Pirtle v. City of Titusville

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Pirtle v. City of Titusville

101 So. 2d 397, 1958 Fla. App. LEXIS 2692

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 21, 1958

DocketNo. 379

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 101 So. 2d 397 (Pirtle v. City of Titusville) 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

Pirtle v. City of Titusville, 101 So. 2d 397, 1958 Fla. App. LEXIS 2692 (Fla. Ct. App. 1958).

Pincite

Opinion

■ PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a final decree in an action brought by Eugene B. Pirtle against the City of Titusville and North Brevard County Hospital District Board in which plaintiff sought a- declaratory decree as to a certain deed of dedication and sought to have another deed cancelled. The decree dismissed the suit and granted defendants damage on an injunction bond which had been filed by the plaintiff. The Circuit Judge dismissed the complaint and in his order found that there was no showing in the -complaint nor in the proof that there would be any injury resulting to the plaintiff different in kind from that sustained by the public generally, nor that the action sought to be enjoined would result in any increase in taxes or any special injury to the plaintiff.

We are of the opinion that upon the rec- ' ord presented there was no showing of interest in the plaintiff different from the public generally. Therefore, we affirm the lower court upon the authority of the following cases: Rickman v. Whitehurst, 73 Fla. 152, 74 So. 205; Metropolis Pub. Co. v. City of Miami, 100 Fla. 784, 129 So. 913; Lykes Bros., Inc., v. Board of Commissioners of Everglades Drainage District, Fla., 41 So.2d 898; Bryan v. City of Miami, Fla., 56 So.2d 924, 926; Town of Flagler Beach v. Green, Fla., 83 So.2d 598.

Affirmed.

KANNER, C. J., ALLEN and SHANNON, JJ., concur.

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

■ PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a final decree in an action brought by Eugene B. Pirtle against the City of Titusville and North Brevard County Hospital District Board in which plaintiff sought a- declaratory decree as to a certain deed of dedication and sought to have another deed cancelled. The decree dismissed the suit and granted defendants damage on an injunction bond which had been filed by the plaintiff. The Circuit Judge dismissed the complaint and in his order found that there was no showing in the -complaint nor in the proof that there would be any injury resulting to the plaintiff different in kind from that sustained by the public generally, nor that the action sought to be enjoined would result in any increase in taxes or any special injury to the plaintiff.

We are of the opinion that upon the rec- ' ord presented there was no showing of interest in the plaintiff different from the public generally. Therefore, we affirm the lower court upon the authority of the following cases: Rickman v. Whitehurst, 73 Fla. 152, 74 So. 205; Metropolis Pub. Co. v. City of Miami, 100 Fla. 784, 129 So. 913; Lykes Bros., Inc., v. Board of Commissioners of Everglades Drainage District, Fla., 41 So.2d 898; Bryan v. City of Miami, Fla., 56 So.2d 924, 926; Town of Flagler Beach v. Green, Fla., 83 So.2d 598.

Affirmed.

KANNER, C. J., ALLEN and SHANNON, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

101 So. 2d 397, 1958 Fla. App. LEXIS 2692, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pirtle-v-city-of-titusville-fladistctapp-1958.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack