City of Miami v. Direct Distributors, Inc.
| Decision Date | 19 October 1938 |
| Citation | 134 Fla. 430,183 So. 841 |
| Parties | CITY OF MIAMI v. DIRECT DISTRIBUTORS, Inc. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Suit by Direct Distributors, Incorporated, against the City of Miami to enjoin the City from enforcing the terms of an ordinance against plaintiff. A temporary restraining order was granted. From a decree denying a motion to dissolve the order and to dismiss the bill of complaint, the City appealed. Thereafter on application of the City, the Supreme Court issued its writ to preserve the status quo of the rem, whereupon the plaintiff moved to dissolve the writ.
Decree affirmed. Appeal from Circuit Court, Dade County; H. F Atkinson, judge.
J. W Watson, Jr., and Robert H. Givens, Jr., both of Miami, for appellant.
Richard H. Hunt, of Miami, and Whitfield & Whitfield, of Tallahassee, for appellee.
July 26, 1938, the City of Miami granted Direct Distributors, Incorporated, a permit to construct two underground gasoline storage tanks with a capacity of 8000 gallons each on lands controlled by it at 3129 North Miami Avenue. On August 10, 1938, the City adopted Ordinance Number 1974 making it unlawful for any person, firm, or corporation to construct or install any gasoline storage tank with a capacity of more than 5000 gallons.
On September 7, 1938, Direct Distributors, Incorporated, filed its bill of complaint in the Circuit Court praying that the City be enjoined from enforcing the terms of Ordinance Number 1974 against it. A temporary restraining order was granted as prayed for. A motion to dissolve said order and to dismiss the bill of complaint was denied and the City appealed. October 6th, on application of the City, this Court issued its writ under Section Five of Article Five of the Constitution to preserve the status quo of the rem. The cause is here for disposition on a motion to dissolve the latter writ and on the merits.
Several questions have been argued; to wit, the power of the City to enact the ordinance, whether or not Appellee had an adequate remedy at law, and whether or not the bill of complaint states a cause of action.
Unquestionably the matter of regulating the storage of gasoline is one within the police power of the State and may be done in the interest of the health, morals, and public welfare. Such power may be delegated to a municipality and we are of the view that the City of Miami was authorized to pass such an...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
City of Miami Beach v. Texas Co.
... ... Oil Service Co. v ... Stark, 96 W.Va. 176, 122 S.E. 533; City of Miami v ... Direct Distributors, Inc., 134 Fla. 430, 183 So. 841; ... Lees v. Cohoes Motor Car Co., 122 Misc. 373, ... ...
-
Adams v. Housing Authority of City of Daytona Beach
...Co., 141 Fla. 616, 194 So. 368, 128 A.L.R. 350; Rowland v. State, 129 Fla. 662, 176 So. 545, 114 A.L.R. 443; City of Miami v. Direct Distributors, 134 Fla. 430, 183 So. 841; and Citizens Insurance Co. v. Barnes, 98 Fla. 933, 124 So. The question in this case is not simply the abatement or d......
-
City of Miami v. McCrory Stores Corporation
...A.2d 661; Fairchild Sons v. Roger, 266 N.Y. 460, 195 N.E. 154; Vine v. Zabriskie, 122 N.J.L. 4, 3 A.2d 886; City of Miami v. Direct Distributors, Inc., 134 Fla. 430, 183 So. 841; Ex parte Wise, 141 Fla. 222, 192 So. 872; Ehinger v. State, 147 Fla. 129, 2 So.2d 357; Dobbins v. City of Los An......
-
State Ex Rel. Dallas Inv. Co. v. Peace
... ... H. Peace, as ... Building Inspector of the City of Miami, to compel issuance ... of permit for erection of ... in City of Miami v. Direct Distributors, Inc., 134 ... Fla. 430, 183 So. 841; Harz v ... ...