MRS. FLORENCE DAUGHERTY
v.
E. A. LATHAM, BEN D. THURSBY, PETER GESSNER, W. M. HANKINS AND J. H. GRAHAM, AS AND CONSTITUTING THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF VOLUSIA COUNTY, FLORIDA, AND THEIR SUCCESSORS IN OFFICE
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, finding that a bill for injunction had equity. The case involved a property owner seeking to prevent county commissioners from closing a public highway that served as her sole access to market, alleging the closure would cause irreparable harm and was for the benefit of private interests without compensation.
Yes, the bill for injunction had equity. The court held that the property owner was entitled to seek an injunction to prevent the closure of the public highway.
“The Court denied a temporary injunction and dismissed the bill for want of equity. Complainant below appealed.”
Describes the procedural posture and the lower court's ruling.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellant filed a bill for injunction against the County Commissioners of Volusia County, alleging they were about to close a public highway that was …
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.
Bill for injunction was filed by the appellant alleging that the County Commissioners of Volusia County, acting under color of authority of Sections 2441, 2445 C. G. L., 1593, 1597 R. G. S., were about to close and abandon a public highway constituting appellant’s only means of ingress and egress without providing another road to the main highway leading to market and outside points as convenient and as practicable as the road now in existence, thereby making it impossible for appellant to transport her farm products and necessities of life to market; that the road about to be abandoned and closed had long been in use and was the only practicable means of ingress and egress to appellant’s homeland farm on which she had resided for about fifty years; that the acts of the respondent County Commissioners were for the benefit of other private property owners and part of a community effort to deprive plaintiff of the road she was then enjoying and had long, since had the^rivilege of using; that all of the acts of defendants below were being perpetrated to plaintiff’s great injury and without making to her, or offering to her, compensation for the damages about to be inflictéd. The Court denied a temporary injunction and dismissed the bill for want of equity. Complainant below appealed.
There was equity in the bill. 29 Corpus Juris, paragraph 232, page 521, and cases cited.
*273Reversed for appropriate proceedings.
Whitfield, P. J., and Brown, J., concur.
Ellis, C. J., and Terrell and Buford, J. J., concur in the opinion and judgment.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Palm Beach Cnty. v. Tessler, 538 So. 2d 846 (Fla. 1989)…e where his property has suitable access from another street even though the alternate route is longer. Bozeman v. City of St. Petersburg, 1917, 74 Fla. 336, 76 So. 894; Halpert v. Udall, S.D.Fla.1964, 231 F.Supp. 574. Cf. Daugherty v. Latham, 1937, 128 Fla. 271, 174 So. 417. Id. at 8-9. The court held the evidence sufficient to support the conclusion that the Austins had suffered a sufficient impairment of their right of access which was to be different in kind from the public at large. The court noted, h…
-
Pinellas Cnty. v. Austin, 323 So. 2d 6 (Fla. 2d DCA 1975)…e his property has suitable ac [*9] cess from another street even though the alternate route is longer. Bozeman v. City of St. Petersburg, 1917, 74 Fla. 336, 76 So. 894; Halpert v. Udall, S.D.Fla.1964, 231 F.Supp. 574. Cf. Daugherty v. Latham, 1937, 128 Fla. 271, 174 So. 417. Applying these principles to the instant case, it must be conceded that the Austins were not totally deprived of access to their property. Nevertheless, the quality of their access was diminished. The old wooden bridge was not adequat…
-
Mrs. Florence Daugherty v. Latham, 139 Fla. 477 (Fla. 1939)…spective parties and being advised in the premises, it is thereupon “Ordered, Adjudged and Decreed that said motion be and the same is hereby denied.” This is the second appearance of this litigation in this Court. See Daugherty v. Latham, et al., 128 Fla. 271, 174 Sou. 317. A’syllabus by the Court in this case is: “Dismissal for want of equity of bill to enjoin closing of a public highway held erroneous, where complainant alleged that highway 'was 'her only means of ingress and egress to [*480] her farm…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence