TOM NESBITT, D/B/A BOWL BAR AND THE CITY OF MIAMI BAR OWNERS ASSOCIATION, A VOLUNTARY UNINCORPORATED ASSOCIATION, APPELLANTS,
v.
THE CITY OF MIAMI, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, 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 the trial court properly dismissed the complaint because it did not state a legal basis for an injunction.
Plaintiffs sought to enjoin the City of Miami from enforcing a Sunday closing ordinance for bars. The trial court dismissed the complaint for failing …
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 Petition For Rehearing cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellants, who were the plaintiffs below, brought an action seeking to enjoin the City of Miami from the enforcement of the City ordinance which requires bars to close after 7:00 p. m. on Sunday. The trial court determined that the complaint did not state a legal basis for the injunction sought and, therefore, dismissed the complaint. Our examination of the complaint and the motion to dismiss reveals that the court properly determined that the complaint did not state a prima facie case for the injunction sought.
On this appeal, appellants complain primarily of the fact that they were not afforded an opportunity to amend the complaint. There is nothing in this record to show that the appellants sought an opportunity to amend. This could properly have been done by a petition for rehearing. In addition, there is nothing in the record or in the argument to indicate the nature of the amendment appellants would like to make. See generally 25 Fla.Jur. Plead-lug's § 100 (1959), and cases cited thereat,
The correctness of the trial judge’s determination that the complaint did not state a cause of action is not argued in this court. We, therefore, decline to reverse.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Dade Cnty. Police Benevolent Ass'n, Inc. v. Metro. Dade Cnty., 452 So. 2d 6 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984)…. Contrary to the plaintiffs’ contention on appeal, a trial court does not err in failing to award a plaintiff an opportunity to amend his complaint when, as here, the record does not reveal a request for such an amendment. Nesbitt v. City of Miami, 314 So. 2d 806 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975); Pletts v. Pletts, 258 So. 2d 297 (Fla.3d DCA 1972). The failure of the plaintiffs to plead a proper class action as required by Fla.R. Civ.P. 1.220(c)(2)(C), (D)(iii) is particularly fatal in this case. There exists, we think, s…