T. J. BURGESS ET AL., APPELLANTS,
v.
CRIPPEN OLDSMOBILE, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, AND CITY OF NORTH MIAMI, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, 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 court affirmed the trial court's denial of an injunction against Crippen Oldsmobile's used car sales operation on a nonconforming property strip, holding that the city's zoning was arbitrary and confiscatory and properly rezoned to permit business use.
A city's zoning restriction on property with established nonconforming use status and prior variance approval is arbitrary and confiscatory when the city itself issued permits for business-related improvements.
[1] A zoning restriction on property with established nonconforming use status and prior variance approval is arbitrary and confiscatory when the municipality has issued perm…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceCrippen Oldsmobile operated a used car sales business on a narrow strip of property zoned for apartment residential use fifteen years earlier; the pro…
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 Restrictions cases and more on FLexlaw
The appellants, who were some of the plaintiffs below, seek reversal of a judgment denying plaintiffs’ suit to enjoin the defendant Crippen Oldsmobile, Inc. from using, for used car sales purposes, a narrow strip of property adjoining its main business property. Fifteen years earlier the subject property had been zoned for apartment residential use. A portion of the property, representing between one third and one half thereof, being the part directly adjacent to the Crippen business property, is properly used for business purposes by Crippen in accordance with its nonconforming use status- and a variance previously issued therefor. In 1968 the City of North Miami issued a permit to Crippen to erect lights on the property (incident to its use thereof for used car sales purposes), and in 1969 the city issued a permit to Crippen to pave the property.
*614The trial court denied the injunction sought by the plaintiffs, and, on a cross-claim by Crippen against the city, held the zoning was arbitrary and confiscatory and directed that the property be rezoned to a classification which would permit its business use. Having examined the record, including exhibits which show the property involved and the general area, and considered the briefs and arguments, we conclude the judgment is supported by the evidence and the applicable law, and that no reversible error has been shown.
Affirmed.