STEVE HESSEN, TRUSTEE, APPELLANT,
v.
METROPOLITAN DADE COUNTY, A POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THE STATE OF 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.
This case involves a property owner appealing a county's rezoning of his land to a more restrictive use. The court reversed the lower court's denial of the owner's petition for certiorari, finding it governed by prior similar cases.
The court held that the county's resolution was improper and that the judgment denying the petition for certiorari should be reversed. The court directed the lower court to grant the petition and quash the resolution.
[1] A resolution changing zoning restrictions on property to a more restrictive use may be quashed upon certiorari review.
[2] A court may reverse a lower court's judgment and remand with directions to grant a petition for certiorari and quash a county commission's resolution based on prior contr…
Previewing 2 of 3 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“The factual basis of the present appeal differs from that dealt with in the Aronovitz opinion only in that in the present instance, the Zoning Appeals Board, by resolution, disapproved the proposed zoning change of appellant’s property and would have adhered to the zoning established pursuant to our mandate in Metropolitan Dade County v. Pierce, supra.”
This quote highlights the factual similarity to prior cases and the Zoning Appeals Board's initial disapproval.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellant owned undeveloped land that the county rezoned to a more restrictive use. The Zoning Appeals Board initially disapproved the change. 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
PER CURIAM.
The appellant, Steve Hessen, Trustee, is the owner of undeveloped land which is located in the Baptist Hospital block in the Kendall area of southern Dade County. He appeals from a final judgment of the trial court denying his petition for certiorari to review a resolution of the Board of County Commissioners changing the zoning restrictions on his property to a more restrictive use. Appellant’s property forms a part of the entire area contained in the former Larkins and Pierce tracts which were the subject of Metropolitan Dade County v. Pierce, Fla.App.1970, 236 So. 2d 202, and Larkins v. Metropolitan Dade County, Fla.App.1970, 237 So. 2d 343. A portion of the former “Larkins tract” was also the subject of a recent appeal to this court. See Aronovitz v. Metropolitan Dade County, Fla.App. 3rd 1974, 290 So. 2d 536. The factual basis of the present appeal differs from that dealt with in the Aronovitz opinion only in that in the present instance, the Zoning Appeals Board, by resolution, disapproved the proposed zoning change of appellant’s property and would have adhered to the zoning established pursuant to our mandate in Metropolitan Dade County v. Pierce, supra. At the time that the present appeal was called for oral argument, the appellee, Metropolitan Dade. County, conceded that the present appeal is governed by the principles set forth in the opinion of this court in Aronovitz v. Metropolitan Dade County, supra. Based upon this representation, oral argument was waived.
We conclude therefore, that upon the authority of Metropolitan Dade County v. Pierce, supra, Larkins v. Metropolitan Dade County, supra, and Aronovitz v. Metropolitan Dade County, supra, the judgment in this case must be reversed. Accordingly, the final judgment denying petition for certiorari in the circuit court is reversed and this cause is remanded with directions to grant the petition and enter an order quashing the resolution of the Dade County Commission rezoning appellant’s property.
Reversed and remanded with directions.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
The Fla. Dep't OF Offender Rehab. v. Leroy Jerry and the Florida Division of Administrative Hearings, 353 So. 2d 1230 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978)…ndermine authority. Section 120.57(l)(b)4, however, gives all parties the opportunity to respond, to present evidence and to conduct cross-examination. . In interpreting the effect of Sec. 120.30, we stated in D. & W. Oil Company, Inc. v. O’Malley, 293 So. 2d 128 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974), that standing under the statute was broader than declaratory actions pursued under Ch. 87. . Section 10 of the Federal Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. § 702) provides: “A person suffering legal wrong because of agency a…
-
Endress v. Fla. Dep't OF Corr., 612 So. 2d 645 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993)…ter 86 has at times been construed as differing somewhat from that which has pertained under various provisions in chapter 120. See Bayne v. Florida State Board of Dispensing Opticians, 212 So. 2d 762 (Fla.1968); D & W Oil Company, Inc. v. O’Malley, 293 So. 2d 128 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974); see also, Florida Department of Offender Rehabilitation v. Jerry, 353 So. 2d 1230 (Fla. 1st DCA), cert. denied, 359 So. 2d 1215 (Fla.1978). When the 1968 constitution was adopted, with the article I, section 21 guarantee of acce…
-
Royal Selections, Inc. v. Fla. Dep't OF Revenue, 687 So. 2d 893 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997)…ons are proper subjects for declaratory decrees. See § 86.021, Fla. Stat. (1993); City of Miami v. Fraternal Order of Police, Miami Lodge 20, 559 So. 2d 627 (Fla. 3d DCA) (statute), rev. denied, 569 So. 2d 1279 (Fla.1990); D & W Oil Co. v. O’Malley, 293 So. 2d 128 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974) (administrative rules). In determining that the appellant did not state a cause of action, the trial court actually construed the various ordinances and administrative rules to demonstrate that collection of the charge by the t…
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
- Farrington v. State, 290 So. 2d 536 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974)
- Metro. Dade Cnty. v. Pierce, 236 So. 2d 202 (Fla. 3d DCA 1970)
- Larkins v. Metro. Dade Cnty., 237 So. 2d 343 (Fla. 3d DCA 1970)