STATE ROAD DEPARTMENT OF FLORIDA, AN AGENCY OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, AND ALACHUA COUNTY, A POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANTS,
v.
EUGENE C. HARTMAN ET AL., APPELLEES
STATE ROAD DEPARTMENT OF FLORIDA, AN AGENCY OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, AND ALACHUA COUNTY, A POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANTS,
EUGENE C. HARTMAN ET AL., APPELLEES
94 So. 2d 742
Florida Supreme Court (1957)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Jacksonville Expressway Auth. v. Henry G. DU Pree Co., 108 So. 2d 289 (Fla. 1958)…rney’s fees, except in those cases where the appeal is taken by the condemnee and the judgment of the circuit court is affirmed. Such an interpretation was adopted by this court in the case of State Road Department of Florida v. Hartman, Fla., 1957, 94 So. 2d 742. In an unpublished order annexed to our per curiam opinion we said: “Upon motion of the landowners, who were defendants in the eminent domain proceeding under Chapter 74 Florida Statutes 1955 and who were awarded compensation in the lower court whi…
-
State Rd. Dep't of Fla. v. Levato, 192 So. 2d 35 (Fla. 4th DCA 1966)…rney’s fees, except in those cases where the appeal is taken by the condemnee and the judgment of the circuit court is affirmed. Such an interpretation was adopted by this court in the case of State Road Department of Florida v. Hartman, Fla., 1957, 94 So. 2d 742. In an unpublished order annexed to our per curiam opinion we said: “Upon motion of the landowners, who were defendants in the eminent domain proceeding under Chapter 74 Florida Statutes 1955 and who were awarded compensation in the lower court whi…