Robson 200, LLC v. City of Lakeland
| Decision Date | 24 March 2022 |
| Docket Number | Case No. 8:20-cv-0161-KKM-JSS |
| Citation | 593 F.Supp.3d 1110 |
| Parties | ROBSON 200, LLC, a Florida Limited Liability Company, Plaintiff, v. CITY OF LAKELAND, FLORIDA, Lakeland Code Enforcement Board; Angela Kaiser, an individual; and Jim Dehne, an individual, Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Middle District of Florida |
Brandon Todd Holmes, Jason S. Lambert, John Philip Gaset, Dinsmore & Shohl LLP, Tampa, FL, for Plaintiff.
Kristie Hatcher-Bolin, Matthew David Jones, GrayRobinson, PA, Lakeland, FL, Craig Frischer Novick, GrayRobinson, PA, Orlando, FL, for Defendants City of Lakeland, Lakeland Code Enforcement Board, Angela Kaiser, Jim Dehne.
Plaintiff Robson 200, LLC, and the City of Lakeland have frequently clashed over the safety and sanitation conditions at Robson's mobile home park. To date, the City has cited Robson for three violations of the City's Land Development Code (LDC). The first two citations involved septic tank issues in 2017 and 2018 but did not result in fines after the Lakeland Code Enforcement Board (the Board) and the Florida courts dismissed the citations for procedural reasons.
In June 2018, a City official cited Robson a third time for code violations related to the disrepair of a fence on Robson's property and issued Robson a notice detailing the offending conditions of the fence. Although Robson attempted to make certain repairs after the initial citation, these attempts did not satisfy the City officials. The Board fined Robson $50 per day, effective November 5, 2018, to accrue until Robson brings the fence into compliance. Robson refuses to mend the fence further and thus the fine continues to grow and now exceeds $50,000.
Robson sued the City, the Board, and two City officials, claiming that the fine is unconstitutionally excessive, that the operative code provision is unconstitutionally vague, and that the City officials maliciously prosecuted the two septic tank violations against Robson. The City now moves for summary judgment, arguing that Robson's claims fail as a matter of law. The Court agrees and grants summary judgment.
Robson's claims concern three code-enforcement citations that the City issued to Robson's mobile home park (the Property). (Doc. 53 at 2–3.) The Property contains approximately eighteen septic tanks, each servicing one to four lots. (Doc. 32 at 2.) It is also surrounded by a wooden fence. (Doc. 53 at 3; Doc. 14-5.) Because the City moves for summary judgment, the Court recites the undisputed facts below and notes when disputes of material fact exist.
On January 10, 2017, Code Enforcement Officer Susan Stone cited the Property for violations of LDC § 86-4 based on Stone's observations of standing water below a mobile home connected to a septic tank on the Property. (Doc. 53 at 2; Doc. 32 at 2; Doc. 14-1 at 1–2; Doc. 36-1 at 150–56 (photos).) In relevant part, LDC § 86-4 prohibits anyone from allowing "any swill, slops or malodorous or noxious liquids to run, drip or fall into or upon any sidewalk, street, highway, alley, park, lake, stream or other public place." (Doc. 14-1 at 1.) The next day, on January 11, 2017, the Health Department issued an inspection report noting (Doc. 36-1 at 5–6.) In the following months, Robson had two septic tank companies (Atomic Septic Tank and Averitt Septic Tank) pump the offending tank on separate occasions and provided the City with copies of the invoices. (Doc. 32 at 2–3; Doc. 36-1 at 30–31, 36–39, 43–46.) Stone advised Robson multiple times that a final Health Department inspection must occur to close out the case. (Doc. 36-1 at 28–29.) In correspondence with the Health Department, Robson disputed the need for a final inspection. (Id. at 30, 47–49.)
On May 3, 2017, the Board found that the violation remained and imposed a $200 per day fine. (Doc. 53 at 2; Doc. 36-1 at 50.) Robson appealed the Board's decision in state court. (Doc. 53 at 2.) On May 8, five days after the Board's order, Robson's counsel provided the City with an affidavit from Averitt Septic's project manager, Mike Ingram, stating that the company had pumped the tank on February 2 and found the system was "functioning properly" on April 5. (Doc. 32 at 3; Doc. 36-1 at 64–67.) Following settlement talks, "Stone executed an Affidavit of Compliance and the Board dismissed the case with no fine." (Doc. 32 at 3; Doc. 53 at 2; Doc. 36-1 at 60–61.) Based on the Board's decision to dismiss the case, the state court dismissed Robson's appeal as moot on August 23, 2017. (Doc. 53 at 3; Doc. 14-2; Doc. 30-1 at 137.)
