notebook - Southwest Florida Water Management District

STYLE/CASE NO. COURT ATTORNEY ACTION DESCRIPTION/STATUS
2D11-6317 granted an extension to April 30 to serve their initial brief. The
various defendants filed answer briefs in June, and on June 29,
2012, the District filed a notice of joinder in co-defendant Sun ‘N
Lake Improvement District’s answer brief. The plaintiffs filed their
reply brief on August 24, 2012. Oral argument set for November
27.
Suggs, Danny
Joseph v.
SWFWMD/Case
No. 5D10-3786
Suggs, Gary Dale
v. SWFWMD/Case
N. 5D11-253
29
Fifth District Court of
Appeal
J. Ward Appeal of Sumter County Court’s
Order on Plaintiff’s Post-Judgment
Motion for Determination of
Homestead Property Claimed by
D. J. Suggs
Appeal of Sumter County Court’s
Order on Plaintiff’s Post-Judgment
Motion for Determination of
Homestead Property Claimed by
G. D. Suggs
27
This appeal and the related Gary Suggs appeal arise from a longstanding
enforcement matter concerning approximately 180 acres
of property in Sumter County owned by the Suggs family. After
discovering unauthorized construction activities on the property in
2001, including dredging and filling wetlands without a permit, the
District served an administrative complaint and order in December
2002, and subsequently brought an enforcement proceeding
against the Suggs family in circuit court in 2003. The defendants
pursued a number of appeals over the next few years, after which
the trial proceedings resumed in earnest.
During the trial proceedings, the Suggs asserted an agricultural
exemption defense, which resulted in a formal administrative
hearing in January 2009. Following the administrative proceeding,
the Administrative Law Judge ruled in favor of the District, finding
that the Suggs could not claim the agricultural exemption.
The District thereafter continued the enforcement process in circuit
court. Following a bench trial in May 2009, final judgment was
entered in favor of the District in July 2009, which included the
assessment of substantial penalties against the Suggs defendants.
During proceedings supplementary to satisfy the final judgment, the
District levied on a number of vehicles owned by the Suggs
defendants, and subsequently had the vehicles sold via sheriff’s
auction.
Gary Suggs and Danny Suggs both raised homestead exemptions
to the District’s efforts to force the sale of multiple homes located
on the property at issue. Following a hearing on the homestead
issue, in December 2010, the trial court ruled in favor of the District
on all but one of the homes, declining to rule on the matter until
other matters are resolved on appeal. Gary and Danny Suggs both
appealed the rulings on their homestead claims, and the District
filed its answer briefs in July 2011.
Gary Suggs’s appeal was dismissed by the appellate court due to
his failure to comply with court orders. On June 26, 2012, the
appellate court ruled wholly in favor of the District in Danny Suggs’s
appeal, affirming the trial court’s order below. Settlement
negotiations with the defendants have been fruitful. While a
settlement agreement was being finalized for Board approval,