Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Dougherty ex rel. Eisenberg v. City of Miami

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided October 7, 2009No. 3D09-639Published

1Concurrence

WELLS, J.,

specially concurring.

I concur in the majority opinion concluding that under the law of the case doctrine, the City Commission on remand following Morningside Civic Assoc., Inc. v. Dougherty, 944 So.2d 370 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006), was (1) restricted to a record review of the evidence adduced before the City’s Zoning Appeals Board (ZAB) when reviewing that board’s decision to grant a Class II Special Permit to Petitioner here, and (2) was obligated to state its reasons for rejecting the ZAB’s determination. These two requirements were imposed on the City by the Appellate Division of the…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. City of Deerfield Beach v. VaillantSupreme Court of Florida · 1982
  2. BD. OF CTY. COM'RS OF BREVARD v. SnyderSupreme Court of Florida · 1993
  3. Broward County v. GBV Intern., Ltd.Supreme Court of Florida · 2001
  4. Jennings v. Dade CountyDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1991
  5. BellSouth Mobility v. Miami-Dade County, FloridaDistrict Court, S.D. Florida · 2001

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API