HomeMy WebLinkAboutEleventh Circuit Court DecisionIN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF TILE
ELEVENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIr IN AND
FOR MIAlvil-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA-
CESAR A. HERNANDEZ-CANTON, et al.
Petitioners
MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, et al.
Respondents
DATE FILED:
On remand from the Third District Court o Alt -x
APPELLATE DIVISION
CASE NO. 06-291 AP
Michael A. Sastre, Esq. for petitioners.
M. Catherine Hite, Esq. for petitioners.
Elliot H_ Scherker, Esq. and Lucia A. Dougherty, Esq. Greenberg Traurig, P.A, for respondents.
Jorge L. Fernandez, Esq., City Attorney, City ofMimi and Rafael Suarez -Rivas, Esq. Assistant
City Attorney, City of Miami_ for respondents
BEFORE JEFFERY ROSINEK, IVAN F. FPRNANDEZ, and DOUGLAS J. CHUMBLEY, JJ.
PER CURJAM
This case comes before the court on remand from the Third District Court of Appeal. See
Hernandez -Canton v. Miami City Coen, 32 Fla. L. Weekly D2473 (Fla. 3d DCA October 17,
2007). In accordance with that decision, we remand the matter to the City Commission for a
new hearing and determination by the Commission of whether the proposed project does, or does
not, comply -with Section 1305 of the Miami City Code as amended in 2tt. Also in accordance
that decision, the developer and the objectors shall be
their presentations at the hearini,t.
Therefore, we QUASH Resolution Number R-06-I3
det tio.n and REMAND to the City Co
a reasonable 61.ne
i.h did not make the ruined
ri for a determination in accordan with
Hernan ez-C raton MiamL .City Cam'n, 3_2 _. eckly.D24,73 (Fla_. 3d. DCA October 17,
2007),
COPIES FUN SHED TO
COUNSEL OF RECORD A
TO ANY PARTY .
BY COUNSEL
2