STATE EX REL. WALTER ZYSK
v.
C. J. WOODRUFF, AS CHIEF OF POLICE OF THE CITY OF TAMPA, A MUNICIPALITY, ETC.
The records and the briefs in this case have been examined and the questions raised found to be identical with those raised in State ex rel William Hough v. C. J. Woodruff, decided this date, so the petitioner is discharged on authority of last cited case.
Whitfield, Buford and Chapman, J. J., concur.
*303Brown, C. J., and Thomas, J., dissents.
(dissenting). — I am unable to agree with the opinion of a majority of the Court because I feel that there is no basis in the record for a writ of habeas corpus.
Brown, C. J., concurs.
Thomas, J.
(dissenting). — I am unable to agree with the opinion of a majority of the Court because I feel that there is no basis in the record for a writ of habeas corpus.
Brown, C. J., concurs.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
The Canal Auth. of the State of Fla. v. Miller, 243 So. 2d 131 (Fla. 1970)…er of eminent domain may file a petition therefore in the circuit court of the county wherein the property lies, which petition shall set forth: “(1) * * * the property is necessary for that use As this Court announced in Sibley v. Volusia County, 147 Fla. 302, 2 So. 2d 578 (Fla.1941) the word “necessity” should be construed to mean a reasonable and not an absolute necessity. Once such a reasonable necessity is shown, the exercise of the condemning authority’s discretion should not be disturbed in the abs…
-
The Canal Auth. of the State of Fla. v. Litzel, 243 So. 2d 135 (Fla. 1970)…ross abuse of discretion as an affirmative defense. To satisfy the initial burden of showing some necessity the condemning authority is not required to prove absolute necessity. It need only show some reasonable necessity. Sibley v. Volusia County, 147 Fla. 302, 2 So. 2d 578 (Fla.1941). Mr. Grimes’ testimony certainly establishes some necessity. The District Court characterized this testimony as only establishing a convenience. By this standard it is hard to imagine how a condemning authority could ever pr…1 / 2
-
Orange Cnty. v. Fordham, 160 Fla. 259 (Fla. 1948)…ation and construction of an entirely new road by the Road Department within the meaning of the cited statutes. See Enzian v. State Road Department, 122 Fla. 527, 165 So. 695; Morrison v. Farnell, 126 Fla. 385, 171 So. 528; Sibley v. Volusia County, 147 Fla. 302, 2 So. (2nd) 578; Brower v. Putnam County, opinion filed January 9, 1948, and not yet reported. The judgment appealed from is hereby reversed and a new trial awarded. THOMAS, C. J., TERRELL and SEBRING, JJ., concur.…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence