DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATION, STATE OF FLORIDA, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, APPELLANT,
v.
DADE COUNTY, A POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Florida's Department of Transportation sought to acquire Dade County land through statutory quick-taking without providing the required good faith estimate of value based on a valid appraisal. The court affirmed the trial court's rejection of this procedure, holding that the quick-take statute requires a good faith estimate of value before taking possession.
The court held that the quick-take statute clearly requires a good faith estimate of value based on a valid appraisal before a taking entity can obtain possession and title. The procedure of taking possession and title while forcing the owner to seek compensation afterward is contrary to the underlying rationale of the quick-take statute and is therefore impermissible.
[1] A statutory quick-taking procedure requires a petitioner to file a declaration of taking including a good faith estimate of value based upon a valid appraisal.
[2] A petitioner in a statutory quick-taking proceeding must deposit a sum not less than the good faith estimate into the court registry to be vested with title.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“By that abbreviated proceeding, specified public bodies are entitled to take possession and title in advance of final judgment in eminent domain actions by filing a declaration of taking, included in which must be a "good faith estimate of value, based upon a valid appraisal of each parcel . . ."”
Establishes the statutory requirement for a good faith estimate based on valid appraisal as a prerequisite to quick-taking
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe Department of Transportation sought to acquire land owned by Dade County using the statutory quick-taking procedure under Chapter 74, Florida Stat…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Good Faith Estimate Of Value cases and more on FLexlaw
HENDRY, Judge.
Appellant, Division of Administration, State of Florida Department of Transportation, seeks acquisition of land owned by appellee, Dade County, by statutory quick-taking. Ch. 74, Fla.Stat. (1979).
By that abbreviated proceeding, specified public bodies are entitled to take possession and title in advance of final judgment in eminent domain actions by filing a declaration of taking, included in which must be a “good faith estimate of value, based upon a valid appraisal of each parcel . . .” § 74.031, Fla.Stat. (1979).
If and when the court determines that the petitioner is entitled to possession prior to final judgment, deposit must be made into the registry of the court of a sum, not less than the good faith estimate mentioned, representing full recompense for the taking. § 74.051, Fla. Stat. (1979).
Upon making the deposit, the petitioner is vested with title. § 74.061, Fla.Stat. (1979).
Appellant seeks to further abbreviate this procedure by declaring that it may take the subject property without compensation in any way whatever to appellee Dade County. This declaration is based upon the assertion that Article X, Section 6 of the Florida Constitution (1968) mandates compensation only for takings of private, i. e. non-gov-ernmentally-owned, property; and by reference to treatises and foreign caselaw. Since the present use by the county of the parent parcel would not be reduced by the taking, suggests appellant, appellee Dade County cannot point to a prospective loss for which it should be compensated.
Whatever the merits of that.contention, they will be fully aired in the trial court, and, no doubt, on appeal.
However, the ruling appealed relates to the absence of a good faith estimate of value, based upon a valid appraisal. Appellant’s original offer to appellee, which was based upon its own estimate of the parcel’s market value, was in excess of $50,000. That offer was revoked, and replaced with the assertion outlined above. That assertion appears to us to be little more than an exercise in boot-straping: Appellant seeks to put itself into possession, with title, while forcing appellee to seek compensation subsequent to dispossession.
We hold such a procedure to be clearly adverse to the underlying rationale of the quick-take statute, and therefore affirm the similar finding of the trial court.
Affirmed.