Young v. Palm Beach County, 82-1762
| Decision Date | 11 January 1984 |
| Docket Number | No. 82-1762,82-1762 |
| Parties | Oliver Earl YOUNG, Appellant, v. PALM BEACH COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
John M. Johnston of White & Case, Palm Beach, for appellant.
Charles F. Schoech, County Atty., and David M. Wolpin, Asst. County Atty., West Palm Beach, and Robert S. Goldman of Messer, Rhodes & Vickers, Tallahassee, for appellee.
Appellant seeks reversal of a final judgment dismissing his amended complaint seeking inverse condemnation against Palm Beach County. The complaint alleged a taking of residential property due to noise from overflying aircraft as they enter and depart Palm Beach International Airport.
The amended complaint averred that for over fourteen years appellant has owned certain real property approximately 2000 yards from the eastern end of the East-West runway of Palm Beach International Airport, which is owned and operated by Palm Beach County. Regular and almost continuous flights to and from the airport over and near appellant's property, often minutes apart, make it impossible during such flights for appellant or members of his family to converse, to speak over the telephone, or to listen to television. It was further alleged that the frequency of these flights has steadily increased over the past fourteen years; the noise emitted by said aircraft has severely diminished, deprived, and substantially interfered with the beneficial use and enjoyment of said property and has diminished the market value thereof. Finally, appellant alleged that appellee should be required to exercise its power of eminent domain and pay appellant for air or avigational easements or other property rights taken.
The trial court granted appellee's motion to dismiss the amended complaint because appellant failed to allege 1) compliance with Section 768.28(6), Florida Statutes (1981), 2) that the conditions complained of are reasonably expected to continue, and 3) inadequate identification of the air or avigational easements or other property rights that were taken.
There now exists a variety of cases involving inverse condemnation of property neighboring airports. 1 They describe the cause of action that arises when noise and other disruptive factors become so onerous as to constitute a taking of neighboring property. The cause of action alleged here does not sound in tort, a sine qua non for application of Section 768.28(6), Florida Statutes (1981). See State Road Department v. Tharp, 146 Fla. 745, 1 So.2d 868 (1941); City of Jacksonville, supra; see also Martin v. Port of Seattle, 64 Wash.2d 309, 391 P.2d 540 (1964), cert. denied 379 U.S. 989, 85 S.Ct. 701, 13 L.Ed.2d 610 (1965). Rather, appellant seeks the equitable remedy of requiring the government to condemn the property taken and pay compensation therefor.
Appellee contends that appellant failed to allege that...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Russo Farms, Inc. v. Vineland Bd. of Educ.
...a tort claim but an equitable remedy, and therefore the "tort claims" law is expressly inapplicable. E.g., Young v. Palm Beach County, 443 So.2d 450, 452 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1984); Borntrager v. County of Delaware, 76 A.D.2d 969, 428 N.Y.S.2d 766, 767 (1980); Wis. Retired Teachers Ass'n, Inc. ......
-
New Port Largo, Inc. v. Monroe County
...of its subdivisions. The county, however, is not entitled to statutory notice with respect to Count IV. In Young v. Palm Beach County, 443 So.2d 450, 451-452 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984), the court found the statutory notice requirement of § 768.28(6) to be inapplicable to an inverse condemnation cl......
-
Schick v. Florida Dept. of Agriculture
...were sufficient to demonstrate a taking. A similar result obtained in Young v. Palm Beach County, 443 So.2d 450 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984). In Young the court held that the amended complaint which alleged a steady increase in airplane flights over a 14-year period, with the attendant noise which s......
-
City of Fort Lauderdale v. Hinton
...2d DCA 1982)). The Hintons do not have to show that all beneficial use or all value was destroyed. See, e.g., Young v. Palm Beach Cty., 443 So. 2d 450, 451-52 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984); Kendry v. State Rd. Dep't, 213 So. 2d 23, 27 (Fla. 4th DCA 1968). A taking occurs when government action depriv......