Florida Statute 73.0511 | Lawyer Caselaw & Research

The 2024 Florida Statutes

Title VI
CIVIL PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE

Chapter 73
EMINENT DOMAIN

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 73.0511

73.0511 Prelitigation notice.—Prior to instituting litigation, the condemning authority shall notify the fee owners of statutory rights under s. 73.091.

History.—s. 1, ch. 87-148.

F.S. 73.0511 on Google Scholar

F.S. 73.0511 on Casetext

Amendments to 73.0511

Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 73.0511

Level: Degree
Misdemeanor/Felony: First/Second/Third

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 73.0511.

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases Citing Statute 73.0511

Total Results: 3

Vinson v. State

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1974-09-27

Citation: 300 So. 2d 714, 1974 Fla. App. LEXIS 8725

Snippet: BOARDMAN, Judge. By amended information Vinson was charged with breaking and entering a dwelling house with intent to commit a felony, to wit: grand larceny, while armed with a dangerous weapon. He was found guilty by a jury and sentenced to fifty years in prison. The evidence is overwhelming that appellant did break and enter with intent to steal property of some value while armed with a knife, and that he did, in fact, steal some property. He was apprehended shortly after the crime was reported

MacCourt v. State

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1974-05-24

Citation: 296 So. 2d 89, 1974 Fla. App. LEXIS 6932

Snippet: PER CURIAM. Based upon our consideration of the briefs and oral argument and from a review of the record of the proceedings below we are of the opinion that the defendants have failed to demonstrate reversible error. With particular regard to the variance between the information, the bill of particulars and the proof adduced at trial we are of the view that no prejudice was shown by the defendants to have resulted from, such variance. Barber v. State, Fla.App.1971, 243 So.2d 2; Fitzgerald v. State

Rahming v. State

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1973-08-21

Citation: 281 So. 2d 371

Snippet: PER CURIAM. This court, proceeding in the manner outlined and recommended by the Supreme Court of the United States in Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493, having deferred ruling on a motion of the public defender to withdraw as counsel for the indigent defendant-appellant, and having furnished appellant with a copy of the public defender’s memorandum brief, and having allowed the appellant a reasonable specified time within which to raise any points that he chose