APPLIED RESEARCH LABORATORIES OF FLORIDA, INC., APPELLANT,
v.
PORTER HOMER, COUNTY MANAGER, ET AL., 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.
Applied Research Laboratories appealed the dismissal of its complaint against Leach, director of Dade County's Department of Pollution Control, for alleged malfeasance or nonfeasance. The court affirmed the dismissal but reversed to allow the plaintiff to file a further amended complaint, finding the original pleading too vague to state a cause of action.
The court affirmed the dismissal of the amended complaint as failing to state a cause of action due to its vague and inartificially drawn allegations, but reversed and remanded to allow the plaintiff to file a properly pleaded amended complaint, recognizing that the plaintiff may have a valid cause of action if properly stated.
[1] A court cannot take judicial notice of the contents of municipal ordinances.
[2] A complaint must clearly allege the specific duties and obligations imposed by a municipal code to state a cause of action for malfeasance or nonfeasance.
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“it is fundamental that we cannot take judicial notice of the contents of municipal ordinances”
Establishes the court's reasoning for why it cannot determine what duties the Metropolitan Code imposed on the defendant
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceApplied Research Laboratories filed suit against the county manager, Metro Commissioners, and Leach, alleging damage resulting from Leach's malfeasanc…
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 Judicial Notice Of Municipal Ordinances cases and more on FLexlaw
This is an appeal from a final judgment dismissing plaintiff-appellant’s cause, with prejudice, consequent upon the granting of the defendant Leach’s motion to dismiss the amended complaint.
The original complaint was brought against the county manager and the Metro Commissioners, as well as Leach, but in the amended complaint all defendants were dismissed except Leach.
As best we can gather from the vague and generalized allegations of the amended complaint, it seeks to set forth a cause of action against the defendant, Leach, for malfeasance or nonfeasance as director of the Department of Pollution Control of Dade County, presumably established by the Metropolitan Code, resulting in damage to plaintiff. Precisely what the defendant’s duties and obligations under this Code are, or what the Code specifically provides, is left to conjecture, since it is fundamental that we cannot take judicial notice of the contents of municipal ordinances. Accordingly, neither the trial court nor we can determine in what respect the defendant, Leach, breached any duty imposed on him by the Code, or in what respect he had the manipulative power to interfere with the plaintiff’s contractual obligations.
Moreover, we fail to understand the appellant’s claim for “damage to their executives, both of the body and the mind”, or “damages to the corporate entity”.
The amended complaint is inarti-ficially drawn and clearly failed to state a cause of action. However, we do not have the benefit of any opinion by the trial court as to the reason for its dismissal with prejudice; and appellant may have a cause of action, if properly pleaded.
Accordingly, we affirm so much of the judgment appealed from as grants the motion to dismiss, but reverse with directions to permit a further amended complaint.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Holmes v. State, 273 So. 2d 753 (Fla. 1972)…that the trial court had, inter alia, held to be unconstitutional an ordinance not entered into evidence before the trial court. In Wilkins v. Tebbetts, 216 So. 2d 477 (Fla.App.3d, 1968), and Applied Research Laboratories of Florida, Inc. v. Homer, 249 So. 2d 732 (Fla.App.3d, 1971), the District Court repeated its holding of Town of Medley, but in none of the cases did the District Court reverse the application of an ordinance by the trial court as Holmes is urging should be done in the case sub jndice. In a…
-
Lester v. State, 754 So. 2d 746 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)…not made a part of the record and ... not before us for construction”); Nicholas v. First Interstate Dev. Corp., 315 So. 2d 238, 240 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975); Haverty v. State, 258 So. 2d 18, 20 (Fla. 2d DCA 1972); Applied Research Lab. of Fla. v. Homer, 249 So. 2d 732, 733 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971); City of Opa-Locka v. Trustees of the Plumbing Indus. Promotion Fund, 193 So. 2d 29, 32 (Fla. 3d DCA 1966). The state maintains that, because Ms. Lester had in her possession an open can of beer, Deputy Sheriff Hough could h…
-
Dade Cnty. v. Acme Specialty Corp., 292 So. 2d 378 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974)…plosive mixture, the sale and use of which shall be permitted at all times.” . County ordinances under Home Rule Charter are to be treated the same as municipal ordinances. See: Applied Research Laboratories of Florida, Inc. v. Homer, Fla.App.1971, 249 So. 2d 732; Delano v. Dade County, Fla.1973, 287 So. 2d 288.…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence