Flava Works

Failure to Maintain Exterior of Commercial or Residential Property. Flava Works maintained in response that the property's landscape was well maintained and cleaned.

Failure to maintain lot in safe, clean condition; not allowing accumulation of debris, trash or dense growth of grass. Flava Works maintained that the yard was in good condition.

Illegally operating a business in a residential zone. Flava Works responded that the company was not operating a business at the property; all business activities and Internet servers are located off-site.

On August 13, 2007, and after "three acrimonious public meetings … in sessions going past midnight, Miami's Code Enforcement Board ruled that Flava Works was "illegally running an adult entertainment business out of a single-family home … and ordered that those operations cease.

However, Flava Works filed a lawsuit against the City of Miami in response to the verdict, invoking First Amendment rights and arguing that it was not running an adult-oriented business out of the "House Next Door". Flava Works also argued that business transactions do not take place in a residential neighborhood in Miami, but rather in virtual space. The case attracted some interest in legal circles.

Ruling on the case was made in January 2009, when Judge Marcia G. Cooke of the United States District Court, Southern District of Florida, Miami Division, ruled in favor of Flava Works. She based her judgment on the precedent of a very similar case involving a heterosexual porn site, "Voyeur Dorm", operating webcams in a Tampa, Florida, residence. The judge ruling on the Voyeur Dorm case came to the conclusion that the residence provided no "offer[ing] [of adult entertainment] to members of the public". The offering occurs when the videotaped images are dispersed over the internet and into the public eye for consumption.

Cooke agreed, writing on the CocoDorm: "Because the public offering by Flava Works, Inc. occurs via cocodorm.com in cyberspace, and not in a particular geographic location, the City of Miami zoning ordinance cannot be applied to the 503 residence. Furthermore,

the servers necessary to transmit the live and recorded video feeds to subscribers are not housed in either the 503 residence or the North Miami avenue business office. Here, although the performers are paid to be at the residence and captured on video, the processing and transmitting of the resulting images is done at a different location; a location not at issue in this case.

Cooke's decision was featured on NBC 6 on February 3, 2009, in a story entitled, "Porn House Can Stay". The report indicated that the City of Miami's intended to appeal the decision.

The city appealed, and in June 2010 the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that regardless of whether the CocoDorm was an adult entertainment establishment, it was a business operation, and Miami zoning ordinances forbid operating a business in a residential zone. The court distinguished the Voyeur Dorm case by pointing out that the latter involved a Tampa ordinance against adult entertainment establishments, not business operations in general.