Case Name: CITY OF FORT PIERCE, a municipal corporation, Lawnwood Medical Center, Inc., and Hutchinson Island Limited, Inc., a foreign corporation, Appellant, v. Michael S. McCARTY, Individually, and as representative of the class of all Taxpayers of the City of Fort Pierce, Florida and Alexander L. Johnson, Jr., Appellees
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1982-12-08
Citations: 422 So. 2d 1094
Docket Number: No. 81-1810
Parties: CITY OF FORT PIERCE, a municipal corporation, Lawnwood Medical Center, Inc., and Hutchinson Island Limited, Inc., a foreign corporation, Appellant, v. Michael S. McCARTY, Individually, and as representative of the class of all Taxpayers of the City of Fort Pierce, Florida and Alexander L. Johnson, Jr., Appellees.
Judges: LETTS, C.J., and DOWNEY and WALDEN, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 422
Pages: 1094–1095

Head Matter:
CITY OF FORT PIERCE, a municipal corporation, Lawnwood Medical Center, Inc., and Hutchinson Island Limited, Inc., a foreign corporation, Appellant, v. Michael S. McCARTY, Individually, and as representative of the class of all Taxpayers of the City of Fort Pierce, Florida and Alexander L. Johnson, Jr., Appellees.
No. 81-1810.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
Dec. 8, 1982.
John T. Brennan, City Atty., of Brennan, McAliley, Hayskar, MeAliley & Jefferson, P.A., and James T. Walker, Asst. City Atty., Fort Pierce, for appellant.
Eric B. Meyers and Susan E. Cook of Shutts & Bowen, Miami, and Ben L. Bryan, Jr., Fort Pierce for appellant Hutchinson Island, Ltd., Inc.
Charles R. Brown of Brown & Williams, Fort Pierce for appellant Lawnwood Medical Center, Inc.
Vincent A. Lloyd of Lloyd, Brown, Hos-kins & Becht, Fort Pierce, for appellee Michael S. McCarty.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
The City of Fort Pierce sought a declaratory judgment concerning a proposed charter amendment limiting the height and density of future construction. The trial court declined to rule upon the constitutionality of the amendment until after'the proposed referendum election. We deem this to be error and hold that the trial court should and must rule upon the constitutionality questions prior to the election upon the authority of and for the reasons stated in Rivergate Restaurant Corporation v. Metropolitan Dade County, 369 So.2d 679 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979); City of Miami v. Smith, 251 So.2d 290 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971); Dade County v. Dade County League of Municipalities, 104 So.2d 512 (Fla.1958); and Duval County v. Jennings, 121 Fla. 584, 164 So. 356 (1935).
Reversed and remanded.
LETTS, C.J., and DOWNEY and WALDEN, JJ., concur.