Jones v. City of Tallahassee

Supreme Court of Florida

Jones v. City of Tallahassee

333 So. 2d 21, 1976 Fla. LEXIS 4352

CourtSupreme Court of Florida

DecidedMay 26, 1976

DocketNo. 46719

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 333 So. 2d 21 (Jones v. City of Tallahassee) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Jones v. City of Tallahassee, 333 So. 2d 21, 1976 Fla. LEXIS 4352 (Fla. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

OVERTON, Chief Justice.

This is a petition for writ of certiorari to review the decision of the First District Court of Appeal reported at 304 So.2d 528 (Fla.App.lst 1974), upon the certified question concerning which party has the right to open and close in condemnation proceedings. Subsequent to the filing of the petition, this Court in City of Fort Lauderdale v. Casino Realty, Inc., 313 So.2d 649 (Fla.1975), resolved the issue presented by the certified question.

The petitioners also seek review of an issue not certified, specifically, the interpretation of the order of taking by the trial court’s holding that the easement appropriated by the City was not in the circumstances of this case tantamount to the taking of a fee simple estate. The District Court affirmed. Petitioners assert conflict with Houston Texas Gas and Oil Corporation v. Hoeffner, 132 So.2d 38 (Fla.App.2nd 1961), and Smith v. City of Tallahassee, 191 So.2d 446 (Fla.App.1st 1966). The facts in each of those cases are distinguishable from the facts in the instant case, and there is no conflict.

The petition for certiorari is denied.

It is so ordered.

ROBERTS, ADKINS, BOYD and ENGLAND, JJ., concur.

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

OVERTON, Chief Justice.

This is a petition for writ of certiorari to review the decision of the First District Court of Appeal reported at 304 So.2d 528 (Fla.App.lst 1974), upon the certified question concerning which party has the right to open and close in condemnation proceedings. Subsequent to the filing of the petition, this Court in City of Fort Lauderdale v. Casino Realty, Inc., 313 So.2d 649 (Fla.1975), resolved the issue presented by the certified question.

The petitioners also seek review of an issue not certified, specifically, the interpretation of the order of taking by the trial court’s holding that the easement appropriated by the City was not in the circumstances of this case tantamount to the taking of a fee simple estate. The District Court affirmed. Petitioners assert conflict with Houston Texas Gas and Oil Corporation v. Hoeffner, 132 So.2d 38 (Fla.App.2nd 1961), and Smith v. City of Tallahassee, 191 So.2d 446 (Fla.App.1st 1966). The facts in each of those cases are distinguishable from the facts in the instant case, and there is no conflict.

The petition for certiorari is denied.

It is so ordered.

ROBERTS, ADKINS, BOYD and ENGLAND, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

333 So. 2d 21, 1976 Fla. LEXIS 4352, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jones-v-city-of-tallahassee-fla-1976.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack