Eminent Domain

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

• Ga. S. & Fla. Ry. Co. v. Duval Connecting R.R. Co.
  187 So. 2d 405· Fla. 1st DCA· 1966-06-09 ·cited 2×
  A circuit court cannot condition a supersedeas bond in an eminent domain proceeding on the landowner paying the condemnor's attorney's fees if the landowner does not defeat the condemnation claim.
• ASH v. N. Ill. GAS Co.
  362 F.2d 148· 7th Cir.· 1966-06-03 ·cited 2×
  The federal district court correctly dismissed the action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and failure to state a claim.
• United States v. 74.60 Acres OF Land
  358 F.2d 143· 7th Cir.· 1966-03-08 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court erred by failing to instruct the jury on the effect of the government's project on decreasing property values, creating an unfair advantage for the government.
• Aritta Gleason v. State Rd. Dep't of Fla.
  178 So. 2d 199· Fla. 2d DCA· 1965-09-09 ·cited 2×
  Property owners appealed the trial court's strike of paragraphs claiming incidental damages (lost rental income, taxes, diminished marketability) in a condemnation proceeding. The court affirmed the strike, holding that under Florida law compensation must be based on the property
• United States v. Citrus Valley Farms, Inc.
  350 F.2d 683· 9th Cir.· 1965-08-17 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the jury's valuation of the condemned land, which included its history of cotton production, was supported by evidence and should be affirmed.
• Dist. OF Columbia v. Sussman
  352 F.2d 683· D.C. Cir.· 1965-07-26 ·cited 2×
  The dissenting judge holds that the United States is not liable for real property taxes on condemned land for the portion of the year it owned the property, as no lien attached before taking.
• United States v. 84.4 Acres OF Land
  348 F.2d 117· 3d Cir.· 1965-07-14 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the jury should have been allowed to consider the cost of clearing land as part of the reproduction cost of the golf course if they found that no comparable cleared land was available.
• Isley v. Bogart
  338 F.2d 33· 10th Cir.· 1964-11-04 ·cited 2×
  The court held that when property condemned for a specific public use, like a market place, is no longer used for that purpose and is leased for unrelated private use, the original condemnation purposes have terminated, lifting the servitude and returning full dominion to the ori
• Meltzer v. Hillsborough Cnty.
  167 So. 2d 54· Fla. 2d DCA· 1964-08-19 ·cited 2×
  Landowners appealed a $31,000 condemnation award for 1.69 acres taken for an overpass and cloverleaf construction at the intersection of Dale Mabry Highway and Hillsborough Avenue in Tampa. They claimed the loss of direct access to their remaining corner property caused damages e
• United States v. Mrs. Vesta M. Pinson and J. H. Pinson
  331 F.2d 759· 5th Cir.· 1964-05-11 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the phrase "existing easements for public utilities" in the declaration of taking did not include flowage easements, and therefore, the Government's taking did encompass these easements.
• United States v. City OF Tacoma
  330 F.2d 153· 9th Cir.· 1964-03-25 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court erred by entering a judgment that left undecided the nature of the easement taken, and that the city should be allowed to file an answer to raise its objections.
• United States v. 355.70 Acres OF Land
  327 F.2d 630· 3d Cir.· 1964-02-13 ·cited 2×
  A blanket deposit of estimated compensation for multiple condemned parcels, without allocation among them, does not relieve the government of its obligation to pay interest on the award from the date of taking.
• Elinor E. Petersen v. United States & the State of Cal.
  327 F.2d 219· 9th Cir.· 1964-01-17 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the appellants' asserted ownership of submerged land was invalid because their title was derived from a patent that clearly excluded such land.
• Martin Cnty. v. Fla. E. Coast Ry. Co.
  20 Fla. Supp. 156· Martin Cty. Cir. Ct.· 1962-11-30 ·cited 2×
  Martin County sought to condemn a right-of-way across Florida East Coast Railway's property for a public road. The court determined whether the railroad could recover the costs of installing and maintaining automatic grade crossing protection devices, grading, and annual maintena
• Emory G. Rich v. Harper Neon Co., Inc.
  147 So. 2d 176· Fla. 2d DCA· 1962-11-16 ·cited 2×
  The Florida District Court of Appeal, Second District, denied a petition for a writ of certiorari seeking review of an apportionment order in an eminent domain case. The court found that certiorari was not an available remedy because the petitioner had a right to appeal, which wa
• Renedo v. Dade Cnty.
  139 So. 2d 698· Fla. 3d DCA· 1962-04-10 ·cited 2×
  In an eminent domain proceeding where Dade County took a five-foot strip of land to widen a street, the trial court reduced jury awards for severance damages to the remaining properties. The appellate court reversed, holding that the jury's awards were supported by expert testimo
• Leeaye, Inc. v. Dist. of Columbia Redev. Land Agency
  296 F.2d 438· D.C. Cir.· 1961-11-16 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial judge did not abuse his discretion in excluding evidence of certain sales as not comparable, and the appellants were not prejudiced by this ruling.
