. Alachua County, 558 So. 2d 1030, 1036 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990). Therefore, we first analyze those counts Lost Tree claims to be facial takings to determine whether they were required to be ripe to proceed. [*572] Facial Takings Claims Counts I through III, titled the “per se” takings…

Previewing 3 of 18 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw