Mendelson v. City of Miami Beach
District Court of Appeal of Florida
1Per curiam
The order under review which dismissed the plaintiffs’ complaint herein with prejudice is affirmed upon a holding that: (a) the complaint fails to allege with specificity in what way the plaintiffs have or will be injured by the zoning ordinances which it attacks and, accordingly fails to state a cause of action for either a declaratory decree as to the validity of such ordinances, Sumpter County v. Davis, 356 So.2d 899 (Fla.2d DCA 1978); see May v. Holley, 57 So.2d 636, 639 (Fla.1952), or for inverse condemnation, Mailman Development Corp. v. City of Hollywood, 286 So.2d 614 (Fla.4th DCA…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Newberry v. City of AndalusiaSupreme Court of Alabama · 1952
- Mailman Development Corp. v. City of HollywoodDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1973
- Hohenberg v. KirsteinDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1977
- SUMTER CTY. v. DavisDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1978
3Cited by1 opinion
- Estate of Rocks v. McLaughlin Engineering Co.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 2010