Seaside Properties, Inc. v. State Road Dept., 59-155
| Decision Date | 06 June 1960 |
| Docket Number | No. 59-155,59-155 |
| Parties | SEASIDE PROPERTIES, INC., a Florida corporation, Appellant, v. STATE ROAD DEPARTMENT of the State of Florida and Monroe County, a subdivision of the State of Florida, Appellees. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Guion T. DeLoach Coral Gables, for appellant.
Bryan W. Henry, Tallahassee, Paul E. Sawyer, Key West, and Clyde G. Trammell, Jr., Tallahassee, for appellees.
This appeal is from an order granting a motion of the defendant to dismiss an amended equity complaint, and dismissing the complaint with prejudice.
The appellant, who was the plaintiff below, filed its amended complaint in the circuit court in Monroe County against the State Road Department seeking to quiet title to certain real estate consisting of a section of Old State Road 4-A which had been abandoned in favor of a newer overseas highway. The appellant deraigned his title, and alleged that appellant and its predecessor in title have exercised possession and control of the subject property and paid taxes thereon for more than seven years; that the record discloses no title in the state or county, and that 'the defendants have no chain of title by which they can claim any right, title or interest in Old State Road 4-A, a/k/a Old Dixie Highway, and that their only claim is based upon use for a period of years which terminated on or about the year 1937 upon the completion of U. S. Highway #1, which is the present Overseas Highway.' It was further alleged that the State Road Department had threatened to invade certain property of plaintiff and remove and destroy certain display signs which plaintiff had placed on the property involved.
In dismissing the cause the learned chancellor was of the opinion, as recited in his order, that 'this court is without jurisdiction over the subject matter of this cause as the said Defendant [State Road Department of Florida] cannot be sued in this action.'
The determinative question here is whether suit to quiet title may be maintained against the State Road Department under the circumstances presented.
It is clear that the state may not be sued without its consent. See 30 Fla.Jur., State of Florida, § 42 et seq. And it is established that a suit against the State Road Department is, in effect, a suit against the state. State ex rel. Davis v. Love, 99 Fla. 333, 126 So. 374, 377.
In contending that the trial court had jurisdiction, appellant cites and relies on the cases of State Road Department of Florida v. Tharp, 146 Fla. 745, 1 So.2d 868; State Road Department v. Bender, 147 Fla. 15, 2 So.2d 298; Webb v. Giddens, Fla.1955, 82 So.2d 743; and State Road Department of Florida v. Darby, Fla.App.1959, 109 So.2d 591; in each of which suit was allowed against the road department. Those cases involved actual physical invasion of a landowner's property, or acts amounting to a taking of property without compensation therefor; and in several of them the court saw fit to compel exercise of the right of eminent domain and prosecution of condemnation proceedings. Upon such facts it was held that the state's immunity did not shield the department from suit.
In the instant case, the complaint contains no allegation of actual taking or physical encroachment. The road department is charged only with having threatened to come upon appellant's property and destroy and remove certain display signs therefrom. Since the threat involved here is not such an invasion or taking of the property as those for which it was held suit against the department would lie in the above cited cases, the chancellor properly dismissed the complaint. See, as exemplary of the broad class of cases precluding suit against the state in like situations, Rabin v. Lake Worth Drainage District, Fla.1955, 82 So.2d 353; Weir v. Palm Beach County, Fla.1956, 85 So.2d 865; Spangler v. Florida State Turnpike Authority, Fla.1958, 106 So.2d 421; Moreno v. Aldrich, Fla.App.1959, 113 So.2d 406. Therefore, this suit to quiet title could not be maintained against the State Road Department unless provision therefor was made by statute.
Our attention has been directed to two statutes dealing with suits against the State Road Department in certain circumstances, §§ 337.19 and 69.17 et seq., Fla.Stat., F.S.A. Neither gives authority to sue the State Road Department to quiet title under this amended complaint. Section 337.19 clearly is not applicable here, as it authorizes suits 'against the department on any claim under contract for work done; provided, that no suit sounding in tort shall be maintained against the department.'
The second statute mentioned, §§...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Cheney v. Dade County
...Turnpike Authority, 106 So.2d 421 (Fla.1958). See also Arnold v. Shumpert, 217 So.2d 116 (Fla.1968); Seaside Properties, Inc. v. State Road Department, 121 So.2d 204 (Fla. 3d DCA 1960); and Department of Natural Resources v. Circuit Court of Twelfth Judicial Circuit, 317 So.2d 772 (Fla. 2d ......
-
City of Gainesville v. State Dot, 1D05-0710.
...Tpk. Auth., 106 So.2d 421, 424 (Fla. 1958); Div. of Admin. v. Oliff, 350 So.2d 484 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977); Seaside Prop., Inc. v. State Road Dep't, 121 So.2d 204 (Fla. 3d DCA 1960); Blockbuster Video, Inc. v. Dep't of Transp., 714 So.2d 1222 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998). Waiver of sovereign immunity wil......
-
State ex rel. Division of Administration v. Oliff, GG-256
...purporting to waive sovereign immunity are strictly construed, and must be clear and unequivocal. Seaside Properties, Inc. v. State Road Department, 121 So.2d 204 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1960). Further, since the Supreme Court opinion in Circuit Court of Twelfth Judicial Circuit v. Department of Natu......
-
Dade County v. Florida Ass'n of Workers for Blind, Inc., 64-1060
...This Court has had opportunity to recognize this provision of the law in a somewhat similar situation. In Seaside Properties, Inc. v. State Road Department, Fla.App.1960, 121 So.2d 204, it was held that in the absence of an allegation that a State agency had actually taken or made physical ......