Case ID: so2d_296/html/0605-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM. PEARSON, Judge", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

E. J. FRANKEL et al., Appellants, v. CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, a municipal corporation, created and existing under the laws of the State of Florida, Appellee.
    Nos. 73-962, 73-963.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    June 18, 1974.
    Rehearing Denied July 15, 1974.
    Sibley, Giblin, Levenson & Ward, Miami Beach, for appellants.
    Joseph A. Wanick, City Atty., and Lee H. Schillinger, Asst. City Atty., for appel-lee.
    Before PEARSON, CARROLL and HAVERFIELD, JJ.
   PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See Curtis Publishing Company v. Bader, Fla.App.1972, 266 So.2d 78; Federated Dept. Stores, Inc. v. Pasco, Fla. App.1973, 275 So.2d 46; Shell Oil Company v. State, Fla.App. 1974, 295 So.2d 648; Eisen v. Carlisle & Jaquelin (1974) -U. S. —, 94 S.Ct. 2140, 40 L.Ed.2d 732, 42 Law Week 4804.

PEARSON, Judge

(dissenting).

I respectfully dissent from the holding that appellants’ case was not a proper one for a class action. It appears to me that this action against the City of Miami Beach falls exactly within the rule announced by the Supreme Court of Florida in Tenney v. City of Miami Beach, 152 Fla. 126, 11 So.2d 188 (1942). I would therefore reverse the order which dismissed the class action aspect of the cause.