Skip to main content
File #: 16-0702    Version: 1 Name:
Type: General Business Status: Passed
File created: 12/4/2016 In control: City Commission Regular Meeting
On agenda: 12/13/2016 Final action: 12/13/2016
Title: Discuss whether to appeal the recent order in Neuman v City of North Port; Circuit Court Case # 2016 CA 000427 NC.
Attachments: 1. Neuman Joseph v City of Northport 2016 CA 427

TO:                                           Honorable Mayor & Members of the North Port Commission

 

FROM:                      Jonathan R. Lewis, ICMA-CM, City Manager

 

TITLE:                     Discuss whether to appeal the recent order in Neuman v City of North Port; Circuit Court Case # 2016 CA 000427 NC.

 

Recommended Action

 

Discuss whether to appeal the recent order in Neuman v City of North Port; Circuit Court Case # 2016 CA 000427 NC.

 

Background Information

 

Attached is a recent order from circuit court in the case Neuman v. City of North Port; Circuit Court Case No. 2016 CA 000427 NC.

 

On an appeal, the District Court’s review of the circuit court's decision is limited to determining whether the circuit court afforded procedural due process and applied the correct law or, stated differently, whether the circuit court departed from the essential requirements of law.

 

Allstate Ins. Co. v. Kaklamanos, 843 So.2d 885, 889 (Fla.2003) (“A district court should exercise its discretion to grant certiorari review only when there has been a violation of a clearly established principle of law resulting in a miscarriage of justice.”)

 

The Neuman’s filed this case to appeal the City Commission’s denial of their application for a special exception for the use of puppy kennel at 1668 Tropicare Boulevard.

 

The court concluded the Neuman’s were not accorded procedural due process, and remanded the matter back to the City Commission for further proceedings.  In other words, the Neumans are entitled to another hearing before the City Commission concerning their application for a special exception.

 

Discussions with the Neuman’s attorney regarding the appropriate “further proceedings” are on-going.  Neuman’s attorney has not said what his clients want to do. 

 

Pursuant to Rules of Appellate Procedure Rule 9.100 (c) the City has a limited amount of time to file an appeal, if one is desired.

 

Attorney Maggie Mooney-Portale, (<http://www.swflgovlaw.com/attorneys/maggie-mooney-portale/>) will continue serving as the Commission’s attorney in this matter.  There is a potential conflict of interest for your in-house attorneys to serve as the City Attorney because the City Attorney’s office was authorized to seek an injunction on the Neumans for operating without a business tax receipt.  (Sarasota County Circuit Court Case No. 2015-1167-CA.).

 

 

Strategic Plan

 

N/A

 

Financial Impact

 

Filling Fees < $500.00

 

Procurement

 

N/A

 

Attachments:                                                               Neuman Joseph v City of Northport 2016 CA 427

 

Prepared by:                                            Mark Moriarty

 

Department Director:                       Mark Moriarty