Turcotte v. City of Coconut Creek

88 So. 3d 296 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2012) · District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District · April 18, 2012

Summary

The Florida Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed summary judgment for the City of Coconut Creek and other appellees. The court held that res judicata barred the appellants’ declaratory and injunctive claims because the same issues had previously been raised and rejected in a certiorari proceeding concerning an amendment to a development of regional impact development order.

Holdings

  1. Res judicata barred appellants from relitigating issues that had been raised and considered on the merits in the prior certiorari proceeding.
  2. The ordinance, which expanded the definition of a permitted use to include a hotel, did not constitute a substantial deviation under section 380.06(19)(b), Florida Statutes (2005).

Questions Presented

  1. Whether res judicata barred appellants from challenging the ordinance in an appeal from summary judgment when the same issues had previously been raised and decided on the merits in a certiorari proceeding.
  2. Whether the ordinance's expansion of the permitted-use definition to include a hotel constituted a substantial deviation under section 380.06(19)(b), Florida Statutes (2005).

Disposition

affirmed

Cases Cited (5)

  • Topps v. State, 865 So. 2d 1253, 1258 (Fla. 2004)(followed)
  • Seminole Entm't, Inc. v. City of Casselberry, 866 So. 2d 1242 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004)(followed)
  • Lake Rosa v. Bd. of Cnty. Comm'rs, 911 So. 2d 206 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005)(followed)
  • Treister v. City of Miami, 575 So. 2d 218 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991)(followed)
  • Rhyne v. City of Wilton Manors, 392 So. 2d 992 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981)(followed)

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…