ORLANDO/ORANGE COUNTY EXPRESSWAY AUTHORITY, APPELLANT,
v.
ORANGE NORTH ASSOCIATES, APPELLEE

Fla. 5th DCA | 1991-12-27
No. 91-474
DAUKSCH and W. SHARP, JJ., concur.
590 So. 2d 1099 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fifth District (1991) Caution
Cited by 6 cases

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.


Holding

The court held that a landowner need only show an invasion of a property right to establish a taking, not necessarily damages prior to the order of taking.


Facts & Procedural History

The Orlando/Orange County Expressway Authority appealed an order of taking for property used as a shopping center. The landowner alleged that the fili…

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.


Opinion of the Court
PETERSON, Judge.

PETERSON, Judge.

The Orlando/Orange County Expressway Authority appeals an order of taking, contending that the trial court erred in determining that a taking occurred because the appellee landowner failed to show damages prior to the entry of the order. We affirm.

The property involved in this taking is used as an improved shopping center, and the owner alleged that the filing of a map of reservation pursuant to subsections 337.-241(2) and (3), Florida Statutes (1987),1 which indicated the potential loss of frontage on a busy thoroughfare, caused the loss of prospective and current tenants. The allegations are similar to those in Orlando/Orange County Expressway Authority v. W & F Agrigrowth-Fernfield, Ltd., 582 So. 2d 790 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991), where the reservation map imposed a moratorium effectively preventing the sale and development of the owner’s land. The opinion indicated that “in order to establish a taking ... [the landowner] need only show that the authority’s action in recording the reservation map invaded some property right of ... [the landowner].” Id. at 792. Whether any damages flowed from the taking in the instant case, thus entitling compensation to be awarded to the landowner, is to be determined by a jury.

AFFIRMED.

DAUKSCH and W. SHARP, JJ., concur. . The Florida Supreme Court declared these sections unconstitutional in Joint Ventures, Inc. v. Department of Transportation, 563 So. 2d 622 (Fla.1990).


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Dep't OF Transp. v. Weisenfeld, 617 So. 2d 1071 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993)
    …ge County Expressway Auth. v. West 50 Ltd., 591 So. 2d 682 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992); Orlando/Orange County Expressway Auth. v. West Orange Nurseries, 590 So. 2d 1129 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992); and Orlando/Orange County Expressway Auth. v. Orange North Assocs., 590 So. 2d 1099 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991). See also Palm Beach County v. Wright, 612 So. 2d 709 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993) and Tampa-Hillsborough Expressway Auth. v. A.G.W.S. Corp., 608 So. 2d 52 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992). As previously noted, the Florida Supreme Court denied review o…
  • Palm Beach Cnty. v. Wright, 612 So. 2d 709 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993)
    …v. Department of Transportation, 563 So. 2d 622 (Fla.1990); Orlando/Orange County Expressway Authority v. W & F Agrigrowth-Fernfield, Ltd., 582 So. 2d 790 (Fla. 5 DCA 1991); and Orlando/Orange County Expressway Authority v. Orange North Associates, 590 So. 2d 1099 (Fla. 5 DCA 1991) decisions. 4. The Thoroughfare Map, as adopted and implemented by the land use element and traffic circulation element of the Palm Beach County Comprehensive Plan, constitutes a temporary taking of that portion of Plaintiff(s)’ pr…
    1 / 2

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw