Whittenton v. City of New Smyrna Beach

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Whittenton v. City of New Smyrna Beach

351 So. 2d 738

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided November 4, 1977·No. No. EE-59·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

SMITH, Acting Chief Judge.

Viewed in a light favorable to the City, the evidence supports the trial court’s decision that the City is not estopped to enforce its zoning ordinance proscribing the use of appellants’ house by paying boarders. The evidence on the elements of estoppel was conflicting and did not establish appellants’ right to continued use as a matter of law. City of North Miami v. Margulies, 289 So.2d 424 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974).

AFFIRMED.

ERVIN and MELVIN, JJ., concur.

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

SMITH, Acting Chief Judge.

Viewed in a light favorable to the City, the evidence supports the trial court’s decision that the City is not estopped to enforce its zoning ordinance proscribing the use of appellants’ house by paying boarders. The evidence on the elements of estoppel was conflicting and did not establish appellants’ right to continued use as a matter of law. City of North Miami v. Margulies, 289 So.2d 424 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974).

AFFIRMED.

ERVIN and MELVIN, JJ., concur.

Whittenton v. City of New Smyrna Beach, 351 So. 2d 738 (Fla. Ct. App. 1977).

Pincite

351 So. 2d 738 (Whittenton v. City of New Smyrna Beach) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related