FLORIDA HOME BUILDERS ASSOCIATION, INC., TALLAHASSEE BUILDERS ASSOCIATION, INC., HERMITAGE VENTURES, L.L.C., AND SUE C. BOYNTON, APPELLANTS/CROSS-APPELLEES,
v.
CITY OF TALLAHASSEE, APPELLEE/CROSS-APPELLANT
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 Florida Home Builders Association and other appellants challenged the constitutionality of a Tallahassee municipal ordinance regulating building projects and sought declaratory and injunctive relief. The appellate court dismissed the appeal for lack of standing, finding that the appellant associations failed to demonstrate that a substantial number of their members were sufficiently affected by the ordinance.
The appellants lacked the requisite standing to maintain the action. Sue Boynton had no standing; Hermitage Ventures lost standing by withdrawing its application and committing to a project not subject to the ordinance; and the builder associations failed to show that a substantial number of their members were sufficiently affected by the ordinance.
[1] A party seeking declaratory or injunctive relief must demonstrate a bona fide dispute with an actual present need for judicial intervention.
[2] An association seeking to bring a legal challenge on behalf of its members must show that a substantial number of its members are sufficiently affected by the ordinance a…
Previewing 2 of 5 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“such speculative possibilities, based on factual assumptions pertaining to events that only might occur at some uncertain time in the future, do not create the necessary standing for declaratory or injunctive relief”
The court rejected the associations' argument that potential future harm to members created standing, requiring instead concrete present injury
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe appellants challenged a municipal ordinance pertaining to building projects in specified areas of Tallahassee. Sue Boynton was found to lack stand…
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 Bona Fide Dispute cases and more on FLexlaw
The appellants challenge an order by which the trial court upheld the constitutionality of a municipal ordinance, upon the appellants’ request for a declaratory judgment and injunctive relief. The appellee has moved to dismiss this appeal, based on the appellants’ lack of standing to further maintain this action. Because the appellants have not established the requisite standing, the appeal is dismissed.
The disputed ordinance pertains to certain building projects within specified areas of the appellee City of Tallahassee, and the appellants were plaintiffs in the proceeding below. The appellant Sue Boynton was found to not have standing, and that ruling is not challenged in this appeal. The appellant Hermitage Ventures was found to have standing, with Hermitage Ventures having submitted an application for a building project that would be subject to the challenged ordinance. However, Hermitage Ventures has since withdrawn that application and has now announced its intent to build a different project which is not subject to the ordinance. Hermitage Ventures thus no longer has standing to pursue the legal challenge to the ordinance in this case.
The appellants Florida Home Builders Association and Tallahassee Builders Association are entities whose members are engaged in the construction business and related occupations. These associations’ standing to pursue this action is governed by Florida Home Builders Ass’n v. Dep’t of Labor & Employment Security, 412 So.2d 351 (Fla.1982). Among other requirements, Florida Home Builders establishes that for these associations to have standing to bring the legal challenge on behalf of their members, the associations must show that a substantial number of the members are sufficiently affected by the ordinance. And this action for a declaratory judgment and injunctive relief is dependent on 3, showing that there is a bona fide dispute with an actual present need for judicial intervention. See e.g. Spencer v. Gonzalez, 731 So.2d 111 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999); Britanico Underwriters, Inc. v. Central Jersey Investments, Inc., 632 So.2d 138 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994).
Florida Home Builders and Tallahassee Builders Association assert that their memberships include the great majority of the builders and developers who are qualified and would be reasonably likely to build or develop projects that could be subject to the ordinance. But such speculative possibilities, based on factual assumptions pertaining to events that only might occur at some uncertain time in the future, do not create the necessary standing for declaratory or injunctive relief. See Dep’t of Ins. v. Guarantee Trust Life Ins. Co., 812 So.2d 459 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002). Because Florida Home Builders and Tallahassee Builders Association have not shown that a substantial number of their members are sufficiently affected to permit the action for declaratory or injunc-tive relief, Florida Home Builders and Tallahassee Builders Association have not satisfied the necessary criteria for standing under Guarantee Trust and Florida Home Builders.
As there is no party to this appeal with the requisite standing to maintain this action, the appeal is dismissed.
PADOVANO and ROBERTS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Francine Liebman v. THE City OF Miami (Fla. 3d DCA 2019)…for the Watson Island site. Such an allegation fails to provide anything more than a mere possibility, and is insufficient to meet the special injury requirement for standing purposes.6 Compare Fla. Home Builders Ass’n, Inc. v. City of Tallahassee, 15 So. 3d 612, 613 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009) (noting: “Florida Home Builders and Tallahassee Builders Association assert that their memberships include the great majority of the builders and developers who are qualified and would be reasonably likely to build or develo…
-
Cmty. Power Network Corp. v. JEA (Fla. 1st DCA 2021)
Authorities Cited
- Fla. Home Builders Ass'n v. Dep't OF Labor & Emp. Sec., 412 So. 2d 351 (Fla. 1982)
- Britamco Underwriters, Inc. v. Cent. Jersey Invs., Inc., 632 So. 2d 138 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994)
- Fla. Dep't OF Ins. & State Treas. v. Guar. Tr. Life Ins. Co. & Golden Rule Ins. Co., 812 So. 2d 459 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002)
- McCUTCHEON v. Fla. Parole Comm'n, 812 So. 2d 459 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002)
- Spencer v. Gonzalez, 731 So. 2d 111 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999)