LAS OLAS TOWER COMPANY, PETITIONER,
v.
CITY OF FORT LAUDERDALE, RESPONDENT

Fla. | 2001-04-12
No. SC95674
WELLS, C.J., and HARDING, ANSTEAD, PARIENTE, LEWIS and QUINCE, JJ., concur.
783 So. 2d 1056 Florida Supreme Court (2001) Positive Treatment
Cited by 1 case

Opinion of the Court
SHAW, J.

SHAW, J.

We granted review of Las Olas Tower Co. v. City of Fort Lauderdale, 742 So. 2d 308 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999), because City of Dania v. Florida Power & Light, 718 So. 2d 813 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998), was pending here at that time and both cases addressed the proper scope of first-and second-tier certiorari review. We have since issued Florida Power & Light Co. v. City of Dania, 761 So. 2d 1089 (Fla.2000), and the present case is consistent with that opinion. Accordingly, we dismiss review of Las Olas Tower Co. It is so ordered.

WELLS, C.J., and HARDING, ANSTEAD, PARIENTE, LEWIS and QUINCE, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Childers v. Cape Canaveral Hosp., Inc., 898 So. 2d 973 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005)
    …e used is not required when to do so would lead to an unreasonable conclusion, defeat legislative intent or result in a manifest incongruity. See Las Olas Tower Co. v. City of Fort Lauderdale, 742 So. 2d 308, 312 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999), rev. dismissed, 783 So. 2d 1056 (Fla.2001). “[I]f from a view of the whole law, or from other laws in pari materia the evident intent is different from the literal import of the terms employed to express it in a particular part of the law, that intent should prevail, for that, in…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw