FRANK R. ROTOLANTE, APPELLANT,
v.
COUNTY OF DADE, A POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, AND JOSEPH R. REDLINGER, 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.
This case involves a property owner's challenge to a county commission's decision to grant a permit for unusual use and building variances. The appellate court affirmed the lower court's denial of the property owner's petition for certiorari, finding no violation of county code and that the granted use was compatible with the surrounding area.
No, the Board of County Commissioners did not violate the Code of Metropolitan Dade County. The unusual use granted to the appellee is compatible with the surrounding property.
“We have examined the record carefully and fail to find that the Board of County Commissioners violated the Code of Metropolitan Dade County.”
Establishes the court's finding regarding the compliance with county regulations.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe appellant sought to quash actions by the Board of County Commissioners of Dade County that granted appellee Redlinger a permit for unusual use and…
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.
By this appeal, the petitioner in the circuit court seeks review of an order denying his petition for certiorari, wherein he sought to have quashed certain actions of the Board of County Commissioners of Dade County granting unto the appellee, Redlinger, a per*616mit for unusual use 1 and building variances on his property.
We have examined the record carefully and fail to find that the Board of County Commissioners violated the Code of Metropolitan Dade County. And, it affirmatively appearing that the unusual use granted to the appellee, Redlinger, is compatible with the surrounding property, the final order here under review will not be disturbed.
Affirmed.