STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, AND VOLUSIA COUNTY, A POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANTS,
v.
GLORIA BYRD ET AL. (PARCEL III, CITY OF DAYTONA BEACH), APPELLEES
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.
Florida appellate court affirmed a jury verdict awarding $225,000 as just compensation for a condemned recreational facility, holding that special-use property requires appraisal methods beyond standard fair market value analysis and that physical depreciation may be considered.
Special-use property such as a public recreation facility requires appraisal methods beyond standard fair market value, and physical depreciation may be considered in determining just compensation.
[1] In an eminent domain proceeding, just compensation for special-use property such as a public recreation facility cannot be determined solely by standard fair market value…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe State of Florida Department of Transportation and Volusia County condemned a parcel of land in Daytona Beach that housed a recreation center servi…
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 Fair Market Value cases and more on FLexlaw
Appellants seek reversal of a final judgment, entered pursuant to jury verdict, in an eminent domain proceeding awarding appellee $225,000.00 as just compensation for the taking of a parcel of land which housed a recreation center in Daytona Beach, Florida.
We have carefully considered the record on appeal, the briefs and oral arguments of the parties herein. We agree with the trial court that the parcel of property involved in this condemnation proceeding was proven to be a recreational facility serving the public and citizens of Daytona Beach, and that an appraisal of the value thereof based upon a fair market value appraisal would not be proper; that due to the special use of the parcel involved, special considerations must be used to reach the just compensation to be awarded. The trial court, in its instructions to the jury charged, inter alia, that the general standards of appraisal could not be used in determining fair market value in awarding just compensation for “special use property”; that many factors, “including depreciation” should be considered. It appears from the record of testimony before the jury, and apparently considered by the jury, that physical depreciation was taken into account in arriving at its verdict, and we think this was proper. Finding no merit to any other alleged errors, the judgment appealed from is affirmed.
Appellees’ petition for attorney fees is granted in the amount of $7575.00.
SPECTOR, -C. J., and WIGGINTON and JOHNSON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Division OF Administration v. W. Palm Beach Garden Club, 352 So. 2d 1177 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977)…ned for park use [*1180] and has in fact been a park for over thirty years. We note the Federal grant and master plan to further develop it. The First District was faced with a somewhat similar problem in State Department of Transportation v. Byrd, 273 So. 2d 400 (Fla. 1st DCA 1973), where the real estate involved was a recreational facility serving the citizens of Daytona Beach. The court in that case held that an appraisal based on fair market value would not be proper, due to the “special use” of the parc…