ROSA L. SURRENCY, APPELLANT,
v.
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, A POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA AND BODY CORPORATE UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, J. J. P. HAMILTON, D. B. MCCULLERS, JR., W. C. GRAVES, JR., ROBERT W. GRAVES, AND DONALD MACDONALD, CONSISTING OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS IN AND FOR INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, AND V. L. WHITTIER AND WIFE, MRS. V. L. WHITTIER, APPELLEES

Fla. 2d DCA | 1959-12-11
No. 1150
ALLEN, C. J., KANNER, J., and GERALD, LYNN, Associate Judge, concur.
116 So. 2d 782 Florida District Court of Appeal, Second District (1959)

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.

Synopsis

The appellate court affirmed the lower court's decree but remanded the case for further proceedings to precisely define the route of a way of necessity before a jury determines compensation.


Holding

The court held that the Chancellor's decree was partially proper in affirming the existence of a way of necessity but remanded the case for further proceedings to precisely delineate the route before a jury awards compensation.


Key Quotes

“We find that there is substantial evidence to support the decision of the Chancellor, and we therefore affirm his decree.”

Establishes the court's agreement with the Chancellor's underlying decision.

Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

The case involves a dispute over a way of necessity over the appellant's land. The Chancellor had previously directed that the compensation for this w…

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
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

We find that there is substantial evidence to support the decision of the Chancellor, and we therefore affirm his decree.

The Chancellor did direct in the Decree of December, 1958, that the matter of the compensation to be paid for the way of necessity over the land of the appellant, be heard before a jury; we feel, however, upon the doctrine of the case of Sunnybrook Groves, Inc. v. Hicks, Fla.App. Second District 1959, 113 So.2d 239, that this cause should be remanded to the Chancellor for further consideration upon the record here and any further evidence and testimony that may be offered so that the Chancellor may delineate the way of necessity across the land of the appellant or in other words, the route by a legal description that such way of necessity should pursue and that then thereafter, the cause should be submitted to a jury for the award of such compensation as the jury may find the appellant to be entitled.

Affirmed and remanded for further proceedings in accordance with the foregoing opinion.

ALLEN, C. J., KANNER, J., and GERALD, LYNN, Associate Judge, concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw