Eminent Domain Proceedings

250 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Transwestern Pipeline Co. v. A Right-of-Way for a Gas Transmission Pipeline in Sections 10
  418 F.2d 15· 5th Cir.· 1969-10-30 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the trial court erred in accepting the Commissioners' award because it was based on inadmissible evidence of sales to parties with eminent domain power, and the findings on damages to the remainder were insufficiently detailed.
• United States v. Meyer
  398 F.2d 66· 9th Cir.· 1968-07-17 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the government's broad attempt to prevent discovery of its appraisers' opinions and the basis for those opinions in a condemnation case was improper. The court also held that striking the declaration of taking and order for possession was an inappropriate sanc
• Brautigam v. MacVICAR
  73 So. 2d 863· Fla.· 1954-07-06 ·cited 20×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed a declaratory judgment decree approving a contract between the City of Miami and the Dade County Port Authority for seaport development, holding that the suit presented no actual adversarial controversy as required by the declaratory judgment st
• United States v. COX
  190 F.2d 293· 10th Cir.· 1951-06-21 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the value of privately owned land taken by eminent domain should include the enhancement in value derived from the availability of adjacent public lands for grazing, even if those public lands were to be used for the taking project.
• Inland Waterway Dev. Co. v. City OF Jacksonville
  160 Fla. 913· Fla.· 1948-10-29 ·cited 20×
  The Florida Supreme Court rejected a mootness argument raised by a defendant in an eminent domain proceeding, holding that substantial compliance with statutory payment requirements was satisfied where the condemnor paid the jury-awarded compensation into court within the statuto
• Murray v. United States
  130 F.2d 442· D.C. Cir.· 1942-07-20 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the jury's valuation was not inadequate, and any errors in admitting evidence or allowing the jury to view a transcript were not prejudicial.
• Broward Cnty. v. Bharat Patel
  641 So. 2d 40· Fla.· 1994-05-19 ·cited 18×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that in eminent domain proceedings involving severance damages, evidence that future zoning variances could mitigate losses is admissible, but only if the party demonstrates a reasonable probability the variance will be granted, and the evidence mus
• Nat'l R.R. Passenger Corp. v. ONE 25
  766 F.2d 685· 2d Cir.· 1985-06-27 ·cited 18×
  The court held that submitting the issue of property access to the jury in an eminent domain case was an error, as it is a legal question for the judge to determine.
• Ga. Power Co. v. 138.30 Acres OF Land
  596 F.2d 644· 5th Cir.· 1979-06-06 ·cited 18×
  The court held that landowners are not constitutionally guaranteed a jury trial in eminent domain proceedings, and while a commission may be appointed, its findings must be detailed and adequately explained, which was not the case here.
• City OF Miami Beach v. Manilow
  253 So. 2d 910· Fla. 3d DCA· 1971-10-26 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in awarding costs and attorney's fees in an eminent domain proceeding, finding ample basis in the record and relevant statutes.
• United States v. An Easement & Right OF WAY 200 Feet Wide & 3
  405 F.2d 305· 6th Cir.· 1968-12-26 ·cited 18×
  The court held that evidence of comparable sales, even if not perfectly similar or occurring after the taking, is admissible and should be considered for its weight, and that apprehension of harm from power lines can affect market value for incidental damages.
• Jacksonville Expressway Auth. v. Bennett
  124 So. 2d 307· Fla. 1st DCA· 1960-11-15 ·cited 18×
  In an eminent domain proceeding to acquire land for the Jacksonville Expressway, the trial court granted new trials to property owners after jury verdicts below the Authority's filed estimates of value. The appellate court reversed, holding that the Authority's estimates were not
• United States v. Mahowald
  209 F.2d 751· 8th Cir.· 1954-01-21 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the stipulation agreeing to the trial date as the 'time of taking' for valuation purposes did not constitute an actual taking of the property, and therefore, interest on the award should not accrue from the trial date but from the later date of the government'
• The Fla. Cent. & Peninsular R.R. Co. v. Bear
  43 Fla. 319· Fla.· 1901-06-01 ·cited 18×
  The Florida Supreme Court dismissed a railroad company's writ of error because the company failed to pay the compensation awarded to a landowner for condemned land. This failure rendered the condemnation proceedings null and void, leaving nothing for the appellate court to review
• Pierpont v. LEE Cnty.
  710 So. 2d 958· Fla.· 1998-03-12 ·cited 17×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that a condemning authority's good-faith estimate of value in eminent domain proceedings does not constitute a "written offer" for purposes of calculating attorney's fees under section 73.092, Florida Statutes. The Court rejected landowners' argumen
• Lovett v. The City OF Jacksonville Beach
  187 So. 2d 96· Fla. 1st DCA· 1966-06-02 ·cited 17×
  Property owner W. R. Lovett appealed a condemnation judgment awarding compensation for his reversionary fee interest in property taken by Jacksonville Beach. The court found it lacked jurisdiction to review the March 17, 1965 judgment because the appeal was untimely, and upheld t
• United States v. Certain Interests IN Prop. IN Champaign Cnty.
  271 F.2d 379· 7th Cir.· 1959-10-21 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the federal government can condemn a leasehold interest subject to a mortgage under federal eminent domain law, and that the district court erred in applying state law to the contrary. The court also affirmed the compensation award amount.
• Edwards v. Miami Shores Vill.
  40 So.2d 360· Fla.· 1949-04-29 ·cited 17×
  This case concerns an appeal from an order granting a new trial in an eminent domain proceeding. The appellate court reversed the order, holding that the trial court abused its discretion by granting a new trial when there was substantial competent evidence to support the jury's
• City OF Madison v. Bear Creek Water Ass'n, Inc.
  816 F.2d 1057· 5th Cir.· 1987-05-15 ·cited 16×
  7 U.S.C. § 1926(b) prohibits municipal condemnation of water association facilities financed by the FmHA during the term of the loan.
• State v. Gables-By-The-Sea, Inc.
  374 So. 2d 582· Fla. 3d DCA· 1979-08-07 ·cited 16×
  The State of Florida appealed a trial court's award of $850,000 in attorneys' fees to the property owner in an inverse condemnation proceeding involving a taking of coastal property. The appellate court affirmed the determination that condemnation became imminent on January 18, 1
• Dade Cnty. v. Oolite Rock Co.
  348 So. 2d 902· Fla. 3d DCA· 1977-06-28 ·cited 16×
  Dade County appeals an attorney's fee award of $29,000 to Oolite Rock Company in an eminent domain case, arguing it is excessive. The appellate court agrees, finding the fee unreasonable given the nature and type of legal work performed, and reduces the award to $14,000.
• Jones v. City OF Tallahassee
  266 So. 2d 382· Fla. 1st DCA· 1972-09-19 ·cited 16×
  Petitioners challenged a city's eminent domain decision to route an electric transmission line across their property, claiming the city acted in bad faith and abused its discretion. The court upheld the city's decision, holding that a public body's determination of necessity in e
• State Rd. Dep't of Fla. v. Outlaw
  148 So. 2d 741· Fla. 1st DCA· 1963-01-22 ·cited 16×
  In this eminent domain appeal, the State Road Department and Okaloosa County challenged a post-judgment order awarding expert witness fees of $1,280.00 to an appraiser who testified about property values. The court held that while the witness was properly qualified as an expert,
• Ga. Power Co. v. 54.20 Acres OF Land
  563 F.2d 1178· 5th Cir.· 1977-11-28 ·cited 15×
  The dissenting judge argues that state law, not federal common law, should govern the measure of compensation in a federal eminent domain action brought by a licensee under the Federal Power Act, as there is no significant federal interest to displace state law.
• Murphy v. United States Dist. Court for N. Dist. of Cal.
  145 F.2d 1018· 9th Cir.· 1944-12-02 ·cited 15×
  A federal judge has discretion to grant a new trial in an eminent domain case, and state procedural statutes limiting this discretion do not apply.
• Cnty. OF Volusia v. W.R. Pickens & Cont'l Ins. Co.
