CASA LOMA SPRINGS DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, A FLORIDA CORPORATION, AND E. E. SWINSON, PLAINTIFFS IN ERROR,
v.
BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA, BY E. C. JOHNSON, JOHN B. RODES, GEORGE G. BROCKETT, P. W. ROBERTS AND JOHN E. REED, COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF SAID COUNTY, DEFENDANTS IN ERROR
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.
The Florida Supreme Court reversed a lower court's decision in a condemnation case. The court found that charging the jury to determine compensation based on market value at the time of trial was harmful error when the property had been unlawfully appropriated before trial.
Yes, it was harmful error. The court held that in cases of unlawful appropriation before trial, the market value at the time of trial might not constitute "full compensation" as required by the Constitution.
“In condemnation proceedings it appears that the public road authorities had taken possession of the property in controversy for right of way purposes before the trial to determine compensation to be awarded. This was illegal.”
Establishes the key factual background and illegality of the taking.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe public road authorities took possession of the property for right of way purposes before the trial to determine compensation. This taking was dete…
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 Unlawful Taking cases and more on FLexlaw
Whitfield, P. J.
In condemnation proceedings it appears that the public road authorities had taken possession of the property in controversy for right of way purposes before the trial to determine compensation to be awarded. This was illegal. Spafford v. Brevard County, — Fla. — , 110 South. Rep. 451. The Court charged the jury that the compensation should be “the fair, actual market value at the time of the lawful appropriation, that is, at the present time.”
In Sunday v. Louisville & N. R. Co., 62 Fla. 395, 57 South. Rep. 351, the trial to determine the compensation to be awarded was before the property was appropriated, and it was properly held that the compensation should be “the fair actual market value at the time of the lawful appropriation.” In this case the appropriation, though unlawful, was before the trial was had to determine the compensation to be awarded; and in view of the nature of the appropriation before trial, it appears from the evidence that 'the actual market value at the trial might not be the “full compensation” for the “property appropriated” that is required by the Constitution, therefore the quoted charge was harmful error. See 20 C. J. 827 et seq.; 2 Lewis Em. Domain (3 Ed.), see 705, 261 U. S. 299; 265 U. S. 106, 123.
Reversed.
Terrell and Buford, J. J., concur. Ellis, C. J., and Strum and Brown, J. J., concur in the opinion. Per Curiam. — The decision is that in this case in view of the unlawful taking of the property before the trial to determine the compensation to be awarded, the charge that the compensation should be the fair, actual market value at the time of the trial, was harmful error. It is not proper in this rather unusual ease to announce general rules as to the measure of the “full compensation” that is required by the Constitution to be made for property that shall be appropriated for public use by due course of law.
Rehearing denied.
Whitfield, P. J., and Terrell and Buford, J. J., concur. Ellis, C. J., and Strum and Brown, J. J., concur in the opinion.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Anhoco Corp. v. Dade Cnty., 144 So. 2d 793 (Fla. 1962)…tituted type of access which should have been provided originally will not suffice to compensate for the harm which was done in the interim. Stock v. Cox, 125 Conn. 405, 6 A. 2d 346; Casa Loma Springs Development Co. et al. v. Brevard County et al., 93 Fla. 601, 112 So. 60. We should interpolate, of course, that when assessing any damages suffered Anhoco is not entitled to recover for losses occasioned merely by the customary limitations on the flow of traffic over a highway which is being constructed unde…
-
State Rd. Dep't of the State of Fla. v. Bender, 147 Fla. 15 (Fla. 1941)…State Road Department, 129 Fla. 723, 177 So. 220. (4) If the court had granted the 'alternative prayer by ordering condemnation, it would have imposed an inordinate burden on the various lot owners. Casa Loma Springs v. Brevard County, 93 Fla. 601, 112 So. 60. When a court of equity takes jurisdiction for one purpose, it will retain jurisdiction for the purpose of settling all controversies between the parties even to the extent of awarding common law relief. That rule is particularly applicable here wh…
-
Rubano v. Dep't OF Transp., 656 So. 2d 1264 (Fla. 1995)…ess which should have been provided originally will not suffice to compensate for the harm which was done in the interim. Stock v. [*1270] Cox, 125 Conn. 405, 6 A. 2d 346 [ (1939) ]; Casa Loma Springs Development Co. et al. v. Brevard County et al., 93 Fla. 601, 112 So. 60 [ (1927) ]. We should interpolate, of course, that when assessing any damages suffered Anhoco is not entitled to recover for losses occasioned merely by the customary limitations on the flow of traffic over a highway which is being const…
Previewing 3 of 9 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Seaboard Air Line Ry. Co. v. United States, 261 U.S. 299 (U.S. 1923)
- Brooks-Scanlon Corp. v. United States, 265 U.S. 106 (U.S. 1924)
- Spafford v. Brevard Cnty., 92 Fla. 617 (Fla. 1926)
- Sunday v. Louisville & Nashville R.R. Co., 62 Fla. 395 (Fla. 1911)