Home
Jacksonville Location Phone Call/Texting Policy How do Fees Work?
Criminal Defense DUI Defense Foreclosure Defense Copyright Workers Compensation Attorney Jacksonville Personal Injury Lawyer
Florida Statutes Georgia Code Jacksonville Accident Attorney Real Estate Attorney Jacksonville Florida Criminal Lawyer Jacksonville Notary Public
Menu
904-383-7448
Florida Statute 73.032 | Lawyer Caselaw & Research
F.S. 73.032 Case Law from Google Scholar
Statute is currently reporting as:
Link to State of Florida Official Statute Google Search for Amendments to 73.032

The 2022 Florida Statutes (including 2022 Special Session A and 2023 Special Session B)
Title VI
CIVIL PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE
Chapter 73
EMINENT DOMAIN
View Entire Chapter
F.S. 73.032
73.032 Offer of judgment.—
(1) This section shall provide the exclusive offer of judgment provisions for eminent domain actions.
(2) The petitioner may serve a defendant with an offer of judgment no sooner than 120 days after the defendant has filed an answer and no later than 20 days prior to trial.
(3) A defendant may make an offer to have judgment entered against defendant for payment of compensation by petitioner only for an amount that is under $100,000, and such offer may be served on petitioner no sooner than 120 days after the defendant has filed an answer and no later than 20 days prior to trial.
(4)(a) The offer of judgment must:
1. Be in writing;
2. Settle all pending claims with that party or parties exclusive of attorney’s fees and costs;
3. State that the offer is made pursuant to this section;
4. Name the parties to whom the offer is made;
5. Briefly summarize any relevant conditions;
6. State the total amount of the offer; and
7. Include a certificate of service.
(b) The offer of judgment must be served in the same manner as other pleadings upon the parties to whom it is made, but may not be filed with the court unless it is accepted or unless filing is necessary to enforce this section.
(c) The offer of judgment shall be deemed rejected unless accepted by filing both a written acceptance and the written offer with the court within 30 days after service of the offer, or before the trial begins if less than 30 days. Upon proper filing of both the offer and acceptance, the court shall enter judgment thereon. A rejection of an offer terminates the offer.
(d) The party making the offer may withdraw the offer in a writing served on the opposing party before a written acceptance is filed with the court. Once withdrawn in this manner, an offer is void.
(e) An offer of judgment which is rejected or which is withdrawn does not preclude the making of a subsequent offer of judgment; however, any such subsequent offer of judgment shall automatically void the prior offer of judgment as if the same had never been made.
(5) If a defendant does not accept the offer of judgment made by the petitioner and the judgment obtained by the defendant, exclusive of any interest accumulated after the offer of judgment was initially made, is equal to or less than such offer, then the court shall not award any costs incurred by the defendant after the date the offer of judgment was rejected.
(6) If the petitioner rejects the offer of judgment made by defendant and the judgment obtained by defendant, exclusive of any interest accumulated after the offer of judgment was initially made, is equal to or is more than such offer, then the court shall award a reasonable attorney’s fee to the defendant based on the factors set forth in s. 73.092(2) and (3).
(7) At the time an offer of judgment is made by the petitioner, the petitioner shall identify and make available to the defendant the construction plans, if any, for the project on which the offer is based.
(8) Evidence of an offer of judgment is admissible only in proceedings to enforce an accepted offer or to determine the costs to be awarded a defendant pursuant to subsection (5) or a reasonable attorney’s fee pursuant to subsection (6).
History.—s. 53, ch. 90-136; s. 2, ch. 90-303; s. 1, ch. 94-162.

F.S. 73.032 on Google Scholar

F.S. 73.032 on Casetext

Amendments to 73.032


Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 73.032
Level: Degree
Misdemeanor/Felony: First/Second/Third

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 73.032.

