C. WELBORN DANIEL, APPELLANT,
v.
FLORIDA STATE TURNPIKE AUTHORITY, A BODY CORPORATE AND POLITIC OF THE STATE 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 affirmed the trial court's judgment upholding the Florida State Turnpike Authority's rules permitting tandem trailers on the Sunshine Parkway, finding the regulations reasonable and supported by competent substantial evidence.
The Florida State Turnpike Authority's rules permitting tandem trailers on the Sunshine Parkway are valid and reasonable, supported by competent substantial evidence.
[1] Administrative agency regulations governing commercial vehicle operations on toll roads are valid when supported by competent substantial evidence of reasonableness and a…
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 intelligenceAppellant Daniel challenged the validity of rules and regulations permitting the operation of tandem or double-bottom trailers on the Sunshine Parkway…
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 Challenge To Administrative Regulation cases and more on FLexlaw
Appellant seeks reversal of a lower court judgment which rejected appellant’s contention that the rules and regulations permitting the operation of tandem or “double bottom” trailers on the Sunshine Parkway are invalid. A variety of reasons are advanced by appellant in support of his contentions. Most of said contentions however were rejected by the Supreme Court earlier when appellant sought review of an interlocutory order denying appellant’s prayer for a temporary injunction. See Daniel v. Florida State Turnpike Authority, 213 So.2d 585 (Fla.1968). The Supreme Court’s opinion contains an adequate recitation of the issues and facts underlying this controversy, thereby precluding the necessity of reiterating them here. The remaining issue to be considered by the Chancellor on remand following the Supreme Court’s affirmance of the interlocutory order in Daniel, supra, related to the reasonableness of the resolution and rules relating to the operation of the tandem trailers on the turnpike as well as the sufficiency of the factual background to justify the adoption of said resolution and rules. Conflicting evidence was adduced in the trial court on these issues, and the Chancellor held in favor of the appellee agency on these questions.
A review of the record on appeal, briefs and oral arguments of the parties inclines us to the view that the Chancellor’s final judgment was supported by competent substantial evidence. Accordingly, the judgment reviewed herein is
Affirmed.
JOHNSON, C. J., and RAWLS and SPECTOR, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Daniel v. Fla. State Tpk. Auth., 240 So. 2d 637 (Fla. 1970)…Certiorari denied. 237 So. 2d 222. ERVIN, C. J., and ROBERTS, CARLTON and BOYD, JJ., concur. DREW, J., dissents.…
Authorities Cited
- Daniel v. Fla. State Tpk. Auth., 213 So. 2d 585 (Fla. 1968)