Beasom v. City of Miami Beach

Florida Circuit Courts

Beasom v. City of Miami Beach

29 Fla. Supp. 2d 117

CourtCircuit Court for the Judicial Circuits of Florida

DecidedJune 22, 1988

DocketCase No. 87-118 AP

StatusPublished

This text of 29 Fla. Supp. 2d 117 (Beasom v. City of Miami Beach) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Circuit Court for the Judicial Circuits of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Beasom v. City of Miami Beach, 29 Fla. Supp. 2d 117 (Fla. Super. Ct. 1988).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

PER CURIAM.

An Appeal follows a final decision of the City of Miami Beach Personnel Board terminating the employment of Appellant. We grant certiorari for the following reasons:

Comments made by the City of Miami Beach Personnel Board members during the course of the hearing indicate that the trier of fact was not impartial as required by law. Appendix to Complaint for Writ [118]*118of Certiorari, Appellant’s brief, Transcript of hearing, p. 31, lines 13-17. Hearn v. City of Gainesville, 688 F.2d 1328 (11th Cir. 1982), Skelton v. Beall, 133 So.2d 477 (Fla. 2d DCA 1961), Perry v. Sinderman, 408 U.S. 593, 601, 92 S.Ct. 2694, 2699, 33 L.Ed.2d 570 (1976), and Goldberg v. Kelly, 397 U.S. 254, 90 S.Ct. 1011 (1970).

Certiorari may be applied to review potential lack of due process by the apparent bias of the tribunal determining the employment status of (City) employee. Weisbrod v. Fla. Career Service Commission, 375 So.2d 1102 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979).

Based on the foregoing, certiorari is granted. The Appellant shall be reinstated with full back pay and he shall be entitled to reasonable costs and attorneys fees.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

OPINION OF THE COURT

PER CURIAM.

An Appeal follows a final decision of the City of Miami Beach Personnel Board terminating the employment of Appellant. We grant certiorari for the following reasons:

Comments made by the City of Miami Beach Personnel Board members during the course of the hearing indicate that the trier of fact was not impartial as required by law. Appendix to Complaint for Writ [118]*118of Certiorari, Appellant’s brief, Transcript of hearing, p. 31, lines 13-17. Hearn v. City of Gainesville, 688 F.2d 1328 (11th Cir. 1982), Skelton v. Beall, 133 So.2d 477 (Fla. 2d DCA 1961), Perry v. Sinderman, 408 U.S. 593, 601, 92 S.Ct. 2694, 2699, 33 L.Ed.2d 570 (1976), and Goldberg v. Kelly, 397 U.S. 254, 90 S.Ct. 1011 (1970).

Certiorari may be applied to review potential lack of due process by the apparent bias of the tribunal determining the employment status of (City) employee. Weisbrod v. Fla. Career Service Commission, 375 So.2d 1102 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979).

Based on the foregoing, certiorari is granted. The Appellant shall be reinstated with full back pay and he shall be entitled to reasonable costs and attorneys fees.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

29 Fla. Supp. 2d 117, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/beasom-v-city-of-miami-beach-flacirct-1988.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack