On the Case

Update on FLC ‘friend of the court’ briefs for cities

By Kraig Conn Florida League of Cities

The Florida League of Cities (FLC) Legal Department provides a wide array of legal services to the League and its members. These services are designed to ensure that Florida’s cities remain apprised of legal matters affecting their operations and that municipal interests are advanced at the various levels of government.

In addition to general “in-house” legal services, the Department provides counsel on the development and effect of legislation, files original court and administrative actions on behalf of municipalities and files amicus curiae – “friend of the court” – briefs in the state and federal appellate courts. Legal staff members can also consult with Florida’s city attorneys on legal problems facing their particular municipalities.

The League is currently involved as an amicus curiae in six cases. As an amicus curiae, the League is not a named party to the particular matter. Instead, the League’s role is to provide a court with a perspective on how its decision in a case may have a statewide impact. A summary of the six cases is provided below. At the time of publishing, all of the cases except two are pending, which means the particular court has not yet decided the matter.

District Courts of Appeal Cases (DCAS) CASES

Testa v. Town of Jupiter Island (Florida’s 4th DCA)

In this case, the Town delayed taking action on a proposed ordinance until the next scheduled town meeting. The Town made no changes to the ordinance and took action at the next meeting. Testa challenged the action because the Town did not readvertise the ordinance. The trial court determined the Town provided proper notice under state law of the ordinance adoption. The League’s brief supported the Town. The 4th DCA found the Town did not follow the proper ordinance adoption procedure and determined the ordinance was void. However, the 4th DCA did certify this matter to the Florida Supreme Court for further review as a matter of great public importance. If the Supreme Court accepts jurisdiction of the case, the League will file an amicus brief with the court. In a related development, the Florida Legislature passed a law during the 2023 Legislative Session to clarify that the action taken by the Town in adopting the ordinance was proper and consistent with the law.

City of Hallandale Beach v. Rosemond (Florida’s 4th DCA)

In this case, the trial court granted non-economic compensatory damages to a city employee who brought an action under the Florida Public Whistleblower Act. The League’s brief argues these damages are not specifically provided for under the law and should not have been awarded.

Hillsborough County Aviation Authority v. Bob Henriquez (Florida’s 2nd DCA)

In this case, the property appraiser imposed property taxes on property owned by the Authority (similar to a city owning the property) and used by lessees to provide services at the airport. The League’s brief informed the court that in the context of governmental property, there is a legal presumption against imposing taxes on governmental property (as that would result in a government taxing another government, which under tax law theory should be avoided). The 2nd DCA determined the properties serve a governmental purpose and are not subject to property taxes. However, the 2nd DCA did certify this matter to the Florida Supreme Court as a question of great public importance.

Roldan v. City of Hallandale Beach (Florida’s 4th DCA)

This case involves when a person may seek attorney fees and costs in a civil action relating to a public records request. In 2017, the Florida Legislature amended the public records law to require a person to provide pre-suit notice before seeking to obtain attorney fees and costs. The plaintiff did not provide the required notice to the City, and the trial court did not award fees or costs. The League’s brief supported the trial court’s decision. The 4th DCA agreed with the trial court and determined the plaintiff did not provide the required notice under the law and was not entitled to fees and costs.

Florida Supreme Court Cases

City of Weston v. State of Florida

This matter involved a challenge to a state law that imposes penalties on local officials and local governments for violating the state preemption of regulating firearms and ammunition. The trial court determined the law was unconstitutional because it violated the absolute legislative immunity of local officials and violated governmental function immunity. The 1st DCA upheld the penalty law and determined that, in the context of an express legislative preemption, legislative immunity and governmental function immunity did not apply. The League and the Florida Association of Counties filed a joint amicus curiae brief with the Supreme Court and argued the penalty law is unconstitutional. The Florida Supreme Court agreed with the 1st DCA and upheld the penalty law.

City of Gulf Breeze v. Brown

In this matter, the 1st DCA determined that city-owned property (a golf course and other buildings) operated under a management agreement with a private company is subject to ad valorem (property) taxes. The 1st DCA certified this matter to the Florida Supreme Court as a question of great public importance. The League’s brief at the Supreme Court supports the City’s position that no taxes should be imposed.

The League will provide periodic updates on the resolution of these cases and other court activities it undertakes.

Kraig Conn is General Counsel/Chief Legal Officer for the Florida League of Cities.

Municipal Home Rule Resource

The Florida League of Cities (FLC) has developed a document listing express legislative preemptions of municipal Home Rule powers. The document is intended to be a working document and serve as a resource for identifying express preemptions. The current version has been updated to include preemptions passed during the 2023 Legislative Session. The document has been widely distributed to municipal attorneys.

If you would like to receive the Express Preemptions document or additional information on any of the League’s legal activities, please contact the League’s Legal Department at 850.222.9684.