Legal Opinion

County of Pasco v. Riehl

Supreme Court of Florida

Decided April 14, 1994No. 82098PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Per curiam

We have on appeal a decision of the Second District Court of Appeal that expressly declares a state statute unconstitutional. We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(1), Fla. Const.

In County of Pasco v. Riehl, 620 So.2d 229 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993), the district court affirmed an order permanently enjoining the County of Pasco from enforcing a dangerous dog classification pursuant to section 767.12, Florida Statutes (1991). The court found that a pre-deprivation hearing had to take place before a dog could be declared dangerous under the statute and because section 767.12 did not provide for such a…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Armstrong v. ManzoSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
  2. Barrow v. HollandSupreme Court of Florida · 1960
  3. County of Pasco v. RiehlDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1993

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Vollmer v. Key Development Properties, Inc.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 2007
  2. Carmona v. WAL-MART STORES, EAST, LPDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2011
  3. E.I. DuPont De Nemours & Co. v. LambertDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1995
  4. Helmy v. SwigertDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1995
  5. Dobson v. U.S. Bank National Ass'nDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2017

5 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