Outfront Media Group LLC v. The City of Miami Beach, Florida, and IKE Smart City, LLC
Outfront, which contracts with Miami Beach to sell advertising on bus shelters, sued the City and competitor IKE for a declaration that IKE's advertising-kiosk contract violated state and local right-of-way laws, without alleging any violation of its own contractual exclusivity rights. The Third District affirmed dismissal for lack of standing, rejecting a broad 'competitor standing' theory and reading Skaggs-Albertson's v. ABC Liquors narrowly as recognizing special-injury standing only for liquor licensees challenging nearby competitors under distance regulations.
Key facts
- Outfront Media Group LLC, which held a contract with Miami Beach to sell advertising on bus shelters, sued the City and competitor IKE Smart City LLC seeking a declaration that IKE's advertising-kiosk contract violated state and local right-of-way laws.
- Outfront did not allege that IKE's contract violated Outfront's own contractual exclusivity rights, but rather challenged the contract as violating laws not designed to protect Outfront from competition.
- +2 more key facts with a free trial
Why it matters
This is the Third District's most direct statement that Florida does not recognize generalized 'competitor standing' to challenge a government contract or permit granted to a business rival, and it cabins ABC Liquors to… — full analysis with a trial
Read the full opinion, holdings & search — free for 30 days
The full opinion PDF, the rules the court applied, our significance analysis, the background facts, and full-text search across every tracked Florida decision — in your hands.
- Search every tracked Florida decision in seconds
- Save, tag & file the cases that matter into your own library
- Read the full plain-English analysis and holdings
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.