Eminent Domain

2,187 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count

• Amen Wardy v. United States
  402 F.2d 762· 5th Cir.· 1968-10-25 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the trial court correctly determined that the condemned land was likely within the scope of the Chamizal Project as of July 18, 1963, and properly excluded evidence of the price paid by the appellants for the land.
• 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.
• Northcutt v. State Rd. Dep't of Fla.
  209 So. 2d 710· Fla. 3d DCA· 1968-04-23 ·cited 12×
  The Northcutts appealed the dismissal of their inverse condemnation complaint against the State Road Department, alleging that construction and operation of an interstate highway and access roads nearby caused structural damage and noise/vibration injuries to their residential pr
• United States v. Trout
  386 F.2d 216· 5th Cir.· 1967-12-04 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the commission's finding of no special benefits was not supported by adequate explanation, requiring a remand for further proceedings.
• United States v. Certain Parcels OF Land Located IN Fairfax AND Loudoun Counties
  384 F.2d 677· 4th Cir.· 1967-10-20 ·cited 12×
  The court affirmed the award of severance damages, finding the commission's report sufficiently specific and the commissioner's qualifications proper.
• United States v. First Pyramid Life Ins. Co. of Am.
  382 F.2d 804· 8th Cir.· 1967-10-03 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the government is not required to pay for enhancement in property value caused by a project if the property was probably within the scope of the project from its inception.
• (1) Jake Klein v. The United States
  375 F.2d 825· Ct. Cl.· 1967-04-14 ·cited 12×
  The court held that plaintiffs have no cause of action for the 'taking' of gravel contracts because the contracts themselves were not taken, but merely frustrated by the government's lawful action. Compensation for the gravel deposits as part of the land was for the district cour
• 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.
• Biggs Rental Co. v. The United States
  353 F.2d 1013· Ct. Cl.· 1965-12-17 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the government's actions did not constitute a taking of the plaintiff's property, as there was no intent to take the property and the plaintiff failed to prove damages or entitlement to rent.
• United States v. Eden Mem'l Park Ass'n
  350 F.2d 933· 9th Cir.· 1965-09-22 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in admitting evidence of income capitalization for valuation and in rejecting evidence for valuing unzoned land as if zoned for cemetery purposes.
• Winston v. United States
  342 F.2d 715· 9th Cir.· 1965-03-02 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in its comments to the jury, its exclusion of certain evidence, or its submission of issues to the jury, and that the jury's award was supported by competent evidence.
• Hyman Soclof and Ida Soclof v. State Rd. Dep't of Fla.
  169 So. 2d 510· Fla. 1st DCA· 1964-12-03 ·cited 12×
  In this eminent domain case, property owners sought compensation not only for the taking of their land but also for damages to their junk business operated by a corporation they owned. The court held that the property owners, as majority stockholders, could not claim business dam
• 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.
• Harwell v. United States
  316 F.2d 791· 10th Cir.· 1963-04-11 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the acquisition of land for construction materials was a public use, and the exclusion of certain engineer reports was harmless error.
• Pub. Util. Dist. NO. 1 OF Pend Oreille Cnty. v. Fed. Power Comm'n
  308 F.2d 318· D.C. Cir.· 1962-08-30 ·cited 12×
  The court held that alleged violations of conflict of interest statutes do not automatically void a license grant, and state laws cannot prevent a federal licensee from exercising federally granted eminent domain powers.
• 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
• Seaside Props., Inc. v. State Rd. Dep't of the State of Fla. & Monroe Cnty.
  121 So. 2d 204· Fla. 3d DCA· 1960-06-06 ·cited 12×
  Seaside Properties appealed dismissal of its suit to quiet title against the State Road Department regarding an abandoned state road in Monroe County. The court affirmed dismissal, holding that sovereign immunity barred the suit because the state had not actually invaded or taken
• 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
• Hijos v. Feliciano
  260 F.2d 500· 1st Cir.· 1958-10-31 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the appellant's claimed right of reversion was extinguished by subsequent legislation and was not a protected property right under the Treaty of Paris.
• August M. Carmazi and Lester M. Muhn v. Bd. OF Cnty. Comm'rs OF Dade Cnty.
  104 So. 2d 727· Fla.· 1958-07-18 ·cited 12×
  Property owners challenged a decree finding they had no property rights that would be impaired by construction of a flood control dam across Little River. The Florida Supreme Court dismissed the appeal on jurisdictional grounds, holding that the lower court's decision involved de
• City OF Thibodaux v. La. Power & Light Co.
  255 F.2d 774· 5th Cir.· 1958-04-18 ·cited 12×
  The court held that a stay order in a federal expropriation case, which is considered a suit at common law, is an appealable interlocutory order under 28 U.S.C.A. § 1292(1).
• United States v. Certain Lands Located IN THE Townships OF Raritan AND Woodbridge
  246 F.2d 823· 3d Cir.· 1957-07-18 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the County of Middlesex is entitled to interest on the condemnation award from the date of taking to the date of judgment.
• United States v. Wateree Power Co. & Millwood Co. (Tracts Nos. N-1327
  220 F.2d 226· 4th Cir.· 1955-03-07 ·cited 12×
  The court held that commissioners were not in error in considering the potential for industrial use and severance damages when determining just compensation, as long as such potential affects market value.
• The United States v. Merchs. Matrix CUT Syndicate, Inc.
  219 F.2d 90· 7th Cir.· 1955-01-17 ·cited 12×
• United States v. 2
  218 F.2d 518· 4th Cir.· 1955-01-05 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the trial court erred in awarding the fee simple value of the land; compensation for a flowage easement should be the difference in the land's value before and after the taking, considering only the actual extent of intermittent flooding.
• United States v. Certain Real Estate Lying ON THE South Side OF Broad Street Between Eighth Avenue
  217 F.2d 920· 6th Cir.· 1954-12-10 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the Administrator had the statutory authority to condemn the property for public use, and the district court erred in divesting title and ordering the return of the property.
• Paradise Prairie Land Co. v. United States
  212 F.2d 170· 5th Cir.· 1954-04-15 ·cited 12×
  The court held that appellants are entitled to have their lands measured by the map or plat according to which they were conveyed, and that the trial court erred in rejecting the Dooley map and adopting a later government map that reduced their acreage. The court also held that t
• 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
• United States v. Wallace
  201 F.2d 65· 10th Cir.· 1952-12-24 ·cited 12×
  The court held that while a jury trial is generally a right in condemnation cases, it is not absolute and can be referred to a commission under exceptional circumstances.
• Trueman Fertilizer Co. v. Larson
  196 F.2d 910· 5th Cir.· 1952-05-23 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court correctly dismissed the complaint because the United States is an indispensable party that has not consented to be sued, and venue was improper.
• United States v. Jaramillo
  190 F.2d 300· 10th Cir.· 1951-06-21 ·cited 12×
  The court held that while the availability of grazing permits can be considered in valuing condemned land, the permit land itself cannot be separately valued and added to the compensation for the fee land.
• Anderson v. United States
  179 F.2d 281· 5th Cir.· 1950-01-10 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the date of taking for just compensation purposes is when the government takes possession of the property, not when it files a declaration of taking and deposits funds.
• Murdock v. United States
  160 F.2d 358· 8th Cir.· 1947-04-03 ·cited 12×
  The court held that evidence of mineral lease income and dry holes was properly excluded, and statements regarding mineral rights' lack of market value made by the owner's agents were admissible as admissions against interest.
• Messer v. United States
  157 F.2d 793· 5th Cir.· 1946-11-14 ·cited 12×
  The jury correctly considered the owner's duty to remove the house and improvements when determining just compensation, as market value is assessed based on the property's condition and obligations at the time of taking.
• United States v. Dickinson
  152 F.2d 865· 4th Cir.· 1946-01-04 ·cited 12×
  When the government takes part of a landowner's property, it must compensate for not only the part taken but also for damage to the remaining land, including the cost of reasonable protective measures.