  439 So. 2d 276· Fla. 5th DCA· 1983-09-22 ·cited 14×
  The dissenting opinion argues that in inverse condemnation cases, property should be valued as of the time of trial, not the date of taking, to ensure full compensation.
• United States v. 58.16 Acres OF Land
  478 F.2d 1055· 7th Cir.· 1973-04-13 ·cited 14×
  The denial of a landowner's challenge to the government's right to take property in eminent domain is an appealable order if the challenge raises fundamental issues of bad faith or arbitrariness, even if interlocutory.
• United States upon the relation & for the Use of the Tenn. Valley Auth. v. AN Easement & Right-Of-Way Containing 0.1 Acres
  452 F.2d 729· 6th Cir.· 1971-12-09 ·cited 14×
  The 1966 amendment to 28 U.S.C. § 2412 does not authorize taxation of costs against the United States in eminent domain proceedings.
• State Rd. Dep't OF Fla. v. McCAFFREY
  229 So. 2d 668· Fla. 2d DCA· 1969-12-17 ·cited 14×
  The State Road Department appeals from summary judgment orders and a final judgment in favor of property owners who lost direct access to State Road 25 after the Department converted it to a limited-access facility. The court affirms, holding that property owners are entitled to
• Esse Forrester O'Brien v. United States
  392 F.2d 949· 5th Cir.· 1968-03-22 ·cited 14×
  The court held that while the overall compensation award was largely affirmed, the judgment should be modified to include specific severance damages for the loss of legal access to the new roadway.
• Casey v. Fla. Power Corp.
  157 So. 2d 168· Fla. 2d DCA· 1963-09-13 ·cited 14×
  In an eminent domain case involving the condemnation of a 14.5-acre easement for a high-voltage transmission line, the court held that evidence of depreciation to adjacent property based on fear of the towers and lines, or their general unsightliness, is too speculative to suppor
• Hunter Giers Hicks v. United States
  266 F.2d 515· 6th Cir.· 1959-05-13 ·cited 14×
  The court held that testimony regarding erosion damage was admissible, but the landowner failed to prove increased river current caused by tree cutting. Incidental damages for the power lines' impact on market value were awarded.
• Porter v. Columbia Cnty.
  75 So. 2d 699· Fla.· 1954-11-12 ·cited 14×
  In this eminent domain proceeding, the Florida Supreme Court affirmed the trial court's judgment, holding that testimony regarding ownership interests and damages to property should be excluded during the initial valuation phase of an eminent domain action and that the trial cour
• Alicot v. Dade Cnty.
  132 So. 2d 302· Fla. 3d DCA· 1961-07-31 ·cited 13×
  The court held that the trial judge did not abuse discretion by instructing the jury to resume deliberations after a poll revealed a non-unanimous verdict, and by denying motions for mistrial and new trial.
• Malone v. Division of Administration
  438 So. 2d 857· Fla. 3d DCA· 1983-09-06 ·cited 12×
  In this eminent domain case, the Florida District Court of Appeal addresses what constitutes compensable "moving costs" when functional industrial machinery is condemned. The court holds that moving costs can include expenses beyond mere physical relocation, such as disassembly,
• Jones v. City OF Tallahassee
  304 So. 2d 528· Fla. 1st DCA· 1974-12-05 ·cited 12×
  In an eminent domain proceeding, the City of Tallahassee sought to acquire a permanent easement for electric transmission lines across the appellants' property. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's valuation of the easement at $63,200 (approximately 75% of fee simple va
• United States v. 412.93 Acres OF Land
  455 F.2d 1242· 3d Cir.· 1972-02-08 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the trial judge did not abuse his discretion in consolidating eminent domain trials, refusing to allow deposition of the government's appraiser, and excluding evidence of the appraiser's contract with the government.
• Gov't OF the Virgin Islands v. 2.6912 Acres OF Land
  396 F.2d 3· 3d Cir.· 1968-06-13 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the Commissioners' reports did not adequately reveal their reasoning, failing to meet the requirements of United States v. Merz.
• City OF Sarasota v. Leonard L. Burch et ux.
