The 2023 Florida Statutes (including Special Session C)

Title XVIII
PUBLIC LANDS AND PROPERTY

Chapter 255
PUBLIC PROPERTY AND PUBLICLY OWNED BUILDINGS

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 255.22

255.22 Reconveyance of lands not used for purpose specified.—

(1) In the event any party owning adjoining land conveys real property, without receipt of valuable consideration, to any municipality or county for a specific purpose or use and if such county or municipality fails to use such property for such purpose for a period of 60 consecutive months or, with respect to property conveyed on or after October 1, 1984, fails to use such property for such purpose for a period of 60 consecutive months or identify during the 60-month period the proposed use of such property in a comprehensive plan or other public facilities plan, then, upon written demand of the grantor, or grantor’s successors in title owning such adjoining land, the municipality or county may execute and deliver a quitclaim deed to the party making such demand provided such party is the owner of land adjoining such property on at least one side. No such quitclaim deed shall be delivered hereunder unless the specific purpose or use to be made of the property was disclosed to the grantee at the time of delivery of the conveyance or appeared in the conveyance or in an official record of the county; provided, however, that as to any such conveyance after July 1, 1967, the specific purpose or use must appear of record.

(2) In the event the purpose for which the property was conveyed required physical improvement or construction on such property or the maintenance thereof, any such municipality or county that fails to construct, improve, or maintain such property for the period specified in subsection (1) shall be conclusively deemed to have abandoned the property for the purpose for which it was conveyed, unless, with respect to property conveyed on or after October 1, 1984, the proposed use of such property has been identified in a comprehensive plan or other public facilities plan of the municipality or county during the 60-month period specified in subsection (1).

History.—ss. 1, 2, ch. 67-383; ss. 1, 2, 3, ch. 84-366; s. 42, ch. 93-164; s. 3, ch. 94-175; s. 3, ch. 95-297; s. 16, ch. 95-310.

Note.—Consolidation of s. 255.22 and former s. 255.23.

F.S. 255.22 on Google Scholar

F.S. 255.22 on Casetext

Amendments to 255.22

Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 255.22

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

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 255.22.

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases from cite.case.law:

STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, v. BOAT CENTER, INC., 726 So. 2d 404 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)

. . . over property originally conveyed by appellee’s predecessor in title to Broward County under section 255.22 . . . While the trial court found conflict between certain subsections of section 255.22, it resolved those . . . See § 255.22, Fla. Stat. (1997) (effective date May 15, 1995). . . .

STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, v. B C FOODS, INC. a d b a s s a n k a s a, 687 So. 2d 4 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)

. . . of Fort Lauderdale to reeonvey the easement at issue to McDonald’s Corporation pursuant to section 255.22 . . . Even though McDonald’s is not the “grantor’s successor” within the meaning of section 255.22(5), it is . . .

G. FEATHER, v. DONALDSON,, 481 So. 2d 937 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1985)

. . . At trial, the Donaldsons successfully contended they were entitled, under sections 255.22 and 255.23, . . . Relying on sections 255.22 and 255.23, the court below concluded that the 1963 deed, while it was a single . . . While an easement is a property interest subject to transfer by deed, section 255.22 did not contemplate . . . A reconveyance under section 255.22 could not vest the fee title with the Donaldsons but, at most, would . . . Section 255.22, Florida Statutes (1983), states as follows: Reconveyance of lands not used for purpose . . .

PHOTO DATA, INC. v. SAWYER,, 533 F. Supp. 348 (D.D.C. 1982)

. . . Plaintiff has also requested reimbursement for litigation costs totalling $255.22. . . . Plaintiff requests $255.22 as reimbursement for the costs of litigation. . . . Service 25.60 Filing and Miscellaneous 28.00 Overtime Meals and Car 20.16 Local Transportation 30-50 $255.22 . . .

J. C. VEREEN SONS, INC. v. CITY OF MIAMI,, 397 So. 2d 979 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1981)

. . . We consider next Vereen’s agreement under Sections 255.22 and 255.23, Florida Statutes (1975). . . . Vereen is entitled to reconveyance under Section 255.22 only if he proves (a) he conveyed the land to . . . the requested zoning variance should not constitute valuable consideration for purposes of Section 255.22 . . . For the reasons set forth above, we find Vereen is not entitled to reconveyance under Section 255.22 . . .

CITY OF MIAMI, a v. J. C. VEREEN SONS, INC. a, 359 So. 2d 533 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1978)

. . . plaintiff-appellee claimed it was entitled to reconveyance of the property by virtue of the provisions of Sections 255.22 . . . case the trial court did not predicate the judgment on the statute invoked by the plaintiff [Sections 255.22 . . .

THE NATIONAL METROPOLITAN BANK OF WASHINGTON AND CORNELIUS H. DOHERTY, EXECUTORS OF THE WILL OF FREDERICK W. BUCHHOLZ, v. THE UNITED STATES, 125 Ct. Cl. 37 (Ct. Cl. 1953)

. . . a balance due under the return of $6,544.13, which was duly assessed, and with interest thereon of $255.22 . . .