Ultra Music Festival's 2019 Edition Hangs in Balance in Miami Courtroom
Miami-Dade Circuit Judge Rodolpho Ruiz is holding a hearing on the Brickell Homeowners Association's emergency motion for temporary injunction against the city of Miami. The suit alleges officials circumvented the law in granting Ultra the use of publicly owned Virginia Key through a license agreement, as opposed to a lease.
March 15, 2019 at 02:39 PM
4 minute read
Ultra Music Festival's 2019 show might face its final obstacle Friday in Miami-Dade Circuit Court.
Miami-Dade Circuit Judge Rodolfo Ruiz is scheduled hear the Brickell Homeowners Association and Miami resident Christopher Mullin's case against the city of Miami over Ultra's use of Virginia Key as a venue.
According to the plaintiffs attorney, Miami litigator David Winker, the city flouted its own laws in order to shorten the process by which public property is granted for private use.
“[Miami officials] want to have a lease, but they're calling it a license because a lease requires competitive bidding,” Winker said.
The office of Miami City Attorney Victoria Mendez declined to comment, citing a policy of not commenting on pending litigation.
In an emergency motion for temporary injunction, the plaintiffs allege the city misrepresented its agreement with Ultra to circumvent time-consuming bureaucratic procedures and limit the time in which concerned citizens could speak out against the deal.
Winker characterized the situation as “what happens when a city goes rogue” and claimed that just two weeks out from the festival, Miami officials and Ultra have yet to announce firm details about how they will transport revelers from Virginia Key.
“We don't have any assurances the city is enforcing the agreement,” Winker said. “This case is about more than environmentally sensitive Virginia Key being a completely inappropriate venue for Ultra. It's about residents having the right to be governed by the rule of law.”
The plaintiffs' March 10 motion for a temporary injunction contends they “are not asking the court for an injunction preventing Ultra from conducting a concert on Virginia Key on the scheduled dates,” or ”asking the court to force the City of Miami to competitively bid a lease with Ultra,” per the city charter.
Read the emergency motion for temporary injunction:
“Rather, plaintiffs are requesting the court to enter a temporary prohibitory injunction enjoining the city of Miami from utilizing the license agreement in its present form to make Virginia Key available to Ultra,” the filing reads. “Plaintiffs do not ask for this extraordinary equitable remedy lightly, but are compelled to do so to preserve the status quo because the license agreement is so clearly a lease, and not a license under established Florida law.”
Although it was not named in the suit, Ultra responded by filing a motion to be added as a defendant or, alternatively, to intervene. The company contended since it ”has the requisite interest in the subject matter” of the suit, it “must be made a party to this action.”
“There can be no real dispute that a final adjudication of plaintiffs' cause of action for declaratory relief will affect [Ultra's] interest, and that any such resolution would be inequitable if [Ultra] is not permitted to participate as a party in the defense of this action,” the motion said, calling Ultra “an indispensable party” to the case.
Scott Ponce, the Holland & Knight attorney who filed Ultra's motion, did not respond to requests for comment. Sandy York and Michael Gaid, Ultra's in-house legal counsel, also did not respond by deadline.
U.S. District Judge Ursula Ungaro on Feb. 15 dismissed an anti-trust lawsuit that concert organizer Rapture Electronic Music Festival filed against Ultra over competing events scheduled for the same days on Virginia Key.
Related stories:
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 AllDivided State Court Reinstates Dispute Over Replacement Vehicles Fees
5 minute readSecond Circuit Ruling Expands VPPA Scope: What Organizations Need to Know
6 minute read'They Got All Bent Out of Shape:' Parkland Lawyers Clash With Each Other
Courts of Appeal Conflicted Over Rule 1.442(c)(3) When Claims for Damages Involve a Husband and Wife
Trending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
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