Norman v. Pinellas County, 71--163
| Decision Date | 09 July 1971 |
| Docket Number | No. 71--163,71--163 |
| Citation | 250 So.2d 279 |
| Parties | H. Curtis NORMAN, Individually, and as Representative of all others similarly situated constituting a class, Petitioners, v. PINELLAS COUNTY, a Political Subdivision of the State of Florida, and Imperial Homes Corporation, Respondents. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Stephen D. Hughes, Largo, for petitioners.
Richard L. Stewart and Stephen Nall, Clearwater, for respondent Pinellas County.
William M. MacKenzie, Clearwater, for respondent Imperial Homes.
ON PETITION FOR REHEARING RE MOTION TO DISMISS
Respondent filed a motion to dismiss, which was denied by this court on May 5, 1971. They are now petitioning for a rehearing on their motion to dismiss. They maintain that this court is without jurisdiction to review by certiorari the denial of certiorari by the circuit court.
On August 11, 1970, the Pinellas County Board of County Commissioners passed and adopted a resolution changing the zoning classification of a certain parcel of land in Pinellas County. The residents of the area of the zoning change contested such change both before a hearing before an examiner and before a subsequent hearing before the Board of County Commissioners. The zoning change was effected notwithstanding their discontent. The residents of that area, through a class action, sought to have the Board's action judicially reviewed by filing a petition for a writ of certiorari to the Circuit Court of the Sixth Judicial Circuit. After the filing of the briefs and full argument, the circuit court denied the petition for a writ of certiorari by an order dated February 4, 1971.
Thereafter, petitioners filed a petition for writ of certiorari in this court and thereby seek to have us review the Board's resolution changing the zoning classification, and to review the order of the Circuit Court of Pinellas County which denied the petition for writ of certiorari.
In Phillips v. County of Dade, Fla.App.1961, 133 So.2d 573, Phillips was aggrieved by a decision of the Dade County Zoning Authority. His petition for relief by writ of certiorari to the Circuit Court of Dade County was denied. Thereupon Phillips filed a petition for writ of certiorari in the district court to review the denial of a petition for certiorari by the circuit court. In granting a motion to dismiss the petition upon the grounds that a petition for certiorari will not lie to review the denial of a petition for certiorari, the court said:
We therefore hold that petitioners' petition for certiorari is not an appropriate remedy in that certiorari will not be issued where one has available his constitutional right of appeal. This is so for the reason that certiorari properly lies only in those cases in which it clearly appears there is no other full, adequate and complete remedy available to the petitioner. See Codomo v. Shaw, Fla.1958, 99 So.2d 849; Pullman Co. v. Fleishel, Fla.App.1958, 101 So.2d 188.
Petitioners have failed to file an appeal within the time required by Rule 3.2(b) F.A.R., 32 F.S.A., which is a jurisdictional requirement. Even though an improvident appeal may be treated as a petition for writ of certiorari, the reverse is not true; an improvident petition for certiorari may not be treated as...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Evans Rowing Club, LLC v. City of Jacksonville, No. 1D19-1851
...of right to a district court of appeal. This result is supported by an unbroken line of authority in this state. Norman v. Pinellas County , 250 So. 2d 279 (Fla. 2d DCA 1971) ; City of Treasure Island v. Decker , 174 So. 2d 756 (Fla. 2d DCA 1965) ; Board of Adjustment of City of Ft. Lauderd......
-
Volusia County v. Transamerica Business Corp.
...1292 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980); United Teachers of Dade v. Save Brickell Avenue, Inc., 378 So.2d 296 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979); Norman v. Pinellas County, 250 So.2d 279 (Fla. 2d DCA 1971). See also McNamara Pontiac, Inc. v. Sanchez, 388 So.2d 620 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980). Since the petition for writ of certio......
-
United Teachers of Dade v. Save Brickell Ave., Inc.
...of right to a district court of appeal. This result is supported by an unbroken line of authority in this state. Norman v. Pinellas County, 250 So.2d 279 (Fla. 2d DCA 1971); City of Treasure Island v. Decker, 174 So.2d 756 (Fla. 2d DCA 1965); Board of Adjustment of City of Ft. Lauderdale v.......
-
Cherokee Crushed Stone, Inc. v. City of Miramar, 82-770
...of administrative action, appellant had a right of appeal from the circuit court's order denying certiorari. Norman v. Pinellas County, 250 So.2d 279 (Fla. 2d DCA 1971), does not directly conflict with Vaillant because it was not decided pursuant to Article V, Section 4(b)(1). On the other ......