• 11 v. United States
  152 F.2d 566· 5th Cir.· 1945-12-21 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the proper measure of compensation for a leasehold estate taken by eminent domain is the diminution in market value, not fair annual rental. The fee owners' compensation was affirmed as they were only deprived of surface use.
• Bank OF Edenton v. United States
  152 F.2d 251· 4th Cir.· 1945-11-05 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the parties' license agreement, which stipulated the property's valuation date, controlled over the date of the declaration of taking or possession for condemnation purposes.
• Timken-Detroit Axle Co. v. Alma Motor Co. (United States
  144 F.2d 714· 3d Cir.· 1944-08-07 ·cited 12×
  The Royalty Adjustment Act of 1942 is a constitutional exercise of eminent domain in aid of the war power, allowing the government to adjust wartime royalties, and the case is remanded to determine if a justiciable controversy remains.
• United States v. Willis
  141 F.2d 314· 4th Cir.· 1944-03-09 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the award for submerged cribbing was a proper element of damages for a taking, but the judgment must be modified to eliminate interest due to the Tucker Act's $10,000 jurisdictional limit.
• United States v. Marin
  136 F.2d 388· 9th Cir.· 1943-06-11 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the condemnation of land for the expansion of a private company producing essential war materials constitutes a public use, even if the company benefits incidentally.
• United States v. Certain Lands in Town of Hempstead
  129 F.2d 918· 2d Cir.· 1942-07-21 ·cited 12×
  A purchaser at a tax sale, who acquires a tax deed after title has vested in the United States by condemnation, is entitled to the entire condemnation award.
• Bailey v. Holland
  126 F.2d 317· 4th Cir.· 1942-02-17 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the Secretary of the Interior's regulation closing areas adjacent to a federal waterfowl refuge to hunting was a valid exercise of authority under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and did not constitute a taking of private property without compensation.
• State of Minn. v. United States
  125 F.2d 636· 8th Cir.· 1942-02-11 ·cited 12×
  The United States has the power to condemn state-owned lands for an Indian Reservation, even if the state has devoted them to a public use, as this constitutes a superior federal interest.
• 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.
• Randall v. Jacksonville St. R.R. Co.
  19 Fla. 409· Fla.· 1882-06-01 ·cited 12×
  Edwin Randall and others appealed the dissolution of a temporary injunction against Jacksonville Street Railroad Company. The dispute involved whether the railroad could lay street railway tracks on Hogan Street, which abutted the plaintiffs' residence. The court ultimately affir
• Lilia Cordones v. Brevard Cnty.
  781 So. 2d 519· Fla. 5th DCA· 2001-04-06 ·cited 11×
  Property owners appealed a trial court's order granting Brevard County temporary easements over their beachfront parcels for a shore protection project. The Fifth District affirmed the condemnation on necessity and valuation grounds but remanded to add a fifty-year duration limit
• Claussen v. State
  750 So. 2d 79· Fla. 2d DCA· 1999-12-01 ·cited 11×
  In this eminent domain case, the Florida appellate court reversed and remanded for a new trial because the Department of Transportation improperly used an undisclosed letter during cross-examination, violating the property owner's right to a fair jury trial on valuation. The lett
• LEE Cnty. v. Barnett Banks, Inc.
  711 So. 2d 34· Fla. 2d DCA· 1997-03-12 ·cited 11×
  The court held that expert testimony on the legal interpretation of a statute is inadmissible, and therefore, the expert witness fee award was reversed.
• Trump Enters., Inc. v. Publix Supermarkets, Inc.
  682 So. 2d 168· Fla. 4th DCA· 1996-09-25 ·cited 11×
  Trump Enterprises appealed a trial court decision denying its request for apportionment of condemnation proceeds paid to its landlord Publix when the State of Florida condemned part of Trump's leased restaurant property. The court reversed, holding that a lessee has a constitutio