Stubblefield v. Dade County

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Stubblefield v. Dade County

137 So. 2d 607

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided February 8, 1962·No. No. 61-399·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This appeal, from a judgment in condemnation, was taken by owners to whom a jury awarded $675 for the taking of a ten foot strip for street widening. The portion taken was a walkway, and the area between the walk and the street which would be added to the street. The walk would remain, as a public walk. We have examined [608]*608the record and given consideration to the several questions briefed and urged by appellants as a basis for reversal, and find them to be without merit.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

This appeal, from a judgment in condemnation, was taken by owners to whom a jury awarded $675 for the taking of a ten foot strip for street widening. The portion taken was a walkway, and the area between the walk and the street which would be added to the street. The walk would remain, as a public walk. We have examined [608]*608the record and given consideration to the several questions briefed and urged by appellants as a basis for reversal, and find them to be without merit.

Affirmed.

Stubblefield v. Dade County, 137 So. 2d 607 (Fla. Ct. App. 1962).

Pincite

137 So. 2d 607 (Stubblefield v. Dade County) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related