KEY COLONY NO. 1 CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC., ET AL., APPELLANTS,
v.
VILLAGE OF KEY BISCAYNE, 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 court affirmed the trial court's judgment upholding the Village of Key Biscayne's stormwater utility assessments against a challenge that they violated the statutory requirement of basing assessments on relative contribution to need, finding appellants failed to overcome the presumption of correctness with strong, direct, clear, and positive proof.
Appellants challenging stormwater utility assessments must overcome a presumption of correctness of the municipality's findings by strong, direct, clear, and positive proof, and appellants here failed to meet that burden.
[1] A municipality's stormwater utility assessments are presumed correct, and a challenger must overcome this presumption by strong, direct, clear, and positive proof that th…
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 intelligenceThe Village of Key Biscayne imposed stormwater utility assessments on the appellants pursuant to Village ordinance 93-11. The appellants challenged th…
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 Standard Of Proof cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The appellants filed suit challenging the assessments imposed upon them by the Village of Key Biscayne to fund a stormwater utility. See generally § 403.0893, Pla.Stat. (1993).
The appellants claimed that Village ordinance 93-11 violated Florida Statute section 403.031(17)’s requirement that assessments be made based upon relative contribution to need. In order to have prevailed below, the appellants needed to overcome a presumption of correctness of the Village’s findings underlying the assessment, and needed to do so by strong, direct, clear, and positive proof. See City of Boca Raton v. State, 595 So. 2d 25, 30-31 (Fla.1992); City of New Smyrna Beach v. Fish, 384 So. 2d 1272, 1276 (Fla.1980); Meyer v. City of Oakland Park, 219 So. 2d 417, 420 (Fla.1969); Rosche v. City of Hollywood, 55 So. 2d 909, 913 (Fla. 1952); Association of Community Orgs. for Reform Now/ACORN v. City of Florida City, 444 So. 2d 37, 38-39 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983), rev. denied, 451 So. 2d 847 (Fla.1984); City of Gainesville v. Seaboard Coastline R.R., 411 So. 2d 1339, 1340 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982).
The judge below found that the appellants failed to make the required showing, and the record on appeal supports the judge’s findings.
Therefore, both the final judgment, and the subsequent cost judgment, are affirmed.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- City OF Boca Raton v. State, 595 So. 2d 25 (Fla. 1992)
- Meyer v. City OF Oakland Park, 219 So. 2d 417 (Fla. 1969)
- Rosche v. City of Hollywood, 55 So.2d 909 (Fla. 1952)
- City OF NEW Smyrna Beach v. Fish, 384 So. 2d 1272 (Fla. 1980)
- City OF Gainesville v. Seaboard Coastline R.R. Co., 411 So. 2d 1339 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982)
- Ass'n OF Cmty. Orgs. FOR Reform NOW/Acorn v. City OF Fla. City, 444 So. 2d 37 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)