THE SOUND TRANSPORTATION PLANNING COALITION, INC., APPELLANT,
v.
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATION, AND LEON COUNTY, FLORIDA, 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 Sound Transportation Planning Coalition (STPC) challenged a permit issued by the Florida Department of Environmental Regulation (DER) for a Department of Transportation highway project. The court affirmed the permit, finding no procedural error in DER's reinstatement of proceedings after a rule was revived and no substantive error in granting the permit.
The court held that DER did not violate the Farrell rule by reinstating the proceedings because the prior dismissal was not a determination on the merits but merely acknowledged the permit rule was no longer in effect. Additionally, on the merits, the court found no error in DER's decision to grant the permit.
[1] A prior dismissal of administrative proceedings that was not a determination on the merits, but rather a recognition that the underlying rule requiring a permit was no lo…
[2] Reinstatement of administrative proceedings after a rule is revived is a measure that restores the controversy to its prior condition and does not prejudice a party that…
Previewing 2 of 4 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 Department of Environmental Regulation did not offend Farrell v. Amica Mutual Ins. Co., 361 So. 2d 408 (Fla.1978), by reinstating the previously dismissed Section 120.57 proceedings”
Establishes that DER did not violate the Farrell rule by reinstating the administrative proceedings
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceSTPC filed a Section 120.57 proceeding to contest issuance of an air quality permit to the Department of Transportation for construction of additional…
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 Administrative Law cases and more on FLexlaw
ROBERT P. SMITH, Jr., Judge.
Sound Transportation Planning Coalition, Inc. (STPC), a Tallahassee-based corporation of persons concerned with transportation developments as they affect the ecology, appeals from an order of the Department of Environmental Regulation granting a complex source air quality permit to the Department of Transportation for construction of additional traffic lanes on Thomasville Roád. We affirm.
The Department of Environmental Regulation did not offend Farrell v. Amica Mutual Ins. Co., 361 So. 2d 408 (Fla.1978), by reinstating the previously dismissed Section 120.57 proceedings, which were initiated by STPC to contest the issuance of a permit to DOT, then dismissed by DER when Fla.Admin.Code.R. 17-2.04(8), requiring such a permit, was purportedly repealed by DER action. When the Division of Administrative Hearings subsequently held that Rule 17-2.04(8) was irregularly repealed, DER reinstated the cause on motion by DOT. The prior dismissal was not a determination on the merits of DOT’s application, but only recognition that the underlying rule requiring the permit, was no longer in effect. Reinstatement of the proceedings when the rule was revived therefore did not disturb a prior decision on the merits, but was in effect a measure conveniently restoring the controversy to its prior condition. There was no prejudice to STPC in reinstatement of the proceedings. Section 120.68(8), Florida Statutes (1977). A renewed application by DOT and a renewed objection by STPC would have had the same effect. There is no cause to extend the Farrell rule to the extent of forbidding renewed proceedings for a required permit for construction, of which DER had jurisdiction, without a determination of the merits.
On the merits we find no error in DER’s action granting the permit.
AFFIRMED.
MILLS, C. J., and HENRY CLAY MITCHELL, Jr., Associate Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Edmond J. Farrell, III v. AMICA Mut. Ins. Co. & Am. Mut. Liab. Co. & Indus. Relations Comm'n, 361 So. 2d 408 (Fla. 1978)