Law Dismantling Miami-Dade County Expressway Ruled Unconstitutional
Leon Circuit Court Judge John Cooper ruled the Florida Legislature overstepped the state Constitution by enacting a bill only affecting Miami-Dade County by dismantling the Miami-Dade County Expressway, or MDX.
August 09, 2019 at 05:52 PM
2 minute read
Reports of the Miami-Dade County Expressway’s death have been greatly exaggerated.
The controversial toll agency, also known as MDX, was granted a new lease on life Friday, following a ruling by Leon Circuit Court Judge John Cooper.
Cooper, who was presiding over a legal challenge brought by MDX against the Florida Legislature for enacting a bill which dissolved and replaced the toll board, declared the transportation organization’s forced dismantling unconstitutional.
The judge based his ruling in part on the home-rule powers afforded to Miami-Dade County in the Florida Constitution, which prohibit the state Legislature from authoring laws that only affect Miami-Dade.
“Look, home rule as it relates to Miami-Dade County is unique to Miami-Dade County,” Cooper said. “It’s special. It’s different. I recognize all that. But it’s in the Constitution.”
The litigation arose over Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis’ signing of HB385 on July 3. The law provided for the dismantling of MDX, and for a new toll agency, the Greater Miami Expressway Agency, to assume its duties.
MDX was represented in Leon Circuit Court by Stearns Weaver shareholder Eugene Stearns, who did not return requests for comment by press time.
A statement released Friday by Miami-Dade County Mayor Carlos Gimenez said Cooper’s decision marked “a great day for the residents of Miami-Dade County and our constitutional right for home rule.”
“When Gov. Ron DeSantis signed this bill into law on July 3, it was a clear violation of the Florida Constitution’s ‘home rule’ protection of Miami-Dade County’s authority to manage its affairs, including our roadways,” the mayor said.
Gimenez added the Florida Legislature “overreached” with the law, and asked DeSantis “to abide by the ruling, and urge the House of Representatives to skip an appeal.”
“Justice prevailed today, thanks to Judge Cooper’s legal clarity,” he said. “Let’s put aside our differences and start moving forward. Our residents are counting on us.”
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This content has been archived.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