City of Jacksonville v. State Ex Rel. Mann

Supreme Court of Florida

City of Jacksonville v. State Ex Rel. Mann

27 So. 2d 727, 158 Fla. 98, 1946 Fla. LEXIS 485

CourtSupreme Court of Florida

DecidedNovember 5, 1946

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 27 So. 2d 727 (City of Jacksonville v. State Ex Rel. Mann) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

City of Jacksonville v. State Ex Rel. Mann, 27 So. 2d 727, 158 Fla. 98, 1946 Fla. LEXIS 485 (Fla. 1946).

Pincite

Opinion

ADAMS, J.:

The City of Jaksonville has appealed from a judgment in mandamus commanding, in substance, that the City re-issue a permit to erect a factory building. A permit was issued to build a factory building. Subsequently the City revoked the permit at the behest of a group of protesting citizens who asserted that a type of business would be conducted in the building which would constitute a nuisance.

The question becomes quite simple: May the City revoke a building permit where it is later convinced that the building will be used for an illegal purpose? We have little difficulty in agreeing with the trial court. These elements drive us to only one conclusion. The area was not zoned against a factory building. Whatever power the City possessed was exhausted when the permit was granted. The City had no judicial forum to adjudge in futuro how the building might be utilized. The City maintains plenary power to protect its citizens by abating a nuisance when and if that condition should occur.

The judgment is affirmed.

CHAPMAN, C. J., TERRELL and BUFORD, JJ., concur.

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

ADAMS, J.:

The City of Jaksonville has appealed from a judgment in mandamus commanding, in substance, that the City re-issue a permit to erect a factory building. A permit was issued to build a factory building. Subsequently the City revoked the permit at the behest of a group of protesting citizens who asserted that a type of business would be conducted in the building which would constitute a nuisance.

The question becomes quite simple: May the City revoke a building permit where it is later convinced that the building will be used for an illegal purpose? We have little difficulty in agreeing with the trial court. These elements drive us to only one conclusion. The area was not zoned against a factory building. Whatever power the City possessed was exhausted when the permit was granted. The City had no judicial forum to adjudge in futuro how the building might be utilized. The City maintains plenary power to protect its citizens by abating a nuisance when and if that condition should occur.

The judgment is affirmed.

CHAPMAN, C. J., TERRELL and BUFORD, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

27 So. 2d 727, 158 Fla. 98, 1946 Fla. LEXIS 485, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/city-of-jacksonville-v-state-ex-rel-mann-fla-1946.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack