Florida Property Rights Law Firm, Florida Condemnation Attorneys
phone
Contact Florida Eminent Domain Lawyers

Florida Eminent Domain Blog | Gregory W. Stoner

The Florida Eminent Domain Law Firm, PA

*Required Fields Privacy Policy

Thursday, February 25, 2010

Exploring the Dissent in Walton County v. Stop the Beach Renourishment, Inc.

We have spoken on several occasions about the legal challenge to the Beach and Shore Preservation Act (BSPA), but mostly we have looked at the majority opinion. However, it is the strength of the dissent's remarks that have cause the Supreme Court to hear the case, so it makes sense for us to take some time to understand what the dissent is saying.

The dissent notes that the majority opinion depends on severing littoral rights from literal contact with the water. The Supreme Court of Florida stated that the literal connection with the water is not inherent to riparian water rights, but the dissent states, "By essential, inherent definition, riparian and littoral property is that which is contiguous to, abuts, borders, adjoins, or touches water."

The dissent makes significant use of Belvedere Development Corporation v. Department of Transportation (1982), which agrees with the principle that "To speak of riparian or littoral rights unconnected with ownership of the shore is to speak a non sequitur," as well as utilizing a number of earlier decisions for definitional support of littoral rights being based on actual contact with the water. Belvedere is a case in which the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) sought to acquire land at the water's edge of properties using eminent domain and paying only a simple fee for the land actually taken without paying severance damages, which the Court decided was inappropriate because taking upland property inherently severed the property from the water.

Most importantly, the dissent calls attention to Hughes v. Washington (1967), which notes the soundness of the principle of accretion and reliction rights, saying "Any other rule would leave riparian owners continually in danger of losing the access to the water which is often the most valuable feature of their property, and continually vulnerable to harassing litigation challenging the location of the original water lines."

The dissent acknowledges that the BSPA may be constitutional if it allowed Florida to restore the beach only to the point that the new water line were at the ECL, but as soon as it goes beyond that to create new beach, it must acknowledge that doing so constitutes a partial taking that severs littoral property rights from the upland property.

It will be interesting to see whether the US Supreme Court upholds the Florida Supreme Court decision or favors the dissent.

If you believe that the actions of a federal, state, or local government constitute a taking of your property, you may be able to file an inverse condemnation lawsuit. The Florida Property Rights Law Firm, PA can help you protect your property and your rights. Please contact us today to learn more.

posted by Tiffany at 5:16 PM

0Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home

Florida Property Rights Law Firm, Eminent Domain Attorneys
Helping Florida Property Owners
121 S. Orange Ave.
Suite 1470
Orlando, Florida 32801
800.914.8661
Monroe Condemnation Attorneys Miami-Dade Eminent Domain Lawyers Broward Eminent Domain Attorneys Collier Condemnation Attorneys Lee Eminent Domain Lawyers Hendry Eminent Domain Lawyers Palm Beach Eminent Domain Lawyers Glades Eminent Domain Lawyers Charlotte Eminent Domain Lawyers Martin Eminent Domain Lawyers Sarasota Eminent Domain Attorneys De Soto Condemnation Attorneys Okeechobee Eminent Domain Lawyers Highlands Eminent Domain Lawyers Saint Lucie Eminent Domain Lawyers Hardee Condemnation Attorneys Manatee Eminent Domain Lawyers Polk Eminent Domain Attorneys Hillsborough Eminent Domain Lawyers Pinellas Eminent Domain Lawyers Indian River Eminent Domain Lawyers Osceola Eminent Domain Lawyers Pasco Eminent Domain Lawyers Brevard Eminent Domain Lawyers Seminole Eminent Domain Attorneys Orange Condemnation Attorneys Hernando Eminent Domain Lawyers Lake Eminent Domain Lawyers Sumter Eminent Domain Lawyers Volusia Eminent Domain Lawyers Citrus Eminent Domain Lawyers Marion Eminent Domain Lawyers Flagler Eminent Domain Lawyers Putnam Eminent Domain Lawyers Saint Johns Eminent Domain Lawyers Clay Eminent Domain Attorneys Duval Condemnation Lawyers Nassau Eminent Domain Lawyers Bradford Eminent Domain Lawyers Union Eminent Domain Lawyers Alachua Eminent Domain Lawyers Levy Eminent Domain Lawyers Gilchrist Eminent Domain Lawyers Baker Eminent Domain Lawyers Columbia Condemnation Lawyers Hamilton Eminent Domain Attorneys Suwannee Eminent Domain Lawyers Dixie Eminent Domain Lawyers Lafayette Eminent Domain Lawyers Taylor Eminent Domain Lawyers Madison Eminent Domain Lawyers Jefferson Eminent Domain Lawyers Wakulla Eminent Domain Lawyers Leon Eminent Domain Lawyers Gadsden Condemnation Lawyers Franklin Eminent Domain Attorneys Liberty Eminent Domain Lawyers Gulf Eminent Domain Lawyers Calhoun Eminent Domain Lawyers Bay Eminent Domain Lawyers Jackson Eminent Domain Lawyers Washington Eminent Domain Lawyers Holmes Eminent Domain Lawyers Walton Eminent Domain Attorneys Okaloosa Eminent Domain Lawyers Santa Rosa Condemnation Lawyers Escambia Eminent Domain Attorneys