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

10 Cases from Casetext:Date Descending

U.S. Supreme Court11th Cir. - Ct. App.11th Cir. - MD FL11th Cir. - ND FL11th Cir. - SD FLFed. Reg.Secondary Sources - All

  1. Department of Transportation v. Enterprising Professional Investment Co.

    809 So. 2d 19 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)
    On appeal, the Department asserts that the trial court erred in refusing to consider the offer of judgment because section 73.032(5) divested the court of any discretion to award costs incurred after the rejection of the offer of judgment. EPIC responds that application of section 73.032(5) constitutes a sanction that must be invoked by the timely filing of a motion pursuant to rule 1.442(g), which the Department failed to do. Thus, the question raised by this appeal is whether section 73.032(5) constitutes a sanction, the imposition of which is controlled by the procedural requirements of rule 1.442(g).
    PAGE 21

  2. CSR Partnership v. State, Department of Transportation

    741 So. 2d 623 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)
    Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.442 committee note (emphasis added). Because the differing time requirements between rule 1.442 and section 73.032 are impossible to reconcile, the rule must control.
    PAGE 624

  3. State v. Smithbilt Industries, Inc.

    715 So. 2d 963 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998)   Cited 9 times
    In addition to amending section 73.092, chapter 94-162 also amended section 73.032 in order to allow a defendant in an eminent domain proceeding to make an offer of judgment. If a defendant is successful in obtaining a judgment in excess of its offer, the Department must pay fees pursuant to subsections (2) and (3), even if the Department has made a written offer under subsection (1). See § 73.032(6), Fla. Stat. (1995). Because Smithbilt made no offer of judgment, this provision has no direct application in this case.
    PAGE 966

  4. Pierpont v. Lee County

    710 So. 2d 958 (Fla. 1998)   Cited 11 times
    The county filed a declaration of quick taking against the property of A G in which there was a good-faith estimate of value of $725,000. Two months later, the county made a written offer to A G to acquire the property for $836,000. The offer was refused and the condemnation proceedings continued. An order of taking was entered and an amount equal to the good-faith estimate was deposited in the registry of the court. Thereafter, pursuant to section 73.032, Florida Statutes (1993), the county served A G with an offer of judgment for $836,000, which was accepted.
    PAGE 959

  5. State v. Hall

    707 So. 2d 1163 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998)
    Section 73.032, Florida Statutes, provides the "exclusive offer of judgment provisions for eminent domain actions." Section 73.032(4)(a) requires that the offer of judgment
    PAGE 1164

  6. Lee County v. Pierpont

    693 So. 2d 994 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1997)   Cited 5 times
    The majority opinion finds comfort in Jacksonville Expressway Authority v. Bennett, 158 So.2d 821 (Fla. 1st DCA 1964). A careful reading of this case does not support the proposition that a landowner is precluded from accepting the good faith estimate as full payment for land taken. Bennett was the fourth appeal in an eminent domain action. See Jacksonville Expressway Authority v. Bennett, 124 So.2d 307 (Fla. 1st DCA 1960); Bennett v. Jacksonville Expressway Authority, 131 So.2d 740 (Fla. 1961); and Jacksonville Expressway Authority v. Bennett, 149 So.2d 74 (Fla. 1st DCA 1963). These cases stand for the proposition that the good faith estimate is not binding on the condemning authority's position at trial. This holding does not persuade me on the issue at hand because offers are seldom admissible or binding on a party's position at trial. See, e.g., § 45.061 (offers of settlement); § 73.032 (offers of judgment in eminent domain actions); § 768.79 (offer of judgment).
    PAGE 998

  7. In re Amendments to Florida Rules of Civil Procedure

    682 So. 2d 105 (Fla. 1996)   Cited 35 times

    rule was amended to reconcile, where possible, sections 44.102(6) (formerly 44.102(5)(b)), 45.061, 73.032, and 768.79, Florida Statutes, and the decisions of the Florida Supreme Court in Knealing v. Puleo

  8. State, Dept. of Transp. v. Daystar

    674 So. 2d 754 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)
    We also agree with the department's assertion that it need not be penalized for including reference to section 73.032 in its offer, "in an abundance of caution," even though that statute was not effective as to previously filed actions. Section 73.032 supplies procedural rules for offers made in an eminent domain proceeding that were previously found in section 73.092 and the rules of civil procedure. There was no confusion created by the department's offer as it was clearly substantively founded on section 73.092.
    PAGE 756

