177.081
Dedication and approval.
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us
JustiaFla. Statutes
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
177.081 Dedication and approval.—
(1) Prior to approval by the appropriate governing body, the plat shall be reviewed for conformity to this chapter by a professional surveyor and mapper either employed by or under contract to the local governing body, the costs of which shall be borne by the legal entity offering the plat for recordation, and evidence of such review must be placed on such plat.
(2) Every plat of a subdivision filed for record must contain a dedication by the owner or owners of record. The dedication must be executed by all persons, corporations, or entities whose signature would be required to convey record fee simple title to the lands being dedicated in the same manner in which deeds are required to be executed. All mortgagees having a record interest in the lands subdivided shall execute, in the same manner in which deeds are required to be executed, either the dedication contained on the plat or a separate instrument joining in and ratifying the plat and all dedications and reservations thereon.
(3) When a tract or parcel of land has been subdivided and a plat thereof bearing the dedication executed by the owners of record and mortgagees having a record interest in the lands subdivided, and when the approval of the governing body has been secured and recorded in compliance with this part, all streets, alleys, easements, rights-of-way, and public areas shown on such plat, unless otherwise stated, shall be deemed to have been dedicated to the public for the uses and purposes thereon stated. However, nothing herein shall be construed as creating an obligation upon any governing body to perform any act of construction or maintenance within such dedicated areas except when the obligation is voluntarily assumed by the governing body.
History.—s. 1, ch. 71-339; s. 2, ch. 79-86; s. 7, ch. 98-20; s. 2, ch. 99-288.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6
cases, 1984–2014 · leading case: LOVE PGI PARTNERS, LP v. Schultz
LOVE PGI PARTNERS, LP v. Schultz (1998)
“§ 177.081(2), Fla. Stat. (1995). Both parties conceded that it would be economically impossible for Sugarmill to fence off the public areas shown on the plat so as to restrict the cattle grazing to simply the platted lot areas.”
Hughes v. Town of Mexico Beach (1984)
“Appellant's primary argument centers on the contention that there neither was nor could be a formal acceptance of the dedication of the disputed strip under Section 177.081, Florida Statutes (1983), and that the evidence is not sufficient to support a claim of ownership by any…”
Lee County Electric Cooperative, Inc. v. City of Cape Coral (2014)
“10 are now found in section 177.081. . To the contrary, in the absence of a formal acceptance by the local governing body, LCEC’s use of the easement could have been deemed an acceptance of the dedication on behalf of the public.”
Cable Holdings of Georgia, Inc. v. McNeil Real Estate Fund VI, Ltd. (1993)
“Based on these two distinctions, the panel concluded that “[i]n both [prior] cases, we determined that these utility easements — dedicated to the public for general utility use — were precisely the types of easements accessible by a franchised cable company pursuant to Section…”
Ecological Development, Inc. v. Walton County (1990)
“081(2) provides, in part, that when a plat containing dedicated streets or rights-of-way has been approved by the governing body and recorded as required by law, such streets and rights-of-way shall be deemed to have been dedicated to the public use.”
Black v. Orange County (2004)
“At the time the plat was approved, Section 177.081(2), Florida Statutes 1975, stated that easements shown on the plat, unless otherwise stated, shall be deemed dedicated to the public for the use and purposes thereon stated.”
— 177.081(2) — 4 cases
LOVE PGI PARTNERS, LP v. Schultz (1998)
“§ 177.081(2), Fla. Stat. (1995). Both parties conceded that it would be economically impossible for Sugarmill to fence off the public areas shown on the plat so as to restrict the cattle grazing to simply the platted lot areas.”
Ecological Development, Inc. v. Walton County (1990)
“081(2) provides, in part, that when a plat containing dedicated streets or rights-of-way has been approved by the governing body and recorded as required by law, such streets and rights-of-way shall be deemed to have been dedicated to the public use.”
Black v. Orange County (2004)
“At the time the plat was approved, Section 177.081(2), Florida Statutes 1975, stated that easements shown on the plat, unless otherwise stated, shall be deemed dedicated to the public for the use and purposes thereon stated.”
Cable Holdings of Georgia, Inc. v. McNeil Real Estate Fund VI, Ltd. (1993)
“Based on these two distinctions, the panel concluded that “[i]n both [prior] cases, we determined that these utility easements — dedicated to the public for general utility use — were precisely the types of easements accessible by a franchised cable company pursuant to Section…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.