  192 So. 2d 9· Fla. 2d DCA· 1966-11-04 ·cited 12×
  The court held that Florida Statutes Chapter 74, governing eminent domain proceedings, explicitly exempts funds deposited in the court registry from clerk's commissions or poundage, overriding the general provision in Section 28.24.
• United States v. Arison Agee
  322 F.2d 139· 6th Cir.· 1963-08-30 ·cited 12×
  The court held that while judicial review of administrative decisions in eminent domain is narrow, it is permissible to review for bad faith, and the District Court correctly found no bad faith in the taking of the entire tract.
• Eustas M. Bainbridge (also known as Eustis M. Bainbridge) and Dora M. Bainbridge v. State Rd. Dep't of Fla.
  139 So. 2d 714· Fla. 1st DCA· 1962-04-12 ·cited 12×
  Landowners Bainbridge appealed from a final judgment in an eminent domain proceeding where a jury awarded just compensation of $14,335 for a 17-foot strip of land, which was less than the $16,891.50 deposited by the State Road Department. The court rejected the landowners' argume
• State Rd. Dep't OF Fla. v. COX
  118 So. 2d 668· Fla. 3d DCA· 1960-03-10 ·cited 12×
  The State Road Department appealed from a final judgment in an eminent domain proceeding and from an order granting a new trial conditioned on payment of increased attorney fees. The court reversed the new trial order, holding that trial courts lack power to condition denial of a
• Peeler v. Duval Cnty.
  70 So. 2d 354· Fla.· 1954-01-05 ·cited 12×
  In this eminent domain proceeding, Peeler sought certiorari review of a circuit court's orders distributing compensation for property taken by Duval County. The Florida Supreme Court upheld the trial court's decision to award interest only to the date money was paid into the cour
• Peeler v. Duval Cnty.
  66 So. 2d 247· Fla.· 1953-07-03 ·cited 12×
  In this eminent domain proceeding, the court upheld the trial court's decision to assess property compensation without determining disputed title and ownership issues in the same proceedings. The Florida Supreme Court held that while all interested parties must be noticed, the de
• Grand River Dam Auth. v. Jarvis
  124 F.2d 914· 10th Cir.· 1942-01-02 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the condemnor should bear the costs of a jury trial when the landowner does not obtain a more favorable verdict than the commissioners' award, as per statutory discretion and constitutional requirements.
• Hartleb v. State
  711 So. 2d 228· Fla. 4th DCA· 1998-05-27 ·cited 10×
  The Fourth District affirmed a trial court's award of attorney's fees and costs, rejecting the appellant's arguments that the award should have been apportioned among different litigation stages and that interest should have been awarded on the fees. The court found the trial cou
• State v. L.N. Murray
  670 So. 2d 977· Fla. 1st DCA· 1996-01-19 ·cited 10×
  In this eminent domain case, the Department of Transportation appealed a jury award of severance and business damages to restaurant owners whose parking lot was partially taken for road expansion. The court affirmed the exclusion of the Department's cost-to-cure testimony regardi
• Metro. Dade Cnty. v. Curelli
  511 So. 2d 602· Fla. 3d DCA· 1987-06-02 ·cited 10×
  In an eminent domain proceeding, the Florida Third District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's final judgment and cost orders, rejecting property owners' claims for business inventory damages in a total taking and affirming expert appraiser fees awarded to property owners
• Musleh v. Division OF Administration
  299 So. 2d 101· Fla. 1st DCA· 1974-06-06 ·cited 10×
  This case involves an eminent domain proceeding where the court considered the admissibility of a land survey. The appellate court held that the survey, despite showing slightly different dimensions than the legal description, should have been admitted to show the size and locati
• Boca Teeca Corp. v. Palm Beach Cnty.
  291 So. 2d 110· Fla. 4th DCA· 1974-02-28 ·cited 10×
  Palm Beach County used eminent domain to take Boca Teeca Corporation's property for a road right-of-way. The jury awarded compensation that Boca Teeca found inadequate, but the appellate court reversed and remanded for a new trial because a seated juror was an employee of the def