DAMN! Florida State Supreme Court Upholds $165K Code Fines For Parking On Grass, Cracked Driveway

"Cities shouldn't be allowed to wreck lives over trivial violations," Sandy Martinez said.

The Florida Supreme Court has ended a years-long legal battle, declining to review a homeowner’s case involving more than $165,000 in municipal fines for minor property infractions.

The decision, finalized in late December 2025, leaves in place lower court rulings that supported the City of Lantana’s ability to levy six-figure penalties for non-safety-related code violations.

Sandy Martinez, a longtime Lantana resident and single mother, challenged the fines as unconstitutionally excessive. The fines stem primarily from a city ordinance that prohibits parking on one’s own lawn. Because Martinez shares her home with three working adults—all of whom require vehicles for employment—cars were frequently parked in the driveway with tires resting slightly on the grass, she said.

In the city of Lantana, this resulted in a $250 daily fine, which quickly compounded into a staggering $101,750 for the parking violation alone.

According to legal filings, the penalties accrued over 407 days of continuous violations. The filing clarified that Martinez was physically unable to park on the street because the neighborhood lacks curbs and the “roadways in front of and beside the house are only wide enough to handle two-way neighborhood traffic.”

The legal history of the dispute dates back to May 6, 2019, when Martinez was cited for parking on an “unapproved surface/grass/walkway.”

Because of minor infractions in the past, the city treated her as a repeat offender. Following a hearing on June 20, 2019, she was deemed in violation, triggering the $250 daily penalty until she could prove total compliance with the city’s rules.

Martinez reportedly attempted to resolve the issue early on. According to her legal team at the Institute for Justice (IJ), she sought a compliance inspection to prove the vehicles had been moved. However, the filing states that “getting code enforcement officials on the phone… was fruitless,” leading her to assume the matter was eventually settled.

The gravity of the situation surfaced during a routine attempt to refinance her home. Upon inquiry, an administrative assistant for the city discovered the fines had never stopped. “I noticed the fines were still accruing and I asked a code officer to go out and re-inspect the property,” the assistant reportedly noted in correspondence dated June 16, 2020.

“He noted the property was in compliance and stopped the fines as of today.”

By then, the “meter” had run for over a year on a problem that had already been fixed.

While Florida’s homestead exemption prevents the city from foreclosing on her primary residence, the massive lien effectively strips Martinez of all home equity. This financial encumbrance makes it practically impossible to sell the property or relocate, as any proceeds would be seized to satisfy the city’s demand.

“Six-figure fines for parking on your own property are shocking,” said Ari Bargil, Senior Attorney at the Institute for Justice. “The Florida Constitution’s Excessive Fines Clause was designed to stop precisely this sort of abuse—to prevent people from being fined into poverty for trivial violations.”

The Institute for Justice argued the case was a vital opportunity for the state’s highest court to clarify the “Excessive Fines Clause,” which has not seen a major interpretive ruling in Florida for over a century. By declining jurisdiction, the court allows the Fourth District Court of Appeal’s prior ruling to stand. That court held the fines were not “grossly disproportionate” because the total was determined by the length of time the violation persisted rather than by the nature of the infraction itself.

“It’s outrageous that the Florida Supreme Court won’t consider whether the constitution protects Floridians from ruinous fines,” Martinez said. “Cities shouldn’t be allowed to wreck lives over trivial violations.”

This video provides early coverage of the lawsuit and the Institute for Justice’s initial arguments that these fines were unconstitutional.