BLUE WATER CORP., APPELLANT,
v.
JULIO HECHAVARRIA, APPELLEE
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.
A statutory way of necessity under section 704.01(2), Florida Statutes, does not apply to land within a municipality used for commercial purposes.
[1] A statutory way of necessity under section 704.01(2), Florida Statutes, applies only to land outside a municipality.
[2] A statutory way of necessity under section 704.01(2), Florida Statutes, is limited to land used for dwelling, agricultural, timber raising or cutting, or stockraising pur…
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceBlue Water Corp. owned waterfront land used for commercial fishing, with limited access. After requests for passage were denied, Blue Water sued for a…
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 Statutory Way Of Necessity cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Blue Water Corp. appeals from an order of the trial court granting final summary judgment in favor of Julio Hechavarria. We affirm.
Blue Water owned since 1980 a waterfront tract of land within the city which it used as a base for its commercial fishing operation. The only practical access to a public roadway from Blue Water’s property was either across land owned by its neighbor Hechavarria or over the approach railing of a Department of Transportation bridge. The latter route would require removal of a section of the bridge railing. After Hechavarria and the Department of Transportation rejected Blue Water’s request for passage across their properties, Blue Water institiated suit against Hecha-varria and the Department of Transportation for a statutory way of necessity pursuant to section 704.01(2), Florida Statutes (1985), which provides:
Based on public policy, convenience, and necessity, a statutory way of necessity ... exists when any land or portion thereof outside any municipality which is being used or desired to be used as a dwelling or for agricultural or for timber raising or cutting or stockraising purposes shall be shut off or hemmed in by lands, fencing or other improvements of other persons so that no practicable route of ingress or egress shall be available therefrom to the nearest practicable public or private road. (Emphasis added.)
Summary judgment was entered for He-chavarria. We affirm based upon our finding that the unambiguous statute affords Blue Water no relief because the subject land (1) is within a municipality and (2) is not used as a dwelling, for agricultural, timber raising or cutting, or stockraising purposes.
We reject Blue Water's argument that the statute should be read to encompass more categories than are enumerated. A challenge to legislation on grounds that it is simply antiquated or unwise is not properly addressed to this court. Rose v. D'Alessandro, 380 So. 2d 419 (Fla.1980); Bingham v. Manson, 363 So. 2d 370 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978).
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Emilio Cirelli v. ENT, 885 So. 2d 423 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004)…asement.”) (citing Bell, 642 So. 2d at 1384 ("Cox presented evidence and the record supports a finding that no common-law easement existed. There was no unity of title between the dominant and servient estate.”)). . Blue Water Corp. v. Hechavarria, 516 So. 2d 17 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987). . Blue Water; Hunt v. Smith, 137 So. 2d 232, 233-34 (Fla. 2d DCA 1962) ("Thus, it may be seen from the language of the statute that the statutory way of necessity exists only when the lands are being used or desired to be used f…
-
Bell v. W.T. COX, Jr., 642 So. 2d 1381 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994)…that his residential lots are situated in the county; if the lots were in a municipality (say anywhere in Duval County), Bell would be safe from having his neighbor condemn a roadway access across his front yard. See Blue Water Corp. v. Hechavarria, 516 So. 2d 17 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987). In this era when residential subdivisions have been and continue to be developed outside municipal limits surrounded by acreage that might indeed lack public access — even the right to a common law way of necessity— the risk rem…
-
Shedrick Staten v. Celso M. Gonzalez-Falla for the Gilman Article III Tr., 904 So. 2d 498 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005)…cial purposes); Hunt v. Smith, 137 So. 2d 232, 233-34 (Fla. 2d DCA 1962)(“[T]he statutory way of necessity exists only when the lands are being used or desired to be used for the purposes specified in the statute.”); Blue Water Corp. v. Hechavarria, 516 So. 2d 17 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987)(rejecting Blue Water’s argument that section 704.01(2) could be read to allow uses other than as stated therein, and holding that a statutory way of necessity would not be allowed for a commercial fishing operation, in part, becau…
Authorities Cited
- Bingham v. Manson, 363 So. 2d 370 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978)
- Rose v. D'Alessandro, 380 So. 2d 419 (Fla. 1980)