• United States v. Certain Space IN the Bldg. Known as Rand McNALLY Bldg. IN Chicago
  295 F.2d 381· 7th Cir.· 1961-10-30 ·cited 2×
  The court held that non-removable improvements made by the government as lessee, contemplated by the lease, are to be included in the determination of just compensation in a condemnation proceeding. It also held that government deposits made after the declaration of taking must b
• United States v. McCRORY Holding Co.
  294 F.2d 812· 5th Cir.· 1961-09-01 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the date of taking for eminent domain proceedings, for the purpose of fixing compensation, is the date of the filing of the Declaration of Taking, not the date of the initial filing of the condemnation action or earlier possession under a prior, related procee
• Humboldt Placer Mining Co. v. Best
  293 F.2d 553· 9th Cir.· 1961-08-18 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court erred in refusing to enjoin administrative proceedings concerning mining claim validity, as that issue was already properly before the court in a condemnation action.
• Am. Tel. & Tel. Co. v. Weiland
  18 Fla. Supp. 4· Duval Cty. Cir. Ct.· 1961-07-06 ·cited 2×
  This case involves a dispute over a telephone company's right-of-way easement across private property. The court granted a permanent injunction against the property owners, restraining them from interfering with the telephone company's facilities and maintenance activities.
• Am. Natural GAS Co. v. United States
  279 F.2d 220· Ct. Cl.· 1960-06-08 ·cited 2×
  A forced sale of stock under the Public Utility Holding Company Act, to comply with regulatory requirements, is not an involuntary conversion resulting from requisition or condemnation for tax deduction purposes under Section 117(j) of the Internal Revenue Code.
• Select Lake City Theatre Operating Co. v. Cent. Nat'l Bank IN Chicago under Tr. Agreement Dated December 14
  277 F.2d 814· 7th Cir.· 1960-05-09 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the lessee has no compensable interest in the condemned property because the lease terminated upon condemnation and neither federal nor state law grants such an interest after condemnation proceedings have commenced.
• Flood v. United States
  274 F.2d 483· 9th Cir.· 1960-01-25 ·cited 2×
  The court held that property owners are not entitled to recover the cost of restoration if the property's market value has not diminished, as just compensation aims to put the owner in as good a pecuniary position as if the property had not been taken.
• United States v. Honorable Peirson M. Hall
  274 F.2d 856· 9th Cir.· 1960-01-09 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district judge did not abuse his discretion in referring condemnation cases to commissioners, as he considered factors beyond calendar congestion.
• Blinkman v. Dade Cnty.
  115 So. 2d 23· Fla. 3d DCA· 1959-10-19 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a trial judge cannot amend a jury's compensation award in an eminent domain case to a lower amount unless the evidence is clear, sufficient, and unconflicted, which was not the case here.
• Barnes v. City OF Gadsden
  268 F.2d 593· 5th Cir.· 1959-06-30 ·cited 2×
  The court affirmed the district court's denial of an injunction but reversed the judgment to the extent it declared the rights of the parties, finding that the redevelopment plan's contemplated segregation, even if voluntary, could constitute state action due to extensive governm
• Kolstad v. United States
  262 F.2d 839· 9th Cir.· 1959-01-07 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying a motion to set aside a condemnation judgment based on a belated claim of partnership ownership and alleged accident or surprise from witness testimony, as the claims were not supported by evidence or pro
• Blas v. United States
  261 F.2d 636· 9th Cir.· 1958-12-17 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court erred in granting a directed verdict, as the appellant's expert testimony on land value was sufficient to go to the jury. The court also held that the land should be valued as residential property, considering enhancements from nearby public im
• Dep't of Highways v. United GAS Pipe Line Co.
  258 F.2d 357· 5th Cir.· 1958-03-05 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the permit and statute required the pipe line company to bear the cost of relocating its under-road installations to accommodate a highway change, even if the relocation was outside the original right-of-way.
• City OF Davenport v. Three-Fifths OF AN Acre OF Land
  252 F.2d 354· 7th Cir.· 1958-02-27 ·cited 2×
  The court held that Congress has the power to confer eminent domain authority on plaintiffs for the bridge project, and the City of Moline's arguments regarding Eleventh Amendment immunity and trust property were without merit.
• Bartholomae Corp. v. United States
  253 F.2d 716· 9th Cir.· 1957-08-15 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court's findings of no negligence and no proximate cause were supported by the record, affirming the dismissal of the plaintiff's claims.
