for Writ of Certiorari to Review Quasi-Judicial Action: Agencies, Boards, and
Commissions of Local Government: ADMINISTRATIVE
– Code Enforcement – due process - jurisdiction – Court does not have
jurisdiction to review previous orders imposing fines that were not timely
appealed – Court does have jurisdiction to review Order Imposing Lien, entered
October 28, 2005, as petition was filed within thirty days seeking review of
this Order – Order must be quashed when City failed to provide Petitioner with
notice and the opportunity to challenge the imposition of the lien – procedural
due process is required even when property owner has previously appeared before
the administrative agency to submit testimony and evidence on the same code
violations - Petition granted. CSX
Transportation, Inc. v. City of
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE SIXTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
CSX TRANSPORTATION, INC.,
vs. Appeal No.05-0096AP-88A
THIS CAUSE came before the Court on the Petition for Writ of Certiorari, the Response and the Reply. Upon consideration of the same and being otherwise fully advised, the Court finds that the Petition must be granted as set forth below.
Petitioner, CSX Transportation Inc. (CSX), seeks review of the Order Imposing Lien
(Order), entered October 28, 2005, by a Special Magistrate
for the Respondent, City of
record shows that CSX is the owner of real property situated between
On July 27, 2005, the Code Enforcement Board (Board) held a hearing on the code violations. After receiving testimony and evidence, the Board concluded that CSX had failed to bring its property into compliance and further ordered that CSX was to correct all code violations by August 11, 2005. The Board’s Order and Notice states that the matter would be considered again by a Special Magistrate on August 23, 2005, and that a fine of $ 250.00 per day would be imposed for failure to bring the property into compliance. CSX was mailed a copy of the Order and Notice. Thereafter, on August 26, 2005, September 30, 2005, and October 28, 2005, the Special Magistrate found that the violations had not been corrected and imposed fines against CSX in the amounts of $ 3,000.00, $ 8,750.00, and $ 7,000.00, respectively.
Before this Court, CSX argues that
the imposition of fines is unlawful as CSX was not provided with notice and an
opportunity to defend itself and, further, that the imposition of fines
violates federal preemption laws.
Initially, the Court reiterates that it does not have jurisdiction to
review the orders entered on July 27, 2005, August 26, 2005, and September 30,
2005, as the time to seek appellate review of these orders has passed. See Fla. R. App. P. Rule 9.100(c); see
also Kirby v. City of
Based on the scant record provided by the parties, the Court finds that certiorari relief must be granted as to the Order Imposing Lien, entered October 28, 2005, since there is nothing in the record to show that CSX was provided with either a predeprivation or postdeprivation process to challenge the validity of the fines imposed. As made clear by the Second District Court of Appeal in Massey v. Charlotte County, 842 So.2d 142 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003), the City must give the property owner notice and opportunity to be heard to challenge the validity of the fines or imposition of the lien. This procedural due process is required even when the property owners have previously appeared before the administrative agency to submit testimony and evidence on the same code violations. See id. at 146.
While it appears that the City
mailed a copy of the Order Imposing Lien to CSX, the City does not have any
written procedure in place to “provide the property owner with notice and an
opportunity to be heard concerning any factual determination necessary to
impose a fine.”
Therefore, it is,
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Petition for Writ of Certiorari is granted and the Order Imposing Lien, entered October 28, 2005, is quashed.
DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers, at
JOHN A. SCHAEFER
Circuit Judge, Appellate Division
LAUREN LAUGHLIN BRANDT C.
Circuit Judge, Appellate Division Circuit Judge, Appellate Division
Copies furnished to:
Daniel J. Fleming, Esquire
Alfred E. Corey, Esquire
Milton A. Galbraith, Esquire
Post Office Box 2842
 As reiterated throughout this order, the decision to grant certiorari relief is directed only to the Order Imposing Lien, entered October 28, 2005.
 The Court concluded that it would not exercise jurisdiction to review such earlier orders in its Order Dismissing Notice of Appeal without Prejudice, entered January 4, 2006.
 The Court is assuming that the Board considered the criteria set forth in Florida Statutes, section 162.09(2)(a), in originally determining at the July hearing that $ 250.00 per day should be imposed. See Massey, 842 So.2d at 145.