Legal Opinion · Dissent

City of Miami Beach v. Stearns

Supreme Court of Florida

Decided January 28, 1955Published

1DissentDrew, Justice

It is true, as pointed out in the opinion of Associate Justice Murphree, that “accessory uses” are defined in the zoning ordinance of Miami Beach as “uses customarily incident to the principal uses as permitted, but not including any commercial activity.” It must be observed, however, that this definition is found in Section 1 of the ordinance where the phrase “accessory uses” as well as many other phrases used in the zoning ordinance is defined. The only purpose of Section 1 is to define the general phrases used in the ordinance itself.

The use of the property on which the subject hotel is…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. City of Miami Beach v. HoganSupreme Court of Florida · 1953
  2. Abbadessa v. Board of Zoning AppealsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1947
  3. New York Ambassador, Inc. v. Bd. of Standards & Appeals of the City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1953

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

Powered by the Exa API