HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005 04 19 Entered into Evidence by Captain Tolleson Re: SummonsDate: April 19, 2005
ENTERED INTO THE
CAPTAIN TOLLESON
RECORD
BY
=~
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE EIGHTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT,
IN AND FOR SEMINOLE COUNTY, FLORIDA
THOMAS A. BINFORD and
AUTHUR O. DUNCAN, individuals,
Plaintiffs,
vs
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, a Florida municipality,
JOHN BUSH as Mayor,
Defendant
s yFR~FF q TR~~
SF~,~F'~~Np~~ pN,q~~~~pY
~tiFl~~r ~~ °~ ~~; r Fs~~~c
to ~ F~ ~
7v ~ ~; ~~R;~ R
'~~~'Li 0
-~o~ N
SUMMONS: PERSONAL SERVICE ON AN INDIVIDUAL
ORDEN DE COMPARECENCIA: SERVICIO PERSONAL EN UN INDIVIDUO
CITATION: L'ASSIGNATION PERSONAL SUR UN INDIVIDUEL
TO/PARA/A: {enter other party's full legal name} CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS c/o JOHN BUSH Ma or
{address including city and state)/location for service} 1126 E. State Road 434
_ Winter Springs Florida 32708
IMPORTANT
A lawsuit has been filed against you. You have 20 calendar days after this summons is served on you
to file a written response to the attached complaint/petition with the clerk of this circuit court, located at:
{street address} 301 N. Park Ave. Sanford Florida 32772
A phone call will not protect you. Your written response, including the case number given above and the names
of the parties, must be filed if you want the Court to hear your side of the case.
If you do not file your written response on time, you may lose the case, and your wages, money,
and property may be taken thereafter without further warning from the Court. There are other legal
requirements. You may want to call an attorney right away. If you do not know an attorney, you may call an
attorney referral service or a legal aid office (listed in the phone book).
If you choose to file a written response yourself, at the same time you file your written response to the
Court, you must also mail or take a copy of your written response to the party serving this summons at:
{Name and address ofparty serving summons} Thomas A. Binford 436E Hwy 434 Winter Springs Florida
z~~nQ
Copies of all court documents in this case, including orders, are available at the Clerk of the
Circuit Court's office. You may review these documents, upon request.
You must keep the Clerk of the Circuit Court's office notified of your current address. (You may
file Notice of Current Address, ~O Florida Family Law Form 12.915.) Future papers in this lawsuit will
be mailed to the address on record at the clerk's office.
Case No.: G~-C`~ ' ~' .~ / -~ ~(~ -~
Florida Family Law Fonn 12.910(a), Summons: Personal Service on an Individual (2/98) 205
WARNING: Rule 12.285, Florida Family Law Rules of Procedure, requires certain automatic
disclosure of documents and information. Failure to comply can result in sanctions, including dismissal
or striking of pleadings.
IMPORTANTE
Usted ha sido demandado legalmente. Tiene veinte (20) dias, contados a partir del recibo de esta
notification, para contestar la demanda adjunta, por escrito, y presentarla ante este tribunal. Localizado en: _
. Una llamada telefonica no to protegera. Si usted desea que el
tribunal considere su defensa, debe presentar su respuesta por escrito, incluyendo el numero del caso y los
nombres de las partes interesadas. Si usted no contesta la demanda a tiempo, pudiese perder el caso y podria ser
despojado de sus ingresos y propiedades, o privado de sus derechos, sin previo aviso del tribunal. Existen otros
requisitos legales. Si to desea, usted puede consultar a un abogado inmediatamente. Si no conoce a un abogado,
puede llamar a una de las oficinas de asistencia legal que aparecen en la guia telefonica.
Si desea responder a la demanda por su cuenta, al mismo tiempo en que presente su respuesta ante el
tribunal, usted debe enviar por correo o entregar una copia de su respuesta a la persona denominada abajo.
Si usted elige presentar personalmente una respuesta por escrito, en el mismo momento que usted
presente su respuesta por escrito al Tribunal, usted debe enviar por correo o llevar una copia de su respuesta por
escrito a la parte entregando esta orden de comparencencia a:
Nombre y direction de la parte que entrega la orden de comparencencia:
Copias de todos los documentos judiciales de este caso, incluyendo las ordenes, estan disponibles en la
oficina del Secretario de Juzgado del Circuito [Clerk of the Circuit Court's office]. Estos documentos pueden
ser revisados a su solicitud.
