MIAMI DESIGN PRESERVATIONM LEAGUE, INC.,

v.

CITY OF MIAMI BEACH AND DR. LEONARD HOCHSTEIN

(PER CURIAM.) Certiorari review of an action taken by a local government agency is governed by a three-part standard of review: (I) whether procedurai due process was accorded; (2) whether the essential requirements of law were observed; and (3) whether the administrative findings and judgment are supported by competent substantial evidence. Haines City Cmty. Dev. C0. v. Heggs, 658 So. 2d 523, S30 (Fla. 1995); City ofDeerfield Beach v. Vaillant, 419 So. 2d 624, 626 (Fla. 1982). in performing this review, the Circuit Court may not reweigh the evidence or substitute its judgment for that of the agency whose decision it reviews. Florida Power & Light Co. v. City ofDania, 761 So. 2d 1089, 1093 (Fla. 2000). “As long as the record contains competent substantial evidence tosupport the agency’s decision, the decision is presumed lawful and the court’s job is ended.” Dusseau v. Metro. Dade Cnly. Bd. ofCnty. Comm ‘rs, 794 So. 2d 1270, I276 (Fla. 2001); see also City ofHialeah Gardens v. Miami-Dude Charter Foundation, Ina, 857 So. 2d 202, 204-05 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003) (holding that fact-based testimony and recommendations from professional staff can constitute competent substantial evidence). ... :=3E.%II§I§:%g§% I }s=\ “a uailwta»ar@°*“&°itease; .( ei1.<1§~$,?.‘."?*_“‘Y'.;.:.;.l;§-:'.;'.l~"—“'?'* I l I

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME FOR FILING

MOTION FOR REHEARING EXPIRES

OR, IF FILED, DISPOSED OF

MIAMI DESIGN PRESERVATION LEAGUE, IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 11'“

JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR

Petitioner,

MIAMI- DADE COUNTY, FLORID

“ at Fl a Li‘ v. CASE no; 13263 AI; CITY OF MIAMI BEACH and DR. LEONARD HOCHSTEIN, ‘Respondents. ‘ , , / - - Opinion filed: February , 20i4. \ . On appeal from a quasi-judicial decision of the City ofMiami Beach Design Review Board. Kent Harrison Robbins, Esq., for Petitioner Miami Design Preservation League Graham C. Penn, Esq., for Respondent Dr. Leonard Hochstein Gary M. Held, First Assistant City Attorney, for Respondent City ofMiami Beach Before GENDEN, KORVICK, RUIZ, JJ. (PER CURIAM.) Certiorari review of an action taken by a local government agency is governed by a three-part standard of review: (I) whether procedurai due process was accorded; (2) whether the essential requirements of law were observed; and (3) whether the administrative findings and judgment are supported by competent substantial evidence. Haines City Cmty. Dev. C0. v. Heggs, 658 So. 2d 523, S30 (Fla. 1995); City ofDeerfield Beach v. Vaillant, 419 So. 2d 624, 626 (Fla. 1982). in performing this review, the Circuit Court may not reweigh the evidence or substitute its judgment for that of the agency whose decision it reviews. Florida Power & Light Co. v. City ofDania, 761 So. 2d 1089, 1093 (Fla. 2000). “As long as the record contains competent substantial evidence tosupport the agency’s decision, the decision is presumed lawful and the court’s job is ended.” Dusseau v. Metro. Dade Cnly. Bd. ofCnty. Comm ‘rs, 794 So. 2d 1270, I276 (Fla. 2001); see also City ofHialeah Gardens v. Miami-Dude Charter Foundation, Ina, 857 So. 2d 202, 204-05 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003) (holding that fact-based testimony and recommendations from professional staff can constitute competent substantial evidence). ... :=3E.%II§I§:%g§% I }s=\ “a uailwta»ar@°*“&°itease; .( ei1.<1§~$,?.‘."?*_“‘Y'.;.:.;.l;§-:'.;'.l~"—“'?'* [*2] CASE NO: I3-263 AP Moreover, procedural due process under this standard is satisfied if the parties are provided notice of the hearing and an opportunity to be heard, while a departure from the essential requirements of law requires the commission of an error so fundamental in character as to renderthe judgment void. Haines City Cmiy. Dev., 658 So. 2d at 527; Jennings v. Dade County, 589 So. 2d 1337, 1340 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991) (holding that “the quality of due process required in a quasi-judicial hearing is not the same as that to which a party to full judicial hearing is entitled”). After review of the briefs, case law and considering the arguments of the parties, the decision reached by the City of Miami Beach Design Review Board complied with procedural due process requirements, observed the essential requirements of law, and was supported by competent substantiai evidence. Accordingly, it is hereby, ORDERED and ADJUDGED that the Petition for Writ of Ceitiorari is DENIED, and Respondent Dr. Leonard Hochstein’s Motion for Appellate Attorneys’ Fees and Costs is

DENIED.

tttitt 0il?‘E0 I _

FEB

6 am . ' iuoernooczrcanuiz noootso a null (jqnnty Court Judge '» F‘ 1*?»Q : a mégfigpggtaii‘. . . . 13"“ I“ ‘TX: wrI“"= setsiaaaztu ;‘.1‘.‘*'.-I d’3t§vtC‘t!t’i‘ ittlirid“ I‘ v. QQPNEQ Fttltfit-tubT0

GOUIISELIOF RE

Page 2 of 2 CASE NO: I3-263 AP Moreover, procedural due process under this standard is satisfied if the parties are provided notice of the hearing and an opportunity to be heard, while a departure from the essential requirements of law requires the commission of an error so fundamental in character as to renderthe judgment void. Haines City Cmiy. Dev., 658 So. 2d at 527; Jennings v. Dade County, 589 So. 2d 1337, 1340 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991) (holding that “the quality of due process required in a quasi-judicial hearing is not the same as that to which a party to full judicial hearing is entitled”). After review of the briefs, case law and considering the arguments of the parties, the decision reached by the City of Miami Beach Design Review Board complied with procedural due process requirements, observed the essential requirements of law, and was supported by competent substantiai evidence. Accordingly, it is hereby, ORDERED and ADJUDGED that the Petition for Writ of Ceitiorari is DENIED, and Respondent Dr. Leonard Hochstein’s Motion for Appellate Attorneys’ Fees and Costs is

DENIED.

tttitt 0il?‘E0 I _

FEB

6 am . ' iuoernooczrcanuiz noootso a null (jqnnty Court Judge '» F‘ 1*?»Q : a mégfigpggtaii‘. . . . 13"“ I“ ‘TX: wrI“"= setsiaaaztu ;‘.1‘.‘*'.-I d’3t§vtC‘t!t’i‘ ittlirid“ I‘ v. QQPNEQ Fttltfit-tubT0

GOUIISELIOF RE