98 So. 3d 1236
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.2012Background
- City of Miami appeals a circuit court order granting a temporary injunction to F.O.P. and its president.
- Circuit court held City Manager could not invoke financial urgency without City Commission action and could proceed before F.O.P. exhausted remedies.
- Statute 447.4095 provides expedited bargaining when financial urgency is invoked and referred disputes to PERC.
- Court vacates injunction, finding lack of irreparable harm, lack of demonstrated likelihood of success, and proper remedies exist at PERC.
- CBA governed by Chapter 447; statute does not require legislative body approval or formalization of financial urgency.
- City Manager has authority under City Charter and CBA to engage in bargaining; dispute would fall under PERC’s jurisdiction.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether temporary injunction was proper. | F.O.P. argued irreparable harm and urgency. | City contends no irreparable harm and urgency prescribes process. | Injunction vacated; no likelihood of irreparable harm shown. |
| Authority to invoke financial urgency without commission action. | F.O.P. claimed unlawful ultra vires action by City Manager. | City asserted managerial authority under charter for invoking urgency. | Ultra vires claim lacks textual support; authority exists. |
| Remedies available to F.O.P. elsewhere. | F.O.P. could pursue PERC unfair labor practice charge after fourteen days. | PERC is the proper forum and timing; circuit court should not intervene. | Remedies at PERC are adequate; circuit court should not have granted injunction. |
Key Cases Cited
- P.M. Realty & Investments, Inc. v. City of Tampa, 779 So.2d 404 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000) (irreparable harm not automatic; need analysis)
- Manatee Educ. Ass’n., FEA, AFT (Local 3821), AFL-CIO v. Sch. Bd. of Manatee Cnty., 62 So.3d 1176 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011) (preemptive PERC jurisdiction for certain disputes)
- Bentley v. State, 411 So.2d 1361 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982) (public interest and legal compliance considerations)
- Cordis Corp. v. Prooslin, 482 So.2d 486 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986) (temporary injunction is extraordinary and drastic)