TAMPA SOUTHERN RAILROAD COMPANY, A CORPORATION, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR,
v.
FRED W. PLEDGER AND ESSEL STAGG BACHAM, DEFENDANTS IN ERROR
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 condemnation judgment for a railway right-of-way, finding no error in the jury's award and denying a motion for a writ of assistance.
No, the Florida Supreme Court found no error in the condemnation judgment and affirmed it. The court also denied the railroad's motion for a writ of assistance.
“The contention of the plaintiff in error that the award of the jury in the condemnation proceedings is excessive we cannot sustain, since the legal proofs in the record would have sustained even a larger award.”
This quote explains the court's reasoning for rejecting the appellant's argument that the jury's award was too high.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceTampa Southern Railroad Company sought a writ of assistance to obtain immediate possession of land condemned for a railway right-of-way, pending a wri…
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 Writ Of Assistance cases and more on FLexlaw
Taylor, J.
— This case is here on writ of error for review of a judgment in condemnation proceedings of land for a railway right-of-way. The cause came on for immediate hearing upon a motion for a writ of assistance from this court to the plaintiff in error to enable it to obtain immediate possession of the land condemned pending the writ of error in this court, the plaintiff in error having deposited the full amount of the judgment or aivard in the registry of the court below. In considering the motion for writ of assistance we have carefully considered the. judgment in the condemnation proceeding, and find no error therein. The contention of the plaintiff in error that the award of the jury in the condemnation proceedings is excessive we cannot sustain, since the legal proofs in the record would have sustained even a larger award.
Finding no error in the record the judgment in the main case, the condemnation proceedings, is hereby affirmed at the cost of the plaintiff in error. The motion for a writ of assistance is hereby denied.
All concur.