TOWN OF PALM BEACH, A FLORIDA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, APPELLANT,
v.
PALM BEACH 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.
The Town of Palm Beach appealed an interlocutory order granting a temporary injunction that restrained it from abandoning four beach access roads. The Florida appellate court reversed the temporary injunction, holding that the trial court's finding of irreparable injury was based on harm that would occur after the ordinance's passage rather than harm from failure to maintain the status quo pending the lawsuit.
The temporary injunction was improper because the irreparable injury found by the trial court would occur upon passage and enforcement of the proposed ordinance, not from failure to maintain the status quo pending suit. Since such injury could be prevented by injunction after the ordinance is passed, no irreparable injury justifying a temporary injunction was demonstrated.
[1] A court will not enjoin the exercise of discretionary powers conferred on municipalities unless the act complained of is illegal, fraudulent, or clearly oppressive.
[2] A municipality may be restrained from the arbitrary exercise of its lawful powers if such exercise infringes upon organic rights.
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“courts will not enjoin the exercise of discretionary powers conferred on municipalities, unless the act complained of is illegal, fraudulent or clearly oppressive”
Establishes the general rule limiting judicial restraint of municipal discretionary powers
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePalm Beach County sued the Town of Palm Beach to restrain the Town from adopting an ordinance or resolution abandoning four beach access roads within …
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 Temporary Injunction cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This is an interlocutory appeal from orders granting a temporary injunction and the denial of a motion to dismiss.
The plaintiff-appellee is Palm Beach County. The defendant-appellant is the Town of Palm Beach. The County brought suit seeking to restrain the Town from adopting an ordinance or resolution abandoning four beach access roads within the Town limits.
The trial court granted a temporary injunction upon finding that “the public will suffer irreparable harm by being denied access to the beach . . .” and it denied the Town’s motion to dismiss.
The appellate questions involve the propriety of the court’s orders granting a temporary injunction and denying appellant’s motion to dismiss. We also raised the question of the appellee’s standing to maintain this suit.
Upon more mature consideration of the case we have elected not to treat the propriety of the order denying the motion to dismiss as the complaint has not been included in the record. We also decline to pass on the question of standing since that issue was not presented to the trial court.
Turning now to the temporary injunction, we note that in general courts will not enjoin the exercise of discretionary powers conferred on municipalities, unless the act complained of is illegal, fraudulent or clearly oppressive. Although, on proper showing a municipality may be restrained from the arbitrary exercise of its lawful powers, for these powers must be exercised in conformity with the organic rights of individuals. 17 Fla.Jur., Injunction, § 57.
The view has been taken that the courts may enjoin the passage of an ordinance which is beyond the scope of the power of a municipal corporation where its passage would work irreparable injury, for in such a case the municipality is acting with no authority of any kind. McQuillin, Municipal Corporations, vol. 5, sec. 16.92, pp. 297-298.
To justify a temporaary injunction in this case the court must find that irreparable injury would accrue to appellee if the appellant was not enjoined while the suit was pending. However, it is clear to us that the irreparable injury which the trial judge found was not injury which could occur because the status quo was not maintained pending suit, but rather injury which will occur upon the passage and enforcement of the proposed ordinance or resolution. Since the later type injury could be prevented by injunction after the ordinance or resolution is passed, no irreparable injury is demonstrated.
Accordingly, the order granting temporary injunction is reversed and the cause is remanded for further proceedings.
WALDEN, C. J., DOWNEY, J., and MORROW, RUSSELL O., Associate Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
LEE v. State, 368 So. 2d 395 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979)…that the arrest in question was lawful. A retrial would therefore inevitably result in a directed judgment of acquittal. Not even the extreme illogicalities sometimes demanded by the law of lesser included offenses, see Silvestri v. State, supra, at 332 So. 2d 355,4 require that we engage in any such useless charade. For these reasons, I concur in the conclusion that the defendant should be discharged as to the charge of resisting arrest without violence. . Although the issue is not before us, I believe, co…
-
Fredericks v. Blake, 382 So. 2d 368 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980)…the preliminary rolls. See e. g. Sections 193.114(5), (6), 195.097, 195.098, Florida Statutes (1977). The injury, if any, could possibly occur only upon completion of the above supervision and review. Compare Town of Palm Beach v. Palm Beach County, 332 So. 2d 355 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976). Fredericks was required to first exhaust his administrative remedies as he lacked standing to invoke the original jurisdiction of the circuit court. See Monroe County v. Gustinger, 285 So. 2d 431 (Fla. 3d DCA 1973). Upon receip…
-
City OF Pompano Beach v. Yardarm Rest., Inc., 509 So. 2d 1295 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987)…e proposed ordinance is enacted, the project will no longer be economically feasible. Further, appellee is presently suffering harm because the city will not issue the building permit. A case from this court, Town of Palm Beach v. Palm Beach County, 332 So. 2d 355 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976), relied on as standing for a different proposition, being concerned only with a temporary injunction, is inapposite. The city’s primary position is based upon the proposition that a court should not enjoin administrative action.…
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