THE CITY OF CORAL GABLES, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
DADE COUNTY, A BODY POLITIC UNDER THE LAWS 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 court held that Metropolitan Dade County's charter provisions for county-wide plumber licensing prevail over conflicting state statutes allowing city licensing.
The City of Coral Gables sought a declaratory decree to determine if its authority to license plumbers under state law superseded the county's authori…
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 Declaratory Decree cases and more on FLexlaw
Appellant, the City of Coral Gables, filed suit for declaratory decree seeking a determination of whether the Dade County Metropolitan Home Rule Charter under which provision was made for licensing of plumbers for county-wide application prevails, or must yield to the provisions of Chapter 469, Fla.Stat., F.S.A., which provide for examination and licensing thereof by a city board in cities of more than 7,500 inhabitants.
The power of Metropolitan Dade County under the Constitution and its charter to provide for examination and licensing of plumbers on a county-wide basis, to the exclusion of cities within the county to do so, was established by the decisions of the Supreme Court in Miami Shores Village v. Cowart, Fla.1958, 108 So.2d 468, and City of Coral Gables v. Burgin, Fla.1962, 143 So.2d 859.
In the Cowart case it was held the Home Rule Amendment and charter authorized the Dade County Board of County Commissioners to regulate and control on a countywide basis those municipal functions and services which are susceptible to and could be most effectively carried on under a uniform plan of regulation applicable to the county as a whole. In the later Burgin case that rule was applied directly to the licensing of plumbers on a county-wide basis. However, in the Burgin case the Supreme Court stated it did not “deal with the applicability or inapplicability of Chapter 469.”
The trial court was eminently correct in holding that in view of the power conferred by Constitution and charter on Metropolitan Dade County in the matter in question, as announced by the Supreme Court in the Cowart and Burgin cases, the provisions of Chapter 469 for such regulation by municipalities are inapplicable to municipalities in Dade County. A contrary ruling would make the holdings above referred to of the Supreme Court in the Cowart and Bur-gin cases ineffective.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
City OF Miami Beach v. Mut. Benefit Life Ins. Co., 239 So. 2d 272 (Fla. 3d DCA 1970)…ade County, Florida. See: Miami Shores Village v. Cowart, Fla.1959, 108 So. 2d 468; City of Miami Beach v. Cowart, Fla.1960, 116 So. 2d 432; City of Coral Gables v. Burgin, Fla.1962, 143 So. 2d 859; City of Coral Gables v. Dade County, Fla.App.1966, 189 So. 2d 530. Acting upon a motion of the appellee to require appellant to post a bond as a requisite for supersedeas on this appeal (see Rule 5.12, Florida Appellate Rules, 32 F.S. A., and § 59.14, Fla.Stat, F.S.A.), this court has advanced this appeal for dis…
Authorities Cited
- Miami Shores Vill. v. Faris N. Cowart, 108 So. 2d 468 (Fla. 3d DCA 1958)
- City OF Coral Gables v. Burgin, 143 So. 2d 859 (Fla. 1962)