Zoning Ordinances

446 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Bd. OF Adjustment OF the City OF Fort Lauderdale & City of Fort Lauderdale v. Zealy
  316 So. 2d 593· Fla. 4th DCA· 1975-08-15
  The Fourth District affirmed the circuit court's judgment estopping the City of Fort Lauderdale from enforcing its single-family zoning ordinance against the appellee, finding the appellate record insufficient to review the factual findings underlying the estoppel determination.
• Blount v. City OF Coral Gables
  312 So. 2d 208· Fla. 3d DCA· 1975-05-06
  The Blounts appealed the denial of their variance application to erect a detached masonry sign on their office building property in Coral Gables. The court affirmed the denial, holding that the sign ordinance was constitutional and that the Blounts' hardship was self-created beca
• Eiswil Corp. v. Indian River Cnty.
  41 Fla. Supp. 122· Indian River Cty. Cir. Ct.· 1974-11-07
  Eiswil Corporation sought a declaratory judgment to overturn Indian River County's denial of its rezoning application from single-family residential to multi-family residential for a 26.8-acre oceanfront parcel in the south beach area. The court upheld the county's decision, find
• City OF Miami Beach v. Arlen King Cole Condo. Ass'n, Inc.
  302 So. 2d 777· Fla. 3d DCA· 1974-11-05
  The City of Miami Beach challenged the conversion of a hotel-apartment building into a condominium, arguing that the conversion triggered new parking requirements under amended zoning ordinances. The Florida appellate court affirmed that the conversion did not change the property
• Bd. of Cnty. Supervisors of the Cnty. of Henrico v. Ins. Co. OF N. Am.
  494 F.2d 660· 4th Cir.· 1974-04-09
  A surety may be relieved of its obligation if the beneficiary's actions materially prejudice or alter the principal's agreed performance, but mere forbearance or a failure to secure permits, without more, does not release the surety, especially when the bond is penal in nature.
• Med. Arts, Inc. v. Loyal D. Rohrbaugh
  293 So. 2d 366· Fla. 4th DCA· 1974-03-29
  Medical Arts, Inc. appeals an injunction prohibiting its use of an adjacent parcel as a parking facility. The court reverses, holding that the neighboring property owners failed to exhaust administrative remedies before filing suit and are additionally estopped from challenging t
• Margulies v. City OF N. Miami
  39 Fla. Supp. 208· Dade Cty. Cir. Ct.· 1973-09-19
  The court held that the city is equitably estopped from denying a building permit because the petitioner relied on the city's prior actions and complied with all requirements.
• Palm Beach Cnty. v. Inlet BAY Club, Inc.
  39 Fla. Supp. 110· Palm Beach Cty. Cir. Ct.· 1972-11-15
  Palm Beach County sought to condemn property owned by Inlet Bay Club, Inc. for beach and recreational purposes under eminent domain. The circuit court denied the taking, finding the County failed to prove necessity where statutory protections require strict judicial review and mu
• Highland Beach Civic League, Inc. v. Town of Highland Beach
  38 Fla. Supp. 115· Fla. Cir. Ct.· 1972-11-10
  The court held that the town could not refuse building permits based on a pending ordinance or a questionable emergency moratorium, and ordered the town to review the original plans and issue permits.
• Jason v. Dade Cnty.
  37 Fla. Supp. 190· Dade Cty. Cir. Ct.· 1972-09-01
  The court held that the building moratorium ordinance is constitutional, as it provides sufficient standards for discretion and is a valid exercise of police power pending comprehensive zoning review.
• Grovpac Corp. v. Metro. Dade Cnty.
  232 So. 2d 416· Fla. 3d DCA· 1970-03-10
  The denial of the appellant's application for an unusual use of its property, including requested variances and special exceptions, was amply supported in law and fact.
• McCORMICK v. The City OF Pensacola
  216 So. 2d 785· Fla. 1st DCA· 1968-12-10
  Homeowners challenged zoning ordinances and restrictive covenants limiting their residential property to residential use after nearby commercialization and increased traffic made the area less suitable for residential purposes. The court affirmed the trial court's rejection of th
• L. H. (Buddy) Hough v. Amato
  212 So. 2d 662· Fla. 1st DCA· 1968-07-11
  The court held that the city is equitably estopped from enforcing a zoning ordinance against the plaintiff's museum due to his substantial reliance on prior zoning laws.
• Cesarano v. The City OF Miami
  204 So. 2d 10· Fla. 3d DCA· 1967-11-14
  The distance provisions of the City of Miami's zoning ordinance are a valid exercise of the police power and were properly applied to deny the plaintiff's request for a liquor license.
