FAUD H. HANNA AND MARGARET ALICE HANNA, HIS WIFE
v.
KATE HAVLIN MARTIN, JOINED BY HER HUSBAND, W. WALTER MARTIN
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.
The Florida Supreme Court affirmed a lower court's decision permanently enjoining property owners from allowing their bay fill to encroach upon their neighbors' submerged lands without a bulkhead. The court found no error in the lower court's ruling.
No, the lower court did not err in permanently enjoining the defendants. The fill, without a bulkhead, caused encroachment on the plaintiffs' submerged lands.
“The effect of the fill, in the absence of a bulkhead on [*968] the dividing line of the two parcels of property, caused the appellees' submerged lands to become partially submerged, and will continue so to be unless bulkheaded or the fill removed.”
This quote describes the factual basis for the injunction, highlighting the encroachment caused by the defendants' fill.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe defendants owned property adjacent to the plaintiffs on Biscayne Bay. The defendants filled in approximately 200 feet of the bay eastward from the…
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 Encroachment cases and more on FLexlaw
The plaintiffs and defendants to this suit own adjacent lots situated on the waters of Biscayne Bay. The defendants-appellants’ property is situated north of the plaintiffs-appellees’ property and a five foot easement separates the lots, as the parcels are located in different subdivisions. The appellants extended their lot eastward into Biscayne Bay by filling in some 200 feet but failed to bulkhead the fill on the south boundary line, which is the north boundary line of appellees property. The effect of the fill, in the absence of a bulkhead on *968the dividing line of the two parcels of property, caused the appellees’ submerged lands to become partially submerged, and will continue so to be unless bulkheaded or the fill removed.
The plaintiffs-appellees obtained a restraining order against further encroachment by the defendants-appellants and on final hearing the temporary restraining order was made permanent and the defendants below appealed. We have studied the record, examined the briefs of counsel and heard oral argument at the bar of this Court, and we fail to find error in the record. See Holland v. Ft. Pierce Financing & Const. Co. 157 Fla. 649, 27 So. (2nd) 76; Freed v. Miami Beach Pier Corp., 93 Fla. 888, 112 So. 841, 52 A.L.R. 1177; Thiesen v. Gulf, F. & A. R. Co., 75 Fla. 28, 78 So. 491, LRA 1918E 718; Sections 27101 and 309.0, F.S.A.
Affirmed.
THOMAS, C.. J., TERRELL and SEBRING, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Amendments to the Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure, 685 So. 2d 773 (Fla. 1996)…eviated forms as shown in this rule should be used if the citation is intended to stand alone either in the text or in footnotes. (a) Florida Supreme Court. (1) 1846-1886: Livingston v. L’Engle, 22 Fla. 427 (1886). (2) 1887-1948: Hanna v. Martin, 160 Fla. 967, 37 So. 2d 579 (1948). (This is the last case for parallel citation.) (3) 1948-date: Fenelon v. State, 594 So. 2d 292 (Fla.1992). (4) For recent opinions not yet published in the Southern Reporter, cite to Florida Law Weekly: Traylor v. State, 17…
-
Hanna v. Martin, 49 So. 2d 585 (Fla. 1950)…1950. Rehearing Denied January 10, 1951. Bell & Bell and Ross Williams, all of Miami, and J. Lewis Hall, Tallahassee, for appellants. Owen W. Pittman, Miami, for appellees. CHAPMAN, Justice. For one phase of this litigation see Hanna v. Martin, 160 Fla. 967, 37 So. 2d 579. As will be shown by the record, this Court on appeal affirmed the final decree entered below. Pertinent portions thereof are viz.: "4. That the portion of the fill constructed by defendants on their submerged lands, which has fallen…
-
Amendments to Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure, 780 So. 2d 834 (Fla. 2000)…eviated forms as shown in this rule should be used if the citation is intended to stand alone either in the text or in footnotes. (a) Florida Supreme Court. (1) 1846-1886: Livingston v. L’Engle, 22 Fla. 427 (1886). (2) 1887-1948: Hanna v. Martin, 160 Fla. 967, 37 So. 2d 579 (1948). (This is the last case for parallel citation.) (32) 1948-date: Fenelon v. State, 594 So. 2d 292 (Fla.1992). (43) For recent opinions not yet published in the Southern Reporter, cite to Florida Law Weekly: Traylor v. State, […
Previewing 3 of 8 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Thiesen v. Gulf, 75 Fla. 28 (Fla. 1917)
- Freed Freed v. Miami Beach Pier Corp., 112 So. 841 (Fla. 1927)
- Spessard L. Holland v. Fort Pierce Fin. & Constr. Co., 157 Fla. 649 (Fla. 1946)