Told Their Treehouse Must Go, Owners Appeal to Supreme Court
Lynn Tran and Richard Hazen built a Florida beachfront treehouse that would be the envy of any child. It's got two levels, hammocks and windows looking out on the Gulf of Mexico.
January 08, 2018 at 04:22 PM
4 minute read
|
Lynn Tran and Richard Hazen built a Florida beachfront treehouse that would be the envy of any child. It's got two levels, hammocks and windows looking out on the Gulf of Mexico.
But the hangout has cost the couple a handsome sum: about $30,000 to construct and probably five times that in legal fees as they've fought local authorities over it, Tran said. Now, they're at their last stop, the U.S. Supreme Court. Unless the high court intervenes, the treehouse must be torn down.
The justices had their first opportunity to consider taking the case at a closed-door conference Friday, and a decision on whether they will weigh in could come this week.
The couple's lawyer, David Levin, acknowledges the case is unlikely to be accepted by the justices, who only hear argument in about 80 of the thousands of cases they're asked to take each year. But he argues that his clients' rights were violated when a Florida court “rubber-stamped” a ruling proposed by the city of Holmes Beach without any evidence of independent consideration.
Tran and Hazen haven't been willing to give up on the structure she calls their “getaway.”
“Part of me still believes there's got to be justice out there and we didn't do anything wrong,” Tran said in a telephone interview.
Tran and her husband run a rental property called Angelinos Sea Lodge on Anna Maria Island on Florida's west coast. They have a house on their property and four rental units.
Before they began constructing the treehouse around an Australian Pine on their property in 2011, Hazen asked the city whether they needed a permit. The answer: No.
So, with some help from the internet, Tran dreamed up the structure, which took six months to build.
Soon, however, the city got an anonymous complaint about the treehouse. After an investigation, the city found the couple did actually need to go through the permitting process. And it turns out the treehouse was in an area where building is prohibited because of a city setback. The couple hoped to get around that by having local voters weigh in, but courts told them no.
Holmes Beach Mayor Bob Johnson noted in a telephone interview that courts have sided with the city and he called the continued legal wrangling “quite honestly a waste of time.”
“For some reason these people have this fixation on it,” he said.
Tran says she never expected such a drawn-out fight and that in hindsight the couple could have taken the money they've spent on the treehouse, gone somewhere else and built an actual house.
It's still costing the couple. They're accumulating a $50 a day fine for not taking down the treehouse, a fine that's now tens of thousands of dollars.
Tran says she's afraid to think about it. Until the high court acts, she's enjoying the treehouse on sunny days, meditating there or napping in a hammock. The couple doesn't have any children of their own enjoying the treehouse and renters aren't allowed up for liability reasons, but Tran says guests and beachgoers often admire the structure.
“It's kind of fun to have around,” she said.
If the treehouse ultimately has to go, there's a lurking irony for the couple. To take down the structure, they'll need the one thing they didn't have before they began putting it up: a city permit.
Jessica Gresko reports for the Associated Press.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllFlorida Supreme Court Paves Way for Attorney Fees Over $100k in Land Dispute
Miami’s Arbitration Week Aims To Cement City’s Status as Dispute Destination
3 minute readHit Song Ignites Multimillion-Dollar Legal Battle in South Florida
Ex-Big Law Attorney Disbarred for Defrauding $1 Million of Client Money
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Judge Denies Sean Combs Third Bail Bid, Citing Community Safety
- 2Republican FTC Commissioner: 'The Time for Rulemaking by the Biden-Harris FTC Is Over'
- 3NY Appellate Panel Cites Student's Disciplinary History While Sending Negligence Claim Against School District to Trial
- 4A Meta DIG and Its Nvidia Implications
- 5Deception or Coercion? California Supreme Court Grants Review in Jailhouse Confession Case
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250