Ayers v. Department of Agriculture & Consumer Services

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Ayers v. Department of Agriculture & Consumer Services

861 So. 2d 500, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 18410, 2003 WL 22867690

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedDecember 5, 2003

DocketNo. 5D03-811

StatusPublished

This text of 861 So. 2d 500 (Ayers v. Department of Agriculture & Consumer Services) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Ayers v. Department of Agriculture & Consumer Services, 861 So. 2d 500, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 18410, 2003 WL 22867690 (Fla. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Cheryl W. Ayers appeals a final order issued by the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, advising her that her citrus trees would be destroyed because the trees were either infected with citrus canker or were located within 1,900 feet of a canker-infested tree. We affirm the Department’s order on the authority of Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services v. Haire, 836 So.2d 1040 (Fla. 4th DCA), review granted, 842 So.2d 844 (Fla.2003). See also Kirchgessner v. Fla. Dep’t of Agrie. & Consumer Servs., 849 So.2d 410 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003). This affirmance is without prejudice to seek just compensation for the destruction of the trees having value, or such other relief as may be appropriate. The stay entered by the court is lifted.

AFFIRMED.

PETERSON, PLEUS and ORFINGER, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

Cheryl W. Ayers appeals a final order issued by the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, advising her that her citrus trees would be destroyed because the trees were either infected with citrus canker or were located within 1,900 feet of a canker-infested tree. We affirm the Department’s order on the authority of Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services v. Haire, 836 So.2d 1040 (Fla. 4th DCA), review granted, 842 So.2d 844 (Fla.2003). See also Kirchgessner v. Fla. Dep’t of Agrie. & Consumer Servs., 849 So.2d 410 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003). This affirmance is without prejudice to seek just compensation for the destruction of the trees having value, or such other relief as may be appropriate. The stay entered by the court is lifted.

AFFIRMED.

PETERSON, PLEUS and ORFINGER, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

861 So. 2d 500, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 18410, 2003 WL 22867690, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ayers-v-department-of-agriculture-consumer-services-fladistctapp-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack