VILLAGE OF VIRGINIA GARDENS, FLORIDA, GUSTAF HOLMBERG, MAYOR; L. EDWARD STEINER, TED K. SPEIDEL, WILLIAM E. HARDY, EARNEST C. PENLAND AND M. A. REISERT, AS COUNCILMEN AND MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OF VIRGINIA GARDENS, FLORIDA, APPELLANTS,
v.
WILLIAM B. JOHNSON AND AGNES J. JOHNSON, HIS WIFE, 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 Village of Virginia Gardens appealed a trial court's decision declaring its zoning ordinance unconstitutional. The Florida appellate court reversed, holding that the property owners failed to meet their heavy burden of proving the ordinance invalid, as the validity of the ordinance was merely a fairly debatable question.
The court held that the appellees failed to carry their heavy burden of proving the ordinance unconstitutional. Because the validity of the ordinance was merely a fairly debatable question, the court could not substitute its judgment for that of the municipal legislative body charged with enacting zoning legislation.
“Where an attack is made on a zoning ordinance enacted by a city council upon authorization by legislative grant, the burden of alleging and proving invalidity rests upon the assailant. This burden is extraordinary and heavy.”
Establishes the heavy burden of proof required for challenging zoning ordinances
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceIn 1953, the Village enacted a zoning ordinance creating a 'restricted business district' that originally permitted restaurants. The ordinance was lat…
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 Zoning Ordinance Constitutionality cases and more on FLexlaw
Appellant Village seeks review of an adverse final decree declaring its zoning ordinance to be unconstitutional and void as bearing no relationship to the health, safety, morals or general welfare of the community as a whole.
The ordinance in question was enacted in 1953 and created a “restricted business district” within which a number of uses, including restaurants, would be permitted. Thereafter, the ordinance was amended by the deletion of restaurants from the list of permissive uses. Subsequently, the appel-lees acquired property within the district. After their request for a variance to construct a building intended for use as a restaurant was denied, appellees brought this action, seeking to have the subject ordinance declared unconstitutional and void. After hearing, the chancellor entered the order appealed.
Appellants contend the chancellor erred in that the evidence presented by the appel-lees was insufficient to overcome the presumption that the ordinance was constitutional. We find this contention has merit.
Where an attack is made on a zoning ordinance enacted by a city council upon authorization by legislative grant, the burden of alleging and proving invalidity rests upon the assailant. This burden is extraordinary and heavy. Gautier v. Town of Jupiter Island, Fla.App.1962, 142 So.2d 321; City of Miami Beach v. Wiesen, Fla.1956, 86 So.2d 442; City of Miami Beach v. Silver, Fla.1953, 67 So.2d 646.
We have examined the record and conclude that this burden was not sufficiently carried by the appellees in the case *693at bar. At most, the record indicates that the validity of the ordinance under consideration is a fairly debatable question. When such is the case, a court does not have the right or authority to substitute its judgment for that of the municipal legislative body charged with the power and duty of enacting zoning legislation. Gautier v. Town of Jupiter Island, supra; City of Miami Beach v. Wiesen, supra; City of Miami Beach v. Hogan, Fla.1953, 63 So.2d 493; City of Miami Beach v. Ocean & Inland Co., 147 Fla. 480, 3 So.2d 364; Village of Euclid, Ohio v. Ambler Realty Co., 272 U.S. 365, 47 S.Ct. 114, 71 L.Ed. 303.
It follows that the decree appealed should be, and is accordingly, reversed with directions to dismiss the complaint.
Reversed with directions.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
City OF Coral Gables v. Wood, 305 So. 2d 261 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974)…undation in reason and is a mere arbitrary exercise of power without reference to public health, morals, safety or welfare. State ex rel. Helseth v. DuBose, 1930, 99 Fla. 812, 128 So. 4. See also Village of Virginia Gardens v. Johnson, Fla.App.1962, 143 So. 2d 692 and Donch v. City of Miami, Fla.App.1968, 214 So. 2d 503. Aesthetic considerations have been held to be a valid basis for zoning in Florida. See Sunad, Inc. v. City of Sarasota, Fla.1960, 122 So. 2d 611; State ex rel. Boozer v. City of Miami, Fla.Ap…
-
Blank v. Town OF Lake Clarke Shores, 161 So. 2d 683 (Fla. 2d DCA 1964)…scussed the authorities already cited herein, as well as many more; and it will be noted that the same reasoning has been employed herein as was employed in the Jupiter Island decision. See also, Village of Virginia Gardens v. Johnson, Fla.App.1962, 143 So. 2d 692; and Polk Enterprises, Inc. v. City of Lakeland, Fla.App.1962, 143 So. 2d 917. The chancellor below, in concluding, found that under all of the circumstances it could not be said that the restrictions placed upon the plaintiffs’ property were not r…
-
Town OF N. Redington Beach v. Winnie G. Williams, 220 So. 2d 22 (Fla. 2d DCA 1969)…circumstances “a court does not have the right or authority to substitute its judgment for that of the municipal legislative body, charged with the power and duty of enacting zoning legislation”. Village of Virginia Gardens v. Johnson, Fla.App.1962, 143 So. 2d 692. See also Blank v. Town of Lake Clarke Shores, Fla.App.1964, 161 So. 2d 683, a 2nd District Court case, and the authorities therein cited, text 685-686. The basic criteria for sustaining a zoning ordinance was fully met in the lower Court. The evid…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Vill. OF Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co., 272 U.S. 365 (U.S. 1926)
- The City of Miami Beach v. Ocean & Inland Co., 147 Fla. 480 (Fla. 1941)
- City OF Miami Beach v. Wiesen, 86 So. 2d 442 (Fla. 1956)
- City of Miami Beach v. Hogan, 63 So. 2d 493 (Fla. 1953)
- Adler v. Nelly Saffran (Fla. 1914)
- City of Miami Beach v. Silver, 67 So. 2d 646 (Fla. 1953)
- Gautier v. Town OF Jupiter Island, 142 So. 2d 321 (Fla. 2d DCA 1962)