Leon County v. Parker’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

6 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “(1) Any aggrieved or adversely affected party may maintain an action for injunctive or other relief against any local government to prevent such local government from taking any action on a development order, as defined in s. 163.3164, which materially alters the use or density or intensity of use on a particular piece of property that is not consistent with the comprehensive plan adopted under this part. (2) `Aggrieved or adversely affected party' means any person or local government which will suffer an adverse effect to an interest protected or furthered by the local government comprehensive plan, including interests related to health and safety, police and fire protection service systems, densities or intensities of development, transportation, facilities, health care facilities, equipment or services, or environmental or natural resources. The alleged adverse interest may be shared in common with other members of the community at large, but shall exceed in degree the general interest in community good shared by all persons. ..... (4) As a condition precedent to the institution of an action pursuant to this section, the complaining party shall first file a verified complaint with the local government whose actions are complained of setting forth the facts upon which the complaint is based and the relief sought by the complaining party. The verified complaint shall be filed no later than 30 days after the alleged inconsistent action has been taken. The local government rec”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 627 So. 2d 476 - Parker v. Leon County · 601 So. 2d 577 - Emerald Acres Inv. v. BD. OF CTY. COM'RS

2. “A local government body, such as a county commission, often proceeds in an informal, free-form manner. The action of the Leon County Commission in these cases does not appear to be an exception. Rather than simply deny the respondent's requests in the cases below, the Leon County Commission suggested that the respondents meet further with the Planning Commission in an effort to work out differences. The requirement of Section 163.3215(4) that a verified complaint be filed with the local government prior to instituting suit has the salutary effect of putting such governmental body on notice that it should be prepared to defend its action and will need to create a record to support that action.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. B & H Travel v. Dept of Com. Affairs · 601 So. 2d 577 - Emerald Acres Inv. v. BD. OF CTY. COM'RS

3. “... The remedies available to an applicant to challenge the denial by use of certiorari review remain.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 601 So. 2d 577 - Emerald Acres Inv. v. BD. OF CTY. COM'RS