State Appeals Circuit Judge's Ruling on Local Gun Regulations
Jamie Cole, the lead attorney for local governments challenging the law, said he expects Leon County Circuit ruling to be upheld on appeal.
August 01, 2019 at 01:21 PM
3 minute read
Florida will appeal a circuit judge's ruling that struck down a state law threatening tough penalties for local officials and governments that approve gun regulations.
Attorney General Ashley Moody filed a notice late Tuesday that the state will appeal the ruling by Leon County Circuit Judge Charles Dodson, who found last week that the 2011 law threatening the penalties was unconstitutional.
Asked for a comment Wednesday, Moody's office released a copy of the notice of appeal, which puts a hold on Dodson's ruling. Meanwhile, Agriculture Commissioner Nikki Fried, the only statewide elected Democrat, blasted the decision to appeal.
Fried called the threatened punishments for passing gun regulations “some of the most extreme anywhere in the nation.”
“Our state shouldn't threaten local elected mayors and council members with fines, lawsuits, and removal from office,” Fried said in a statement. “We should restore local democracy and allow communities to consider common-sense local measures that reflect their values.”
Fried, whose Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services handles concealed-weapons licensing in the state, added that the appeal “is not only a waste of taxpayer money and time, but the wrong direction for our state.”
The lawsuit was filed in April 2018, after the mass shooting at Parkland's Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School that killed 17 people and injured 17 others. The school shooting led to widespread calls for gun-control measures, including calls for cities and counties to act.
Florida since 1987 has had what is known as a “preemption” law that prevents local governments from passing gun regulations that are stricter than state firearms laws. In 2011, lawmakers passed another measure that included a series of steps designed to prevent local governments and officials from violating the 1987 law, including imposing penalties of up to $5,000 against officials and potential removal from office.
The law also allowed individuals and groups that successfully challenged local governments over gun regulations to receive damages up to $100,000 and attorney fees.
During arguments last month before Dodson, Daniel Bell, an attorney for the state, said the law prevented a “potential patchwork regulatory scheme” of gun restrictions across Florida.
In his ruling issued late Friday, Dodson found that the 2011 law was unconstitutional, but he did not strike down the underlying 1987 law.
Moody's move to appeal Dodson's ruling to the Tallahassee-based First District Court of Appeal was not a surprise. But a group of local officials in recent days had urged Moody and Gov. Ron DeSantis not to appeal.
The law was challenged by more than 30 local governments, mostly South Florida cities, but also included Orlando, Gainesville and Tallahassee, and Miami-Dade, Broward and Leon counties.
Jamie Cole, the lead attorney for the local governments, said Wednesday he expects Dodson's ruling to be upheld on appeal.
“Judge Dodson's decision was well-reasoned, well-written and supported by decisions from the U.S. Supreme Court, Florida Supreme Court and Florida's district courts of appeal,” Cole said in a statement.
Jim Turner reports for the News Service of Florida.
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 AllCOVID-19 Death Suit Against Nursing Home Sent to State Court, 11th Circuit Affirms
Year-End Tax Planning: How Real Estate Investors Can Leverage Qualified Opportunity Funds
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1The Pusillanimous Press
- 2Contract Lifecycle Management Company ContractPodAi Unveils Leah Drive
- 3'Great News' for Businesses? Judge Halts Transparency Mandate
- 4Consilio Announces ‘Native AI Review,’ Expanding Its Gen AI E-Discovery Offerings
- 5Federal Judge Hits US With $227,000 Sanction for Discovery Misconduct
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