  9. Florida Inland Nav. Dist. v. Humphrys

    616 So. 2d 494 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)   Cited 6 times
    (6) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, if an offer of judgment made by the petitioner, pursuant to s. 73.032, is rejected and the verdict or judgment is less than or equal to the offer of judgment, no attorney's fees or costs shall be awarded for time spent by the attorney or costs incurred after the time of rejection of the offer, except for apportionment or other supplemental proceedings.
    PAGE 496

    Cases from cite.case.law:

    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, v. ENTERPRISING PROFESSIONAL INVESTMENT COMPANY,, 809 So. 2d 19 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

    . . . because, in determining EPIC’s entitlement to costs, the trial court failed to properly apply section 73.032 . . . because the final judgment award was less than the offer of judgment, EPIC was precluded, under section 73.032 . . . EPIC responds that application of section 73.032(5) constitutes a sanction that must be invoked by the . . . We hold that section 73.032(5) is not a sanction as that term is used in rule 1.442. . . . fees and costs without a determina tion as to whether any of those costs were prohibited by section 73.032 . . .

    AMENDMENTS TO THE FLORIDA RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 773 So. 2d 1098 (Fla. 2000)

    . . . rule was amended to reconcile, where possible, sections 44.102(6) (formerly 44.102(5)(b)), 45.061, 73.032 . . .

    CSR PARTNERSHIP, a C. d b a s v. STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION,, 741 So. 2d 623 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)

    . . . If substantive, section 73.032, Florida Statutes (1997), controls and requires that an offer be served . . . Because the differing time requirements between rule 1.442 and section 73.032 are impossible to reconcile . . .

    STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, v. SMITHBILT INDUSTRIES, INC. a, 715 So. 2d 963 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998)

    . . . In addition to amending section 73.092, chapter 94-162 also amended section 73.032 in order to allow . . . See § 73.032(6), Fla. Stat. (1995). . . . offers that do not comply with all of the requirements to create an offer of judgment under section 73.032 . . .

    F. PIERPONT, v. LEE COUNTY, A G INVESTMENTS, v. LEE COUNTY, BARNETT BANKS, INC. v. LEE COUNTY,, 710 So. 2d 958 (Fla. 1998)

    . . . Thereafter, pursuant to section 73.032, Florida Statutes (1993), the county served A&G with an offer . . .

    STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, v. E. HALL,, 707 So. 2d 1163 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998)

    . . . On February 20,1995, the department presented an offer of judgment pursuant to section 73.032, Florida . . . Section 73.032, Florida Statutes, provides the “exclusive offer of judgment provisions for eminent domain . . . Section 73.032(4)(a) requires that the offer of judgment 1. be in writing; 2. settle all pending claims . . . , offer of judgment for $126,400 clearly met all of the statutory requirements set forth in section 73.032 . . .

    LEE COUNTY, a v. F. PIERPONT J., 693 So. 2d 994 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1997)

    . . . See, e.g., § 45.061 (offers of settlement); § 73.032 (offers of judgment in eminent domain actions); . . .

    In AMENDMENTS TO FLORIDA RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 682 So. 2d 105 (Fla. 1996)

    . . . rule was amended to reconcile, where possible, sections 44.102(6) (formerly 44.102(5)(b)), 45.061, 73.032 . . .

    STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, v. DAYSTAR, INC., 674 So. 2d 754 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)

    . . . The department’s offer stated that it was being made “pursuant to Florida Statutes Sections 73.032, 73.092 . . . agree with the department’s assertion that it need not be penalized for including reference to section 73.032 . . . Section 73.032 supplies procedural rules for offers made in an eminent domain proceeding that were previously . . . argument that by the department’s reference, in the offer of judgment to the later-adopted section 73.032 . . . The additional reference to section 73.032 was mere surplus-age, as that statute by its terms could not . . .

    FLORIDA INLAND NAVIGATION DISTRICT, v. A. HUMPHRYS, H., 616 So. 2d 494 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)

    . . . Notwithstanding any other provision of law, if an offer of judgment made by the petitioner, pursuant to s. 73.032 . . .