LAND CORPORATION OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
METROPOLITAN DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA, 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.
Land Corporation of Florida appealed the dismissal of its complaint challenging a county commission's denial of its zoning variance application. The court affirmed the dismissal, holding that review of the county commission's zoning decision must proceed by certiorari petition rather than by equitable suit.
The court held that review of a county commission's zoning decision is prescribed by statute to proceed by certiorari, not by separate equitable action.
“the method prescribed for review of the commission's ruling was by certiorari”
Establishes that statutory procedure requires certiorari review, not equitable suit
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceLand Corporation sought a zoning boundary change from single-family residence (RU-1) to liberal business (BU-3) zoning. The county zoning appeals boar…
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 Suit In Equity cases and more on FLexlaw
This is an appeal by the plaintiff below from an order dismissing its amended complaint, on motion of the defendant.
Plaintiff made application for a zoning boundary change, to liberalize the zoning on its property from RU-1, single family residence, to BU-3, liberal business. After a hearing on notice th'e county zoning appeals board recommended that the application be granted. The county commission disapproved the recommendation.1
Following the action of the county commissioners, plaintiff filed a suit in equity reciting the proceedings outlined above, charging that the hearing before the zoning appeals board was conducted in a manner which departed from essential requirements of law in that witnesses were permitted to make arguments before the board without being sworn or cross examined, and that the county commission departed from essential requirements of law in that the hearing there “was informal in nature in that witnesses making arguments before the board were neither sworn, nor opportunity presented to cross examine them,” and because the recommendation of the zoning appeals board which was considered by the county commissioners was not filed in evidence. The complaint charged that on the applicable facts the commission’s ruling was erroneous, arbitrary and amounted to a denial of equal protection of the laws. It was prayed that the county commission be mandatorily enjoined to change the zoning as requested.
As revealed by the order dismissing the amended complaint, the trial court accepted the argument of the county attorney that the method prescribed for review of the commission’s ruling was by certiorari. That decision of the circuit judge is supported by the ruling of this coiirt in Dade County v. Metro Improvement Corporation, Fla.App.1966, 190 So.2d 202, on the authority of which we affirm.
*224The separate suit filed m this case did not present an attack on the validity of the zoning ordinance, and for that reason the case of Thompson v. City of Miami, Fla.1964, 167 So.2d 841 is not applicable. Here the challenge was to the county commission’s ruling for which review by cer-tiorari is prescribed by § 33-316 of the Code of Ordinances of Metropolitan Dade County.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Otto S. Baker and Bertha H. Baker v. Metro. Dade Cnty., 237 So. 2d 201 (Fla. 3d DCA 1970)…circumstances, the rule is that certiorari is the proper method of challenging the county commission’s ruling. Metropolitan Dade County v. Greenlee, Fla.App.1968, 213 So. 2d 485; Land Corporation of Florida v. Metropolitan Dade County, Fla.App.1967, 204 So. 2d 222, cert. denied, 210 So. 2d 224; Dade County v. Metro Improvement Corporation, Fla.App.1966, 190 So. 2d 202. The commission’s procedure, i.e., utilizing the resolution as a means of denying the request for rezoning, is quasi judicial in nature, Harris…
-
Gen. Elec. Credit Corp. OF Ga. v. Metro. Dade Cnty., 346 So. 2d 1049 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977)…n Dade County, 318 So. 2d 149 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975); Baker v. Metropolitan Dade County, 237 So. 2d 201 (Fla. 3d DCA 1970); Metropolitan Dade County v. Greenlee, 213 So. 2d 485 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968); Land Corporation of Florida v. Metropolitan Dade County, 204 So. 2d 222 (Fla. 3d DCA 1967), cert. denied, 210 So. 2d 224 (Fla.1968); Dade County v. Carmichael, 165 So. 2d 227 (Fla. 3d DCA 1964). . Odham v. Foremost Dairies, Inc., 128 So. 2d 586, 593 (Fla.1961).…
-
Metro. Dade Cnty. v. Greenlee, 213 So. 2d 485 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968)…argument is that since the action of the county commission was by resolution rather than by an ordinance the prescribed method of review was by certiorari, citing and relying on Land Corporation of Florida v. Metropolitan Dade County, Fla.App.1967, 204 So. 2d 222, decided by this court following Dade County v. Metro Improvement Corp., Fla.App.1966, 190 So. 2d 202. The appellee contends that proceeding by separate suit was proper because his complaint presents a general challenge to the validity of the zonin…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Thompson v. City OF Miami, 167 So. 2d 841 (Fla. 1964)
- Dade Cnty. v. Metro Improvement Corp., 190 So. 2d 202 (Fla. 3d DCA 1966)