5 Florida opinions name it 1 courts 2013–2022 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Florida courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Turkali v. City of Safety Harborgreen2 sentences2022See Turkali, 93 So. 3d at 495 (an appraisal that “does not provide opinions as to the value of just [the owner’s] parcel before and after the enactment of the new use restrictions,” does not provide “the means by which to evaluate the potential claim”) (emphasis added). 2022See Turkali, 93 So. 3d at 495 (an appraisal that “does not provide opinions as to the value of just [the owner’s] parcel before and after the enactment of the new use restrictions,” does not provide “the means by which to evaluate the potential claim”) (emphasis added). | 1 | 1 |
Citrus County v. Halls River Development, Inc.green2 sentences2018The ordinance at issue was never applied to the property, leaving the Harris Act claim “dormant” and “inchoate.” We also acknowledge, as the Fifth District recognized in Citrus County v. Halls River Development, Inc., 8 So. 3d 413, 420 (Fla. 5th DCA 2009), the requirement that a property owner apply to develop property is not absolute. 2018The ordinance at issue was never applied to the property, leaving the Harris Act claim “dormant” and “inchoate.” We also acknowledge, as the Fifth District recognized in Citrus County v. Halls River Development, Inc., 8 So. 3d 413, 420 (Fla. 5th DCA 2009), the requirement that a property owner apply to develop property is not absolute. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Florida. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Palm Beach Polo v. Village of Wellington
green
2 sentences2018Id. at 990 . 2018Id. at 990 . | 1 | 2018–2018 |
M & H PROFIT, INC. v. City of Panama City
green
2 sentences2015Rev. 255 , 273, the author recognized that in order to have a cause of action under the Harris Act, there must be direct action against an owner’s property: “[a] governmental action which indirectly burdened or inadvertently devalued an owner’s land, because of regulatory decisions regarding another owner’s property, would be too attenuated for relief under the Harris Act.” Powell went on to state in the article, which was cited with approval in our decision in M & H, 28 So.3d at 76 , that in order to have a Harris Act claim, “the governmental entity must specifically apply the statute, rule, 2015Rev. 255 , 273, the author recognized that in order to have a cause of action under the Harris Act, there must be direct action against an owner’s property: “[a] governmental action which indirectly burdened or inadvertently devalued an owner’s land, because of regulatory decisions regarding another owner’s property, would be too attenuated for relief under the Harris Act.” Powell went on to state in the article, which was cited with approval in our decision in M & H, 28 So.3d at 76 , that in order to have a Harris Act claim, “the governmental entity must specifically apply the statute, rule, | 1 | 2015–2015 |
RUSSO ASSOCIATES v. City of Dania Beach
green
1 sentence2013The Wendlers then timely filed their Harris Act action on July 14, 2011, well before the four-year period ended. 5 See Russo, 920 So.2d at 718 . | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.