Orlando Utilities Commission v. Rosalund Holding Co., 75--1211
| Citation | 330 So.2d 56 |
| Decision Date | 19 March 1976 |
| Docket Number | No. 75--1211,75--1211 |
| Parties | The ORLANDO UTILITIES COMMISSION et al., Appellants, v. ROSALIND HOLDING COMPANY, a Florida Corporation, a member of and representative of a class composed of all persons who are consumers of service including sewer, water and electricity furnished by the Orlando Utilities Commission, Appellees. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Thomas B. Tart, of Gurney, Gurney & Handley, P.A., Orlando, for appellant Orlando Utilities Commission.
Robert L. Hamilton, Asst. City Atty., Orlando, for appellant City of Orlando.
Richard W. Bates, of Richard W. Bates, P.A., Orlando, and Mateer & Harbert, County Attys., for appellant Orange County.
Charles E. Davis and Stephen P. Kanar, of Fishback, Davis, Dominick & Simonet, Orlando, for appellees.
This is an interlocutory appeal from (1) an order denying the defendant-appellants' motion to (a) dismiss appellee's amended complaint for failure to state a cause of action, and (b) strike various portions of that complaint and (2) an order denying defendant Orange County's motion for severance.
Appellee's amended complaint (which sought equitable relief), among other things, alleged that defendant Orlando Utilities Commission is charging all its consumers (including appellee) unreasonable rates. This allegation is sufficient to withstand appellants' motions to dismiss and to strike. We therefore affirm the first order on authority of the cases set forth at 10 Fla.Jur., Dismissal, etc., § 33, p. 544, note 42.
Appellant Orange County has not demonstrated any abuse of discretion in the court's ruling on its motion for severance. We therefore affirm the second order. See Compania Dominicana de Aviacion v. Knapp, Fla.App.1971, 251 So.2d 18, 19.
AFFIRMED.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Rosalind Holding Co. v. Orlando Utilities Commission
...prevailing party. 31 AFFIRMED. ORFINGER, J., and WALKER, GRISSIM H., Associate Judge, concur. 1 In the Orlando Utilities Commission v. Rosalind Holding, 330 So.2d 56 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976), the Fourth District Court ruled that the complaint alleging that the Orlando Utilities Commission had ch......
-
Spierer v. City of North Miami Beach
...389 So.2d 283, 285-86 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980) (class action), review denied, 399 So.2d 1144 (Fla.1981); Orlando Utilities Comm'n v. Rosalind Holding Co., 330 So.2d 56 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976); cf. Frankel v. City of Miami Beach, 340 So.2d 463 (Fla.1976) (challenge of water rates; class action). Whil......