an Order finding that both types of violations set forth in the NOV had occurred.
That decision could have been appealed to the Circuit Court Appellate Division, but was not. §24-11, Miami-Dade County Code That decision is now
with respect to this matter.
Holiday Inns, Inc. v. City of Jacksonville,
678 So.2d 528 (Fla. 1 DCA 1996);
University of Miami v. Zepeda,
674 So.2d 765 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996);
See, Miami-Dade County v. Fernandez,
905 So.2d 213 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005). This Court is now faced with the
Motion for Preliminary Injunctive Relief wherein the County is moving the Court for an Order granting injunctive relief concerning the two violations enumerated. Typically, injunctions require the Court to conduct an evidentiary hearing and make findings. In this matter, however, the Court has two administrative determinations that the violations have occurred and those determinations are binding on this Court under the doctrine of administrative
. For all purposes, the fact that the violations have occurred has been determined adverse to Mr. Dubois. In light the administrative determinations that the violations have occurred, this Court must decide if a preliminary injunction is appropriate. Preliminary injunctions in code enforcement matters have a much reduced burden in terms of what the government must prove in order to be entitled to the injunction.
Miami-Dade County v. Fernandez,
905 So.2d 213 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005);
Metropolitan Dade County
660 So.2d 364 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995). In general, where there is a clear showing of a violation of the police power, the government is entitled to relief.
[T]he county and its citizens have a clear
This Court notes that during the testimony before the EQCB, Mr. Dubois presented an expert witness, Stephen Carney, who testified that it was his professional opinion that Mr. Dubois did commit the violations he is accused of committing.