The Daily Business Review publishes case summaries when available.
Publish date: October 4, 2001
1.
Voyeuristic Tampa Web site located elsewhere for zoning purposes.
11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals
Case No. 00-16346
Decision date: Sept. 21, 2001
A Web site known as voyeurdorm.com, which films the lives of 25 to 30 women living in a Tampa residence and which generated $3,166,551.35 between August 1998 and June 2000, did not fall within the purview of a city zoning code prohibiting public offerings of adult entertainment within the city because its audience did not physically go either to that specific address, "or congregate anywhere in Tampa to enjoy the entertainment," held the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. "Rather," the court added, "the public offering occurs over the internet in ‘virtual space.’"
The city had argued that the code did not expressly require that consumption take place at that premises, where the women were employed and where filming occurred. However, "As a practical matter," the reversing appeals court added, "zoning restrictions are indelibly anchored in particular geographic locations." The zoning code, therefore, did not apply.
Voyeur Dorm, L.C., a Florida limited
liability company, Entertainment Network, Inc., a Florida corporation, et al.,
Plaintiffs-Appellants
Dan Marshlack, Sharon Gold Marshlack, Plaintiffs, v. City of Tampa, FL, a Florida municipal corporation, Defendant-Appellee
Tjoflat, Dubina and Duhe*, Circuit Judges.
*John M. Duhe, Jr., U.S. Circuit Judge for the Fifth Circuit, sitting by designation.
Publish date: October 3, 2001
1.
Class properly certified for claims of Allstate's alleged payment failures.
Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal
Case No. 3D00-1966
Decision date: Sept. 12, 2001.
A trial court did not abuse its discretion when it granted class certification and class representative status to a man who alleged that his personal injury protection (PIP) insurer had unlawfully declined to pay 80% of his medical bills without first obtaining either an independent medical examination report or a record review that justified the reduced payment, the Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal ruled.The man also alleged that Allstate failed to pay statutory interest after declining to provide PIP benefit payments within 30 days of receiving notice of the loss. Allstate had admitted liability to the man individually, and even tendered a check, but the man refused it on the grounds that the carrier had not included necessary interest. A trial court later granted the man's motion for class certification. During the pendency of the appeal, Allstate offered to pay the man an additional amount, but he also declined that too. Upholding both the certification and the appointment of the man as class representative, the appeals court explained that even if Allstate were to pay the insured's claim in full after the class was certified, he would still be able to proceed as representative on behalf of the absent class members. "Although the insurer may recognize that it has made errors and may them try to correct them prior to class certification… it cannot simply try to 'pick off' the named class representative," the court said.
Allstate Indemnity Co., Appellant v. Leandro De La Rosa, Appellee
Before Jorgenson and Gersten, JJ., and Nesbitt, Senior Judge.
Not final until time expires to file rehearing motion and, if filed, disposed of.
20 percent rule not enough to support nationwide preliminary injunction.
2.
11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals
Case No. 00-15378
Decision date: September 17, 2001
A Florida federal district court abused its discretion in a copyright infringement case when it granted a nationwide preliminary injunction to four major television network stations and stayed a satellite company from providing distant network signals to certain "served" residences allegedly in violation of their rights under the Satellite Home Viewer Improvement Act and in violation of the networks' copyrights, the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled. The appeals court found error in the district court's application of the "twenty percent" rule, by which it extrapolated from five markets to draw conclusions about 230 markets, nationwide. Vacating the injunction the circuit court said, "We cannot sustain the drastic remedy of a nationwide preliminary injunction on a record as sparse as this."
CBS Broadcasting, Inc., Fox Broadcasting Co., ABC, Inc., National Broadcasting Co., FBC Television Affiliates Association, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees v. Echostar Communication Corp., d.b.a. DISH Network, Echostar Satellite Corp., Satellite Communications Operating Corp., Direct Sat Corp., Defendants-Appellants
United States of America, Intervenor.
Echostar Communication Corp., a Nevada Corporation, Plaintiff-Counter-Defendant-Appellant, Echostar Satellite Corp., a Colorado corporation, Satellite Communications Operating Corp., a Colorado corporation Direct Sat Corp., a Delaware corporation, Plaintiffs-Appellants v. CBS Broadcasting Inc., a New York corporation, Fox Broadcasting, Co., a California corporation, National Broadcasting Co., a New York corporation, ABC, Inc., a New York corporation, Defendants-Counter-Claimants-Appellees, United States of America,
Intervenor.
Before Anderson, Chief Judge, Birch and Wood*, Circuit Judges.
*Harlington Wood, Jr., U.S. Circuit Judge for the Seventh Circuit, sitting by designation.
3.
Florida speech statute unconstitutional, after applied to anti-Semitic mail.
Florida 4th District Court of Appeal
Case No. 4D00-2630
Decision date: Sept. 19, 2001
Section 836.11 of the Florida statutes, which prohibits publications that tend to expose people to hatred, contempt or ridicule, and which was applied to someone sending anonymous anti-Semitic inter-office mail to county board members, was unconstitutional as impermissibly content-based, overbroad and vague, the Florida 4th District Court of Appeal held. The appeals court affirmed the lower court's finding that the statute was facially invalid and its dismissal of the criminal information that had been filed against the defendant who was arrested after admitting to detectives that he wrote the letter.
State of Florida, Appellant
v.
Lloyd Shank, Appellee.
Gunther, Farmer and Taylor, JJ., concur.
Not final until the disposition of any timely filed motion for rehearing.
|
Law.com Home