In May 2017, Code Enforcement Officer David Anders met with multiple Robson tenants, observed photos of backed-up sewage, smelled sewage, and observed toilet paper around one of the septic tanks. (Doc. 32 at 4; Doc. 37 at 57–58, 62, 79.) Code Enforcement Officer Angela Kaiser also conducted separate inspections, smelled sewage, observed "foul fecal-smelling water" in one of the tenant's bathtubs, and met with multiple tenants who showed her similar photos to those Anders had seen. (Doc. 32 at 4–5; Doc. 34 at 5; Doc. 41 at 219–20.) On June 7, 2018, Kaiser cited Robson for violating LDC § 46-1 due to backed-up sewage under several mobile homes on the Property and problems with several septic tanks. (Doc. 53 at 3; Doc. 32 at 4–5.) LDC § 46-1 bans anyone from "creat[ing], maintain[ing], or contribut[ing] to any condition or circumstance which is deemed prejudicial to the public health, or which is in any manner likely to cause or create any unhealthful condition in the city." Kaiser advised Robson that the "evidence shows that the septic tanks have been overly full and not draining" and that "[t]he [C]ity asks you as the owner to have them emptied and functioning properly." (Doc. 34-1 at 25.) In response, Robson explained that it could not comply because the City failed to specify which tanks needed to be emptied or repaired. (Id. ) Without proof from Robson that the tanks had been emptied, Kaiser submitted an affidavit of non-compliance on October 18, 2018. (Id. at 27.) In a subsequent order, the Board concluded that Robson remained in violation of LDC § 46-1. (Doc. 34 at 6–7; Doc. 34-1 at 27.) Robson again appealed the Board's order to state court. This time, the state court quashed the Board's order, concluding that the notice of violation did not clearly identify which septic tanks were noncompliant, that subsequent communications were insufficient to properly provide notice to Robson of the specific problem, and that the lack of notice denied Robson due process. (Doc. 14-4 at 2.)
On June 28, 2018, Kaiser cited the Property for violations of LDC § 4.4.1(i) due to its "damaged fence" and directed Robson to "replace broken or damaged boards, [and] repair areas of fence where leaning or coming apart." (Doc. 14-5 at 1; Doc. 53 at 3.) LDC § 4.4.1(i) requires all [f]ences and walls, whether required or optional, [to] be maintained in sound condition." (Doc. 14-5 at 1.)
On July 19, Robson sent Kaiser a letter disputing the violation, asserting it had repaired the fence and requesting the case be closed immediately. (Doc. 53 at 3; Doc. 43-1 at 60.) The record includes photos of Robson's fence taken that same day:
(Doc. 30-2 at 16, 24.) Ten days later, Robson notified Code Enforcement Supervisor Jim Dehne (Kaiser's supervisor) by email that it performed additional repairs and attached photos. (Doc. 34-1 at 43–55; Doc. 33 at 4.) After Dehne shared the email with Kaiser, she acknowledged that some work had been done but more was required to bring the fence into compliance. (Doc. 34-1 at 43.) In her follow-up email to Robson, Kaiser attached labeled photos to show the specific issues and the specific boards that needed to be replaced. (Id. )
On August 29, Robson emailed Kaiser again, asserting that the part of the fence visible from the street "is intact and vertical." (Id. at 60–61.) Kaiser replied that the entire fence needed to comply with the Code, not just the part "visible from the roadside" and asked if Robson was ready for an additional inspection. (Id. at 60.) After an additional email exchange where Robson again asserted that the fence was repaired and that the case should be closed, Kaiser repeated that she needed to perform an additional inspection. (Doc. 32 at 7; Doc. 34-1 at 59–60.)
On November 6, 2018, Kaiser executed an affidavit of noncompliance. (Doc. 53 at 3; Doc. 34-1 at 68.) The Board found that a violation existed and entered an order imposing a $50 per day fine, effective November 5, 2018, and accruing each day until the Property was compliant. (Doc. 30-2 at 7.) Robson again appealed the Board's order in state court, but this time the state court affirmed. (Doc. 30-2 at 181–82.) The fine has continued to grow ever since. (Doc. 53 at 3.) Under the applicable Code provision, once the Property is compliant, Robson may request that the total accrued fine be reduced to 10% of the total, plus administrative costs. (Doc. 32 at 7; Doc. 48 at 2.)
On January 22, 2020, Robson sued the City, the Board, Dehne, and Kaiser. (Doc. 1.) The Court granted in part the City's motion to dismiss, dispatching Robson's claims to the extent (1) they sought relief from the individual defendants in their official capacities as duplicative of the claims against the City and the Board and (2) they sought redress for a violation of Robson's procedural due process rights because the state court had resolved those claims on appeal. (Doc. 12.) Robson then filed an Amended Complaint, asserting five claims. (Doc. 14.) Counts I through IV concern the third citation about the condition of the fence. Counts I and II allege that the City's fine is excessive under the Eighth Amendment of...
To continue reading
Request your trial