Usted debe de manener informada a la oficina del Secretario de Juzgado del Circuito de su direction
actual. (Usted puede presentar el Formulario: Ley de Familia de la Florida 12.915, [~O Florida Family
Law Form 12.915], Notification de la Direction Actual [Notice of Current Address]. Los papelos que se
presenten en el futuro en esta demanda judicial seran env ados por correo a la direction que este registrada en la
oficina del Secretario.
ADVERTENCIA: Regla 12.285 (Rule 12.285), de las Reglas de Procedimiento de Ley de Familia de
la Florida [Florida Family Law Rules of Procedure], requiere cierta revelation automatica de documentos e
information. El incumplimient, puede resultar en sanciones, incluyendo la desestimacion o anulacion de los
alegatos.
IMPORTANT
Des poursuites judiciaries ont ete entreprises contre vous. Vous avez 20 fours consecutifs a partir de la
date de 1'assignation de cette citation pour deposer une reponse ecrite a la plainte ci jointe aupres de ce tribunal.
Qui se trouve a: ~L ' Adresse} Un simple coup de telephone est insuffisant
pour vous proteger; vous etes obliges de deposer votre reponse ecrite, avec mention du numero de dossier ci-
dessus et du nom des parties nommees ici, si vous souhaitez que le tribunal entende votre cause. Si vous ne
deposez pas votre reponse ecrite dans le delai requis, vous risquez de perdre la cause ainsi que votre salaire, votre
argent, et vos biens peuvent etre saisis par la suite, sans aucun preavis ulterieur du tribunal. Il y a d'autres
obligations juridiques et vous pouvez requerir lee services immediate d'un avocat. Si vous ne connaissez pas
d'avocat, vous pour iez telephoner a un service de reference d'avocats ou a un bureau d'assistance juridique
(figurant a 1'annuaire de telephones).
Florida Family Law Form 12.910(a), Summons: Personal Service on an Individual (2/98) 20C
Si vows choisissez de deposer vous-meme une reponse ecrite, it vous faudra egalement, en meme temps
que cette fonnalite, faire parvenir ou expedier une copie au Carbone ou une photocopie de votre reponse ecrite
a la partie qui vous depose cette citation.
Nom et adresse de la partie qui depose cette citation:
Les photocopies de tour les documents tribunals de cette cause, y compris des arrets, sont disponible au
bureau du greffier. Vous pouvez revue ces documents, sur demande.
II faut aviser le greffier de votre adresse actuelle. (Vous pouvez deposer ®O Florida Family Law Form
12.915, Notice of Current Address.) Les documents de 1'avenir de ce proces seront envoyer a 1' adresse que vous
donnez au bureau du greffier.
ATTENTION: La regle 12.285 des regles de procedure du droit de la famine de la Floride exige que 1'on
remette certains renseignements et certains documents 'a la partie adverse. Tout refus de les fournir pourra dormer
lieu a des sanctions, y compris le rejet ou la suppression d'un ou de plusieurs actes de procedure.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA
TO EACH SHERIFF OF THE STATE: You are commanded to serve this summons and a copy of the complaint
in this lawsuit on the above-named person.
DATED: MAR 1 t 2003 .~ ~~,.
CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT
(SEAL)
5ALL~ JI€~I~]'i
By:
Deputy Clerk
Florida Family Law Form 12.910(a), Summons: Personal Service on an Individual (2/98) 207
n
-~
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE EIGHTEENTH JUDICIAL
CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR SEMINOLE COUNTY, FLORIDA
THOMAS A. BINFORD and
ARTHUR O. DUNCAN, individuals,
Plaintiffs,
vs
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, a Florida municipality,
JOHN BUSH as Mayor,
Defendant.
