Jacksonville Property Rights Association, Inc., et al v. City of Jacksonville, Florida, No. 12-11197 (11th Cir. 2012)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 12-11197 Date Filed: 11/13/2012 Page: 1 of 3 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ________________________ No. 12-11197 Non-Argument Calendar ________________________ D.C. Docket No. 3:05-cv-01267-MMH-JRK JACKSONVILLE PROPERTY RIGHTS ASSOCIATION, INC., a Florida non-profit corporation, HORTON ENTERPRISES, INC., a Florida corporation, d.b.a. The New Solid Gold, HARTSOCK ENTERPRISES, INC., a Florida corporation, d.b.a. Doll House, llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiffs - Appellants, E.M.R.O. CORPORATION, INC., etc., et al., lllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiffs, versus CITY OF JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA, a Florida municipal corporation, llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellee. Case: 12-11197 Date Filed: 11/13/2012 Page: 2 of 3 ________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida ________________________ (November 13, 2012) Before TJOFLAT, MARCUS and KRAVITCH, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: In Jacksonville Property Rights Ass'n, Inc. v. City of Jacksonville, 635 F.3d 1266, 1277 (11th Cir. 2011), we dismissed the parties' appeals, vacated the District Court s judgment, and remanded the case to the District Court with instructions to dismiss this action. Following the issuance of our mandate, appellants moved the District Court for leave to amend their complaint and for other relief. The District Court, following the mandate rule, see Piambino v. Bailey, 757 F.2d 1112, 1120 (11th Cir. 1985), dismissed the case1, reserv[ing] jurisdiction to consider any timely filed motions for attorneys fees and costs. Appellants now appeal the District Court s ruling. The District Court did precisely what our mandate instructed it to do, i.e., dismiss the action. We accordingly affirm. 1 We construe the dismissal to be without prejudice, since the basis for our disposition of the parties appeals was that the case was moot. 2 Case: 12-11197 Date Filed: 11/13/2012 AFFIRMED. 3 Page: 3 of 3
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
