RIVERSIDE HOMES, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLANT,
v.
CITY OF MIAMI, A FLORIDA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, APPELLEE
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 appellate court affirmed a lower court's decision upholding a city's zoning ordinance, finding that the appellant failed to demonstrate error in the trial court's application of the "fairly debatable rule." The court noted that zoning decisions are presumed correct and can be challenged if conditions change.
No, the trial court did not err. The appellant failed to demonstrate that the trial court committed error in its decision.
“Appellant appeals an adverse final decree upholding the zoning of the appellee municipality upon the "fairly debatable rule".”
This quote establishes the core issue on appeal: the appellant's challenge to the zoning decision based on the "fairly debatable rule."
Previewing 1 of 4 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceRiverside Homes, Inc. (appellant) challenged the City of Miami's zoning of its property. The trial court upheld the zoning based on the "fairly debata…
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 Fairly Debatable Rule cases and more on FLexlaw
Appellant appeals an adverse final decree upholding the zoning of the appellee municipality upon the “fairly debatable rule”. In this connection, see: City of Miami Beach v. Lachman, Fla.1953, 71 So.2d 148; Village of Virginia Gardens v. Johnson, Fla.App. 1962, 143 So.2d 692.
. The chancellor’s decree arrived in' this court with a presumption of correctness. See: Meadows Southern Construction Co. v. Pezzaniti, Fla.App.1959, 108 So.2d 499; Lynch v. Coppola, Fla.App.1961, 129 So.2d 183. It was incumbent upon the appellant to demonstrate error. See: Videon v. Hodge, Fla.1954, 72 So.2d 396; Frell v. Frell, Fla.App.1963, 154 So.2d 706. Following an examination of the record, briefs and after oral argument by respective counsel, the appellant has failed to demonstrate that the chancellor committed error in the record then before him. Therefore, his actions should be affirmed, without prejudice to the appellant to seek relief from the zoning restrictions on its property in the future, in the event of a change in conditions.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Davis v. Situs Inc., 275 So. 2d 600 (Fla. 1st DCA 1973)…Fla.1954), 71 So. 2d 148. . Ogden v. Groves (Fla.App.1970), 241 So. 2d 756; see also Stokes v. City of Jacksonville, 276 So. 2d 200, Fla.App., opinion filed March 29, 1978, not yet reported. . Riverside Homes, Inc. v. City of Miami (Fla.App.1964), 159 So. 2d 264. . William Murray Builders, Inc. v. City of Jacksonville (Fla.App.1971), 254 So. 2d 364.…
Authorities Cited
- City of Miami Beach v. Lachman, 71 So. 2d 148 (Fla. 1953)
- Lynch v. Coppola, 129 So. 2d 183 (Fla. 2d DCA 1961)
- J. C. Frell and Jeanne v. Frell, 154 So. 2d 706 (Fla. 3d DCA 1963)
- Meadows S. Constr. Co. v. Pezzaniti, 108 So. 2d 499 (Fla. 2d DCA 1959)
- Vill. OF Va. Gardens v. Johnson, 143 So. 2d 692 (Fla. 3d DCA 1962)
- Videon et ux. v. Hodge, 72 So. 2d 396 (Fla. 1954)