Department of Transportation v. Fortune Federal Savings and Loan Association
Supreme Court of Florida
532 So.2d 1267 (1988)
Relevant factsFree
Florida DOT (defendant) needed only part of Fortune's (plaintiff) land for a road-widening project, but a Florida statute let it acquire the entire parcel to avoid paying the substantially higher business damages ($2,225,000) required for a partial taking, instead paying only the full parcel's value ($480,000); the trial court limited DOT to taking only the needed portion, and the intermediate appellate court affirmed, holding cost savings was not a valid public purpose and that taking more than necessary was unconstitutional.
IssueFree
Whether, under a state constitution, saving the state money by reducing land-acquisition costs is a valid public purpose that may justify a taking of property.
Related cases
Pennell v. City of San Jose485 U.S. 1 (1988)Huntington Branch, NAACP v. Town of Huntington844 F.2d 926 (2d Cir.), review declined in part and judgment aff’d sub nom. Town of Huntington v. Huntington Branch, NAACP, 488 U.S. 15 (1988)Karches v. City of Cincinnati526 N.E.2d 1350 (1988)City of New York v. CitiSource, Inc.679 F. Supp. 393 (1988)Messiah Baptist Church v. County of Jefferson859 F.2d 820 (1988)