CASE NO. C~_~- C ~- ~J .~ l /(c -
•-,
VERIFIED PETITION FOR WRIT OF PROHIBITION
COMES NOW, the Petitioners, THOMAS A. BINFORD and ARTHUR O. DUNCAN, and
petition the Circuit Court of Seminole County, Florida to issue its Writ of Prohibition to enjoin the
City of Winter Springs, a Florida municipality, from enforcing its sign ordinances number 683 and
2000-17 and for the basis thereof the Petitioners would state as follows:
1. This Court has jurisdiction pursuant to Rule 9.030(c), Rules of Appellate Procedure,
Florida Rules of Court.
2. Writ of Prohibition is the proper vehicle in this cause. Prohibition is preventative,
not corrective, and may not be used to undo what has already been done. City of Winter Springs has
the right to pass sign legislation in this case but not the right to enforce it against the Petitioners.
3. The Petitioners seek relief based on the following facts:
(A) Petitioners are legal citizens of the State of Florida and have standing in this
action.
(B) Petitioners seek enjoinment by the Court of sign ordinance numbers 683 and
2000-17 of the City of Winter Springs, a Florida municipality, (hereinafter referred to as City) from
enforcing said ordinances pursuant to Petitioners' properties which are more particularly described
legally as shown in Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part of this petition.
(C) The Petitioners have had their respective businesses and signs located
contiguous to one another on Highway 434 in the City of Winter Springs for over 15 years. Each
has his own sign located on his property between his business office structure and the highway.
Both signs were permitted and approved by the City at the respective times of installation.
Business signs are an acceptable and necessary method of identification of a business
location. Petitioners' signs are so located as to promote business identification in a safe manner for
the driving public.
Due to the unique nature and size of the Petitioners' lots, 60 feet on the highway and 100 feet
deep, ingress and egress to the businesses posed a potentially hazardous situation for clients and the
driving public. Therefore, the Petitioners agreed to let the other utilize the other's driveway by his
clients for ingress and egress purposes. This agreement has worked safely and satisfactorily for over
the past 15 years. See exhibit C.
(D) Petitioner Binford submitted an application for variance for his sign from the
City sign ordinance nos. 683 and 2000-17. The hearing was held on October 23, 2002 by the City
Board of Adjustment, hereinafter referred to as BOA. They can not deny nor grant the variance
request, only make a recommendation to the City Commission. Their recommendation was denial
of the variance application. The City Commission affirmed the BOA denial recommendation on
November 25, 2002 and gave Petitioner Binford 90 days to conform to the sign ordinances at which
time he would be in violation of same. Petitioner Binford has failed to conform to the sign
ordinances in a timely manner. This action is ripe for adjudication.
(E) City discriminated against the Petitioners in adopting sign ordinance nos. 683
and 2000-17. Due to the uniqueness of their lots (see exhibit B), the sign ordinances impose such
restrictive measures as to preclude the full use of their respective properties and is a confiscatory
measure by the City. This taking is not in the public interest and is unconstitutional. Nor is
aesthetics a determination in enforcement of the ordinances. Petitioner Binford's building is half
imported mahogany and half sand stone with flowers et al. The full grown trees between Binford's
building and the highway would have to be cut down for the needed business exposure to
2
E 1
compensate for removal of Binford's sign. Binford's contiguous neighbor has submitted a letter to
the City confirming that Binford's business location is aesthetically pleasing: "Mr. Binford's sign
has been there for at least 15 years and it has never bothered me or my family. In fact, when Mr.
Binford put in his sign and the trees in front of his office, it made the area look a lot better and more
pleasing to the eye. As his neighbor for many years I would like for him to keep his sign right where
it is." See exhibit E. Relocation of the Petitioners' signs to comply with the sign ordinances would
detrimentally affect ingress and egress and loss of parking spaces. Enforcement of the City's
ordinances restrict the use of the Petitioners' property and interfere with the Petitioners' beneficial
use of their property.
(F) Petitioner considers City vicariously liable for printed comments made by City
staff with malicious intent. The City prejudiced the BOA with hearsay and comments taken out of
context prior to and during the BOA hearing on the variance. Under CONSIDERATIONS section
of the City staff comments to the BOA at the October 23, 2002 variance hearing, was stated, "Mr.
