Brown v. Florida Department of Agriculture & Consumer Services

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Brown v. Florida Department of Agriculture & Consumer Services

946 So. 2d 646, 2007 Fla. App. LEXIS 735, 2007 WL 162749

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided January 24, 2007·No. No. 4D05-4044·Published

Opinion

KLEIN, J.

Appellant alleged in this case that he lost cattle in 1985 as a result of the cattle being confiscated by the state because of a brucellosis outbreak. He is seeking indemnification from the state for the appraised value of the cattle which were destroyed, under section 585.09, Florida Statutes (1985). After waiting many years to seek compensation, appellant brought this proceeding, and after a nonjury trial, the court concluded that appellant never presented his cattle for testing or for appraisal, which would have been necessary in order for appellant to be compensated under a stipulated order entered in the original action initiated by the Department of Agriculture in 1983. There is competent substantial evidence in this record to support the trial court’s finding of fact that appellant did not demonstrate that the state had failed to fulfill any of its obligations, and that it was the appellant who failed to perform his obligations which are the source of his alleged loss. We accordingly affirm.

POLEN and MAY, JJ., concur.

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

KLEIN, J.

Appellant alleged in this case that he lost cattle in 1985 as a result of the cattle being confiscated by the state because of a brucellosis outbreak. He is seeking indemnification from the state for the appraised value of the cattle which were destroyed, under section 585.09, Florida Statutes (1985). After waiting many years to seek compensation, appellant brought this proceeding, and after a nonjury trial, the court concluded that appellant never presented his cattle for testing or for appraisal, which would have been necessary in order for appellant to be compensated under a stipulated order entered in the original action initiated by the Department of Agriculture in 1983. There is competent substantial evidence in this record to support the trial court’s finding of fact that appellant did not demonstrate that the state had failed to fulfill any of its obligations, and that it was the appellant who failed to perform his obligations which are the source of his alleged loss. We accordingly affirm.

POLEN and MAY, JJ., concur.

Brown v. Florida Department of Agriculture & Consumer Services, 946 So. 2d 646, 2007 Fla. App. LEXIS 735, 2007 WL 162749 (Fla. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

946 So. 2d 646 (Brown v. Florida Department of Agriculture & Consumer Services) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.