Case ID: so2d_451/html/0528-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM. ANSTEAD, Chief Judge, BERANEK, Judge,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

REINHOLD CONSTRUCTION, INC., Appellant, v. CITY OF VERO BEACH, Florida, Appellee.
    No. 83-1806.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
    May 30, 1984.
    Rehearing Denied July 5, 1984.
    Larry Klein, West Palm Beach, and John A. Barley & Associates, P.A., Tallahassee, for appellant.
    Charles P. Vitunac, City Atty., Vero Beach, for appellee.
   PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

LETTS, J., concurs.

ANSTEAD, C.J., concurs specially with opinion.

BERANEK, J., dissents with opinion.

ANSTEAD, Chief Judge,

specially concurring:

I agree that there is competent, substantial evidence in the record to support the trial court’s factual determination that the City acted properly within the authority of its public bidding ordinance in awarding a construction contract to a bidder who submitted a bid slightly higher than that of the appellant.

BERANEK, Judge,

dissenting:

I respectfully dissent. I believe the City Council awarded the public works contract to a contractor other than the lowest responsible bidder for the reason that the successful contractor was a local firm. Hometown location was not one of the criteria listed in the solicitation for bids. Furthermore, it was not one of the criteria to be considered in determining the lowest responsible bidder as set forth in the city ordinance. I would reverse. See Adolphus v. Baskin, 95 Fla. 603, 116 So. 225 (1928).