Binford has stated that he believes this is wrong and that he hopes he will be denied the variance
request so that he may sue the City." Petitioner was denied procedural due process because hearing
was then not before an impartial decision-maker. See exhibit D. Subsequently, at the BOA hearing
the City staff's written recommendation for Binford's variance denial stated, "In order to
recommend any variance from the terms of this chapter, the board of adjustment must and shall find:
1. That special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to the land, structures or
building involved and which are not applicable to other lands, structures or buildings in the same
zoning district. 2. That the special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of
the applicant. 3. That granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special
privilege that is denied by this chapter to other lands, buildings or structures in the same zoning
district. 4. That literal interpretation of the provisions of this chapter would deprive the applicant
of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same zoning district under the terms of this
chapter and would work unnecessary hardship on the applicant. 5. That the variance granted is the
minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land, building or structure. 6.
That the grant of the variance will be in harmony with the general intent and purpose of this chapter,
will not be injurious to the neighborhood, or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare." The City
3
staff, BOA and City ruled that Petitioner Binford failed all of the above criteria in his sign variance
application. Their findings are strictly subjective and totally erroneous. City's enforcement of the
sign ordinances are clearly arbitrary and unreasonable and have no substantial relation to the public
health, safety, morals or general welfare. The City has abused its legislative power. Petitioner has
been denied substantive due process.
Test for determining whether there has been a violation of due process as result of denial of
Petitioner's variance application is twofold: Court must first determine whether there has been a
deprivation of a constitutionally protected interest, and then must determine whether the deprivation
was the result of an abuse of government power. Deprivation of property interest is of constitutional
stature if it is undertaken for improper motive and by means that were pretextual, arbitrary and
capricious, and without rational basis and bore any substantial relation to the public welfare.
Examination of Exhibit B displays within the red /green marks the limited area the Petitioners have
available in which to erect their business signs pursuant to the new sign ordinances. This is an
excellent example of obvious abuse of government power against its citizens for no apparent
enhancement of public welfare.
(G) Enforcement of the sign ordinances by the City is a taking that will cause
undue financial hardship to the Petitioners not common to the general public resulting in tortious
business interference. Tortious interference with an advantageous relationship consists of (1) the
existence of an advantageous business relationship under which the Petitioner has legal rights, (2)
an intentional and unjustified interference with that relationship by the defendant, and (3) damage
to the plaintiff. All of these elements are present in this cause. Additionally, this action by the City
is tantamount to subjecting the Petitioners to inverse condemnation. The doctrine of inverse
condemnation is predicated on the proposition that a taking may occur without formal proceedings.
(H) The City's sign ordinance nos. 683 and 2000-17 are arbitrary and capricious
for all of the aforementioned reasons and do not bear a substantial relation to the public health,
safety, morals or general welfare, and are therefore an invalid exercise of police power.
(I) Even though the Petitioners' land may be physically unchanged for all
practical purposes in the adherence to the new City sign ordinances, the bundle of rights the
Petitioners had will have been diminished. The Petitioners will no longer have the right to own and
4
enjoy the property as they intended.
(J) The laws of the State of Florida grant municipalities the right and power to
establish sign ordinances; however, such ordinances shall not conflict with any applicable state or
federal laws. Enforcement of sign ordinances 683 and 2000-17 by the City against the Petitioners
is a violation of not only their state and federal constitutional rights but more particularly of the Fifth
and Fourteenth Amendments of the Constitution of the United States.
Petitioners are competent, have personal knowledge of and verify that to the best of their
knowledge and belief all statements in paragraphs 1 through 3(J) are true and accurate.
WHEREFORE, the Petitioners respectfully request this Circuit Court take jurisdiction of this
matter and review the record, the applicable Florida and United States laws and constitutions and
case law and grant its Writ of Prohibition to order the defendant, City of Winter Springs, through its
City Commission to invalidate enforcement of its sign ordinances 683 and 2000-17, reimburse the
Petitioners all costs and fees pursuant to this action and any and all other relief as this Court deems
just and proper.
Respectfully submitted,
,- Jdr _
ARTHUR O. DUNCAN
424 E. Delineation 434
Winter Springs, Florida 32708
407-326-1341
HOMAS A. BINFO
426 E. Hwy 434
Winter Springs, Florida 32708
407-327-1315
5