Dade County v. Acme Specialty Corp.

292 So. 2d 378
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedMarch 26, 1974
Docket73-897
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 292 So. 2d 378 (Dade County v. Acme Specialty Corp.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Dade County v. Acme Specialty Corp., 292 So. 2d 378 (Fla. Ct. App. 1974).

Opinion

292 So.2d 378 (1974)

DADE COUNTY, a Political Subdivision of the State of Florida, Appellant,
v.
ACME SPECIALTY CORPORATION, a Foreign Corporation, Appellee.

No. 73-897.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

March 26, 1974.

Stuart Simon, County Atty., and Steven Lee, Asst. County Atty., for appellant.

Ullman, Kimler & Entin, Miami, for appellee.

Before BARKDULL, C.J., and CARROLL and HENDRY, JJ.

BARKDULL, Chief Judge.

By this appeal, the County questions the correctness of a final judgment holding null and void those portions of a County ordinance banning the sale of "sparklers". Section 791.01, Fla. Stat.,[1] F.S.A., defining fireworks, has a specific exemption as to sparklers and provides in part that they may be offered for sale.

The Supreme Court of Florida has recently had occasion to review the propriety of a municipality attempting to enact an ordinance prohibiting activities authorized by a general State statute. Rinzler v. Carson, Fla. 1972, 262 So.2d 661. Examining the ordinance under attack in light of the cited statute, the sale of sparklers having been specifically approved by the Legislature of this State, we believe the trial court was correct in the final judgment declaring so much of the County's fireworks ordinance[2] which prohibits such sale to be unconstitutional.

Therefore, the final judgment here under review be and the same is hereby affirmed.

Affirmed.

NOTES

[1] "791.01 Fireworks defined

* * * * *

"(2) The term `fireworks' shall not include sparklers, toy pistols, toy canes, toy guns, or other devices in which paper caps containing twenty-five hundredths grains or less of explosive compound are used, providing they are so constructed that the hand cannot come in contact with the cap when in place for the explosion, and toy pistol paper caps which contain less than twenty hundredths grains of explosive mixture, the sale and use of which shall be permitted at all times."

[2] County ordinances under Home Rule Charter are to be treated the same as municipal ordinances. See: Applied Research Laboratories of Florida, Inc. v. Homer, Fla.App. 1971, 249 So.2d 732; Delano v. Dade County, Fla. 1973, 287 So.2d 288.

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

Related

Phantom of Brevard, Inc. v. Brevard County
3 So. 3d 309 (Supreme Court of Florida, 2008)
Metro. Dade County v. Chase Fed. Housing
737 So. 2d 494 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1999)
Metropolitan Dade County v. City of Miami
396 So. 2d 144 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1981)
Acme Specialty Corporation v. City of Miami
292 So. 2d 379 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1974)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
292 So. 2d 378, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dade-county-v-acme-specialty-corp-fladistctapp-1974.