Collier v. City of Homestead

81 So. 2d 201
Supreme Court of Florida·Decided September 21, 1955·Published·Cited by 8 cases

Opinion

DREW, Chief Justice.

The sole question presented by the peti-‘ tion for certiorari in this case is whether the lower court erred in denying plaintiffs’ motion for. a summary final decree. ' To have granted the motion for summary final decree would have resulted in a judicial' determination that the zoning ordinances of the City of Homestead were invalid and unenforceable.

The burden of making error clearly appear is upon the petitioners. They have failed to carry this burden by virtue of which the petition for certiorari is denied.

This denial of the petition for cer-tiorari shall not be construed as passing'upon any of the issues in the litigation and decides only that no error has been made to appear on the basis of which the order sought to be reviewed could be disturbed. Compare State Road Department v. Lewis, Fla., 79 So.2d 699, text 700.

TERRELL, ROBERTS and BUFORD, JJ., concur.

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

Collier v. City of Homestead, 81 So. 2d 201 (Fla. 1955).

81 So. 2d 201 (Collier v. City of Homestead) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Danluck v. Lotspeich Co.
334 So. 2d 32 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1976)
Keay v. City of Coral Gables
236 So. 2d 133 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1970)
State v. Edwards
135 So. 2d 889 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1961)
Southern Bell Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. Bell
116 So. 2d 617 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1959)
Perez v. State
81 So. 2d 201 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1955)