← Case library
3rd DCAMarch 2, 2022Dismissed in part; Affirmed in part⭐ Notable

City of Miami Beach v. Clevelander Ocean, L.P.

Case No. 21-1345

The Third DCA affirmed a temporary injunction barring Miami Beach from enforcing its general noise ordinance against the Clevelander hotel after the City repealed an eastbound noise exemption, holding competent substantial evidence supported the trial court's finding that the hotel had vested rights (zoning estoppel) arising from a Historic Preservation Board order and two conditional use permits setting a decibel limit, plus its $66 million acquisition and $1 million in reliance expenditures. The court dismissed as moot the portion of the appeal challenging the injunction against an alcohol-sales rollback ordinance that had expired by its own terms.

Key facts

  • Miami Beach enacted a general noise ordinance and repealed an eastbound noise exemption that had previously applied to the Clevelander hotel.
  • The Clevelander hotel, which had acquired the property for $66 million and spent $1 million in reliance on a Historic Preservation Board order and conditional use permits setting specific decibel limits, sought to enjoin enforcement of the new ordinance.
  • +2 more key facts with a free trial

Why it matters

A useful Third DCA statement of the zoning/vested-rights estoppel test and, more broadly, of the deferential competent-substantial-evidence review applied to temporary injunctions — counsel defending an injunction can… — full analysis with a trial

🔒 Read the full opinion, holding & search the library

The full opinion PDF, the rules the court applied, our significance analysis, the background facts, and full-text search across every tracked Florida decision are available to members. Start a free 30-day trial — no credit card.

Not ready to sign up? Get the free Friday digest — the week's key Florida decisions by email, no login required.

Florida Court Tracker provides summaries of publicly available court opinions for informational and research purposes only. This is not legal advice and does not create an attorney–client relationship. Always verify holdings against the official opinion.