• Goodyear Farms v. United States
  241 F.2d 484· 9th Cir.· 1956-12-03 ·cited 2×
  The denial of the petition for intervention was proper, and the order denying the motion to amend was not an appealable final order.
• Panama City Airport Bd. v. Laird
  90 So. 2d 616· Fla.· 1956-10-31 ·cited 2×
  The Airport Board has the substantive right to condemn land outside the city limits for airport purposes, as its enabling act, read in conjunction with general statutes and the city charter, grants this power.
• United States v. Mills
  237 F.2d 401· 8th Cir.· 1956-10-24 ·cited 2×
  The court held that while the government's legal position regarding the definition of a 'tract' was correct, the district court's error in excluding evidence and refusing a jury instruction was not prejudicial in this case.
• Pocock v. Town OF Medley
  89 So. 2d 162· Fla.· 1956-08-08 ·cited 2×
  The Town of Medley sought to enjoin the Pococks from interfering with its use of a 60-foot right-of-way for a public road across their property and to compel removal of their home and fence. The Florida Supreme Court reversed the lower court's finding that the road had been dedic
• United States v. Town OF Clarksville
  224 F.2d 712· 4th Cir.· 1955-08-16 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the government is not obligated to pay for the operation and maintenance of a sewage treatment plant, as this was not included in the parties' stipulation for just compensation.
• Clackamas Cnty. v. McKAY
  226 F.2d 343· D.C. Cir.· 1955-07-28 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the Act of Congress transferring administration of certain lands from the Department of the Interior to the Department of Agriculture was constitutional and did not constitute a taking.
• ST. JOE Paper Co. v. Choctawhatchee Elec. Coop., Inc.
  79 So. 2d 761· Fla.· 1955-04-27 ·cited 2×
  St. Joe Paper Company appealed a condemnation judgment, challenging the necessity of Choctawhatchee Electric Cooperative's taking of its land for a power line right-of-way. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed, holding that a defendant in a condemnation proceeding cannot question n
• Belcher v. Fla. Power & Light Co.
  74 So. 2d 56· Fla.· 1954-07-06 ·cited 2×
  Florida Power & Light Company sought to condemn property owned by Belcher for a transmission line right of way using summary condemnation procedures under Chapter 74.141. The appellants challenged whether the statute unconstitutionally extended summary condemnation powers to publ
• Olin E. Watts Under the Last Will and Testament and Codicil thereto of A. F. Baines v. Duval Cnty.
  75 So. 2d 316· Fla.· 1954-06-11 ·cited 2×
• Christman v. City OF Wichita
  209 F.2d 639· 10th Cir.· 1954-01-27 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the intervenors failed to present substantial evidence of abandonment, and therefore, the city's title to the land was not forfeited.
• People of Colorado Ex rel. Watrous v. Dist. Court of United States for Dist. of Colo.
  207 F.2d 50· 10th Cir.· 1953-09-09 ·cited 2×
  The court held that federal courts have jurisdiction to determine if state action constitutes a taking of private property without just compensation, even if state courts might offer a remedy.
• Philips v. United States
  206 F.2d 867· 9th Cir.· 1953-08-12 ·cited 2×
  The Court of Appeals reversed the judgment in proceeding No. 2,001 because the District Court lacked jurisdiction over the contract-based restoration damages claim, which belonged to the Court of Claims. The judgment in proceeding No. 2,652 was affirmed as it was unaffected by th
• Ocean Park Dev. Corp. v. People of Puerto RICO
  204 F.2d 371· 1st Cir.· 1953-05-04 ·cited 2×
  The court held that an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court of Puerto Rico remanding a case for further proceedings is not a 'final decision' over which the court has appellate jurisdiction.
• United States v. 5.42 Acres OF Land
  182 F.2d 787· 3d Cir.· 1950-06-01 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the fair market value of a leasehold interest taken by condemnation is the proper measure of just compensation when such a standard is readily available, excluding evidence of special value to the condemnee.
• Gawzner v. Lebenbaum
  180 F.2d 610· 9th Cir.· 1950-03-08 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court's method of distributing the condemnation award was not sufficiently disclosed, requiring a remand for redetermination based on specific evidentiary factors.
• United States v. Tavares Const. Co., Inc.
  175 F.2d 379· 9th Cir.· 1949-06-16 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the Constructors' leasehold estate and option were not condemned or taken in the proceeding, and therefore they were not entitled to compensation.
• United States v. 26
  174 F.2d 367· 5th Cir.· 1949-05-19 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court erred by admitting evidence of anticipated profits and failing to clearly distinguish between just compensation and damages in a condemnation case.
• Demetria Sifuentes v. United States
  168 F.2d 264· 1st Cir.· 1948-06-02 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the landowners failed to establish error regarding the consideration of capitalized rental value for condemned land. However, the case must be remanded for findings on severance damages related to an easement and the splitting of the farm unit.