From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Village of Vir. Gardens v. Johnson

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Sep 5, 1962
143 So. 2d 692 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1962)

Opinion

No. 61-739.

August 7, 1962. Rehearing Denied September 5, 1962.

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Dade County, Marshall C. Wiseheart, J.

Franks Gordon, Miami, for appellants.

Anderson Nadeau, Miami, for appellees.

Before HORTON, CARROLL and HENDRY, JJ.


Appellant Village seeks review of an adverse final decree declaring its zoning ordinance to be unconstitutional and void as bearing no relationship to the health, safety, morals or general welfare of the community as a whole.

The ordinance in question was enacted in 1953 and created a "restricted business district" within which a number of uses, including restaurants, would be permitted. Thereafter, the ordinance was amended by the deletion of restaurants from the list of permissive uses. Subsequently, the appellees acquired property within the district. After their request for a variance to construct a building intended for use as a restaurant was denied, appellees brought this action, seeking to have the subject ordinance declared unconstitutional and void. After hearing, the chancellor entered the order appealed.

Appellants contend the chancellor erred in that the evidence presented by the appellees was insufficient to overcome the presumption that the ordinance was constitutional. We find this contention has merit.

Where an attack is made on a zoning ordinance enacted by a city council upon authorization by legislative grant, the burden of alleging and proving invalidity rests upon the assailant. This burden is extraordinary and heavy. Gautier v. Town of Jupiter Island, Fla.App. 1962, 142 So.2d 321; City of Miami Beach v. Wiesen, Fla. 1956, 86 So.2d 442; City of Miami Beach v. Silver, Fla. 1953, 67 So.2d 646.

We have examined the record and conclude that this burden was not sufficiently carried by the appellees in the case at bar. At most, the record indicates that the validity of the ordinance under consideration is a fairly debatable question. When such is the case, a court does not have the right or authority to substitute its judgment for that of the municipal legislative body charged with the power and duty of enacting zoning legislation. Gautier v. Town of Jupiter Island, supra; City of Miami Beach v. Wiesen, supra; City of Miami Beach v. Hogan, Fla. 1953, 63 So.2d 493; City of Miami Beach v. Ocean Inland Co., 147 Fla. 480, 3 So.2d 364; Village of Euclid, Ohio v. Ambler Realty Co., 272 U.S. 365, 47 S.Ct. 114, 71 L.Ed. 303.

It follows that the decree appealed should be, and is accordingly, reversed with directions to dismiss the complaint.

Reversed with directions.


Summaries of

Village of Vir. Gardens v. Johnson

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Sep 5, 1962
143 So. 2d 692 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1962)
Case details for

Village of Vir. Gardens v. Johnson

Case Details

Full title:VILLAGE OF VIRGINIA GARDENS, FLORIDA, GUSTAF HOLMBERG, MAYOR; L. EDWARD…

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District

Date published: Sep 5, 1962

Citations

143 So. 2d 692 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1962)

Citing Cases

Town of N. Redington Beach v. Williams

The ordinance was "fairly debatable" and in such circumstances "a court does not have the right or authority…

Riverside Homes v. City of Miami

Appellant appeals an adverse final decree upholding the zoning of the appellee municipality upon the "fairly…