PINELLAS COUNTY, A POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
MARY ELLEN FIORE, AND SUNCOAST TOYS, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, 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.
Florida appellate court affirmed that Pinellas County's ordinance prohibiting skill machines at bingo halls failed the rational basis test because the prohibition bore no rational relationship to the county's governmental interests.
An ordinance prohibiting skill machines at bingo halls is unconstitutional under the rational basis test because the prohibition lacks a rational relationship to the county's asserted governmental interests.
[1] An ordinance prohibiting skill machines at bingo halls fails the rational basis test when the prohibition bears no rational relationship to the government's asserted inte…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceSuncoast Toys leased toy crane machines (skill machines) to bingo halls and other businesses. Pinellas County Ordinance 97-60 prohibited video games, …
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 Constitutional Challenge To Ordinance cases and more on FLexlaw
NORTHCUTT, Acting Chief Judge.
Pinellas County ordinance 97-60 regulates the playing of bingo. Among its provisions is a decree that “no video games, slot machines, or skill machines ... shall be allowed on any premises where a bingo game is being conducted.” Suncoast Toys, Inc. leases toy crane machines, which are skill machines within the meaning of the ordinance, to bingo halls and other businesses. Suncoast and its owner, Mary Ellen Fiore, filed a declaratory action challenging the constitutionality of the quoted edict as applied to the toy crane machines. In due course, the circuit court rendered an amended judgment declaring that the part of the ordinance regulating skill machines was unconstitutional.
The court advanced many grounds for its ruling. These included a finding that the contested provision failed to pass the rational basis test, the standard for determining the validity of legislation that does not impinge upon constitutionally protected conduct. See Pinillos v. Cedars of Lebanon Hosp. Corp., 403 So. 2d 365, 367 (Fla. 1981) (applying rational basis test to equal protection claim); DeWeese v. Town of Palm Beach, 812 F. 2d 1365, 1367 (11th Cir.1987) (using rational basis test to determine substantive due process claim). The court specifically found that prohibiting forms of entertainment that are not gambling bore no rational relationship to the county’s asserted governmental interests in passing the ordinance. We affirm the amended declaratory judgment on that basis.
Affirmed.
CASANUEVA, J., and QUINCE, PEGGY A., Associate Judge, Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Lowell Joseph Kuvin v. City OF Coral Gables (Fla. 3d DCA 2007)…g other motel advertising signs unconstitutional as having “no justification from an aesthetic viewpoint[:] ... a sign advertising rates is not aesthetically distinguishable from a sign advertising [other] motel services”); Pinellas County v. Fiore, 732 So. 2d 1152 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999)(upholding judgment invalidating, as bearing no rational relationship to asserted government interest in prohibiting gambling, ordinance regulating skill machines so as to bar leasing of toy crane machines on premises conducting bi…
Authorities Cited
- Rene Pinillos for the Estate of Margarita Pinillos v. Cedars OF Lebanon Hosp. Corp. & the Fla. Patients Comp. Fund, 403 So. 2d 365 (Fla. 1981)
- DeWEESE v. Town OF Palm Beach, 812 F.2d 1365 (11th Cir. 1987)