Jonathan Javitt v. North Bay Village
This text of Jonathan Javitt v. North Bay Village (Jonathan Javitt v. North Bay Village) 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.
Opinion
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida
Opinion filed June 24, 2026. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D25-1440 Lower Tribunal No. 24-34-AP-01 ________________
Jonathan Javitt, et al., Petitioners,
vs.
North Bay Village, Respondent.
On Petition for Writ of Certiorari from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Appellate Division, Daryl E. Trawick, Ramiro C. Areces, and Miguel M. de la O, Judges.
Brito, PLLC, and Alejandro Brito, and Jalaine Garcia, P.A., for petitioners.
Weiss Serota Helfman Cole & Bierman, P.L., and Laura K. Wendell, for respondent.
Before LOGUE, GORDO, and LOBREE, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
Jonathan and Marsha Javitt petition this court for second-tier certiorari review of the circuit court appellate division’s per curiam affirmance of an
order of enforcement issued by the North Bay Village Code Enforcement
Division. Based on our review of the record, including the petition for writ of
certiorari, response, and reply, and applying the narrow standard of review
applicable in second-tier certiorari proceedings, we conclude that the petition
must be denied. See Futch v. Fla. Dep’t of Highway Safety & Motor Vehicles,
189 So. 3d 131, 132 (Fla. 2016) (“We reassert that ‘second-tier certiorari
should not be used simply to grant a second appeal; rather, it should be
reserved for those situations when there has been a violation of a clearly
established principle of law resulting in a miscarriage of justice.’” (quoting
Nader v. Dep’t of Highway Safety & Motor Vehicles, 87 So. 3d 712, 717 (Fla.
2012))); Somerset Acad., Inc. v. Miami-Dade Cnty. Bd. of Cnty. Comm’rs,
314 So. 3d 597, 599 (Fla. 3d DCA 2020) (“[A] circuit court order that . . .
provides a result without a written opinion and therefore cannot act as
precedent in future cases, will generally not merit certiorari review in the
district court, even if the district court might disagree with the result.” (quoting
Dep’t of Highway Safety & Motor Vehicles v. Alliston, 813 So. 2d 141, 145
(Fla. 2d DCA 2002))); Dep’t of Highway Safety & Motor Vehicles v. Hofer, 5
So. 3d 766, 772 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009) (“A circuit court’s decision will generally
not merit certiorari review if it is issued without a written opinion or is
2 particularly fact-dependent or fact-specific because it lacks precedential
value.”); State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. CC Chiropractic, LLC, 245 So. 3d
755, 758 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018) (stating that due process inquiry on second-
tier certiorari review addresses whether circuit court afforded due process);
Kirrie v. Indian River Cnty. Code Enf’t Bd., 104 So. 3d 1177, 1180 (Fla. 4th
DCA 2012) (holding that whether code enforcement board failed to accord
property owners procedural due process was not reviewable in second tier
certiorari proceeding).
Denied.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Jonathan Javitt v. North Bay Village, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jonathan-javitt-v-north-bay-village-fladistctapp-2026.