Legal Opinion

City of Indian Harbour Beach v. City of Melbourne

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided June 30, 1972No. 71-79PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WALDEN, Judge.

This is a tale of two cities — the city of Indian Harbour Beach (plaintiff-appellant) and the city of Melbourne (defendant-ap-pellee).

For some time Melbourne furnished water from its utility plant to Indian Harbour Beach residents, all without incident. There was no franchise agreement or contract and apparently Melbourne was a de facto franchiser, or a franchiser at sufferance, as concerns Indian Harbour Beach.

A dispute arose between the cities as concerns the right to regulate these water rates.1

In 1963 the Legislature delegated to Indian Harbour Beach, via charter provisions,…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Tyson v. LanierSupreme Court of Florida · 1963
  2. Markham v. BlountSupreme Court of Florida · 1965
  3. Howarth, Et Ux. v. City of DelandSupreme Court of Florida · 1934
  4. Woodley Lane, Inc. v. NolenDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1962
  5. City of Treasure Island v. DeckerDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1965

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. North Miami General Hosp. v. Central Nat. Life Ins. Co.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1982
  2. Escambia County Council v. GoldsmithDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1985
  3. Allstate Insurance v. City of Boca RatonDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1980
  4. Ago, Florida Attorney General Reports1975
  5. Ago, Florida Attorney General Reports1986

4 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