Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
4 canonical passages across 3 cases, quoted by 13 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Panama City v. State.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Panama City v. State Anchor | green | “the development of the law in this state on this question and particularly a study of the legislative history with relation to public projects of a recreational and entertainment nature reveals the allowance to the public bodies of an extremely wide latitude in this field.” | 4 |
| 2 | Islamorada, Village of Islands v. Higgs | green | “ad valorem tax exemption when the marina serves both residents and nonresidents, despite (1) operating in competition with other marinas in the area and (2) generating a profit for the municipality.” | 3 |
| 3 | Islamorada, Village of Islands v. Higgs | green | “is a recreational facility that is available to residents and nonresidents and is operated without the involvement of a non-governmental lessee or operator.” | 3 |
| 4 | Fla. Dept. of Rev. v. City of Gainesville | green | “a separate and more restrictive test” | 3 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.