Local Government Law Symposium
| VOLUME
26 |
Spring 1997
|
NUMBER
3 |
|
Municipal Finance and the Commerce Clause: Are User Fees the Next Target of the "Silver Bullet"?
|
Suellen M. Wolfe |
| Professor Wolfe discusses the possible constitutional challenges that may arise when local governments impose user fees as a method for raising revenue. She presents an overview of municipal finance and user fees, addresses constitutional limitations on user fees, and focuses upon potential Commerce Clause challenges. Professor Wolfe concludes that user fees are vulnerable to discrimination claims, and that they are in jeopardy if local governments are not careful in properly documenting the measure of their user fees. |
|
|
|
Capacity Sharing: The Next Step in Florida's Evolving Water Economy
|
Alexander Rhodes |
| Mr. Rhodes' Article focuses on the evolution of Florida's water economy from a groundwater perspective, using the facts of Harloff v. City of Sarasota, 575 So. 2d 1324 (Fla. 2d Disc. Ct. App. 1991), as a framework. Mr. Rhodes discusses water use in Florida and the common law of groundwater, then proceeds to analyze the Florida Water Resources Act of 1972, and then suggests new approaches to allocating groundwater resources. The Article concludes that these new approaches, known collectively as capacity sharing, will alleviate many of the problems associated with Florida's current water rights allocation system. |
|
|
|
Litter or Literature: Does the First Amendment Protect Littering of Neighborhoods?
|
Stephen Durden, David Ray |
| This Article discusses First Amendment concerns with anti-littering laws, particularly when those laws affect distribution of political speech. Professor Durden and Mr. Ray first identify some of the problems associated with distribution of pamphlets, especially on residential property. They then examine First Amendment free speech implications of distributing literature to property instead of to people. Finally, the Article discusses the Florida Litter Law and other possible solutions to unwanted distribution of literature, along with the legal and political risks associated with those solutions. |
|
|
|
The Harris Act: What Relief from Government Regulation Does It Provide for Private Property Owners?
|
Vivien J. Monaco |
| This Comment examines the Bert J. Harris, Jr. Private Property Rights Protection Act, enacted in 1995, from the perspective of a hypothetical private property owner. Ms. Monaco places the Harris Act remedies within the historical framework of remedies available to property owners, discussing Florida equitable estoppel and federal and Florida takings jurisprudence. This Comment concludes with a discussion of the hypothetical property owner's remedies under the Harris Act as compared with those available under takings and equitable estoppel law. |
|
|
|
Creating Meaning Within a Great Area: Redefining Likelihood of Confusion in Libman Co. v. Vining Industries, Inc.
|
Lee Ann Tranford |
| Ms. Tranford's Note critically analyzes the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeal's decision in Libman Co. v. Vining Industries, Inc., in which the Seventh Circuit invalidated Libman's trademark infringement claims against Vining Industries, finding that no likelihood of confusion existed. The Note discusses how the Seventh Circuit focused on the lack of evidence of actual consumer confusion and neglected the other factors traditionally used in determining whether a likelihood of confusion exists. Ms. Tranford then concludes that the Seventh Circuit improperly shifted from the seven-factor test of likelihood of confusion to a single-factor test of actual consumer confusion. |
|
|
Stetson Law Review • 1401 61st Street South • Gulfport, Florida 33707
phone: (727) 562-7800 ext. 7955 • fax: (727) 347-4873 • lrmarked@law.stetson.edu
|
Gulfport, Florida 33707-3299