• Eber v. Overby
  163 So. 2d 532· Fla. 1st DCA· 1964-04-30
  Defendants appealed a permanent injunction prohibiting them from operating a memorial gardens cemetery on rural property near St. Augustine. The appellate court reversed, finding the area was not predominantly residential as required by Jones v. Trawick and thus the cemetery did
• Sydney Diamond v. City OF Miami
  150 So. 2d 243· Fla. 3d DCA· 1963-03-05
  The trial court's judgment denying the property owner's application for conditional use of residential-zoned property as a parking lot for an adjacent commercial business was affirmed without written opinion.
• City OF Miami Beach v. Deauville Operating Corp.
  129 So. 2d 185· Fla. 3d DCA· 1961-04-20
  The City of Miami Beach appeals from an injunction enjoining enforcement of a zoning ordinance that prohibits storefronts in connection with liquor sales at the Deauville Hotel. The court reverses, holding that the hotel cannot claim reliance on a condition (street entrance) that
• City OF E. Detroit v. Detroit Edison Co.
  272 F.2d 410· 6th Cir.· 1959-12-14
  The Board of Appeals on Zoning could not rehear a matter after five days from granting permission, and its subsequent rejection of plans was arbitrary.
• Boyce v. Barrett
  258 F.2d 640· 3d Cir.· 1958-07-30
  The court held that the buyer exercised due diligence in attempting to obtain permits, and the seller improperly retained the deposit.
• City of Miami v. MAY
  12 Fla. Supp. 155· Dade Cty. Cir. Ct.· 1958-02-17
  The court held that the municipal court erred in convicting the appellant of zoning ordinance violations and maintaining a nuisance, and that the daily fine imposed was invalid.
• Town OF Palm Beach Shores v. Doty
  100 So. 2d 205· Fla. 2d DCA· 1958-01-22
  The court held that the zoning ordinance provision attempting to establish a building line on the subject property was void for vagueness and uncertainty.
• Doty v. Town of Palm Beach Shores
  10 Fla. Supp. 113· Palm Beach Cty. Cir. Ct.· 1956-10-26
  Petitioners sought mandamus to compel issuance of a building permit for an apartment building on property designated as "Reserved" in the town's plat. The court held that neither the plat restrictions nor the zoning ordinance clearly prohibited construction on the disputed parcel
• Savage v. Iowa Dev. Co.
  226 F.2d 936· 8th Cir.· 1955-11-03
  A complaint challenging zoning amendments must state concrete facts demonstrating illegality and resulting damage, not just vague legal conclusions.
• Lainhart v. W. Palm Beach Zoning Bd. of Appeals
  7 Fla. Supp. 42· Palm Beach Cty. Cir. Ct.· 1955-01-07
  The court held that the zoning board's grant of a special exception was illegal because the hardship claimed was not unique or unusual, and granting the variance would undermine the comprehensive zoning plan.
• The City OF Miami Beach v. Silver
  75 So. 2d 817· Fla.· 1954-11-19
  The Florida Supreme Court upheld a temporary restraining order preventing Miami Beach from prosecuting a physician for treating patients in his home in a business-zoned area, finding the zoning ordinance as applied to be discriminatory and arbitrary under state and federal consti
• Accursio v. Town of Fla. City
  5 Fla. Supp. 152· Dade Cty. Cir. Ct.· 1953-12-23
  Plaintiffs challenged a zoning ordinance enforcement action, claiming the use of a building for housing migrant farm workers constituted a protected nonconforming use. The circuit court rejected this claim, finding the building had been substantially destroyed and rebuilt under a
• Connor v. West Bloomfield TP.
  207 F.2d 482· 6th Cir.· 1953-10-16
  The court held that the township's zoning ordinance prohibiting trailer occupancy in a residential subdivision was a valid exercise of police power and affirmed the lower court's decision.
• World Fire & Marine Ins. Co. v. Palmer
  182 F.2d 707· 5th Cir.· 1950-06-07
  The court held that the loss of rents was covered by the insurance policy because the city's good-faith denial of a repair permit, based on a reasonable interpretation of its ordinances regarding repair costs exceeding fifty percent of the building's value, constituted an enforce
• City OF Miami v. McCrory Stores Corp.
  181 F.2d 368· 5th Cir.· 1950-04-14
  The court held that the controversy was not moot despite the issuance of the building permit, and affirmed the lower court's finding that the proposed alterations were not 'structural' under the ordinance.