-
Trouble logging in? Send us a message with your username and/or email address for help.
US Supreme Court says Florida can Widen Beaches
- Thread starter Kurt
- Start date
Supreme Court affirms right to renourish beaches
BREAKING NEWS: U.S. Supreme Court affirms right to renourish beaches
June 17, 2010 9:39 AM
The Associated Press
WASHINGTON ? The Supreme Court has affirmed a ruling allowing Florida to undertake beach-widening projects without paying beachfront property owners who lose exclusive access to the water.
The court, by an 8-0 vote Thursday, rejected a challenge by six homeowners in Florida's panhandle who argued that a beach-widening project changed their oceanfront property into oceanview. Justice John Paul Stevens took no part in the case.
Private property advocates had hoped the court would rule for the first time that a court decision can amount to a taking of property.
BREAKING NEWS: U.S. Supreme Court affirms right to renourish beaches
June 17, 2010 9:39 AM
The Associated Press
WASHINGTON ? The Supreme Court has affirmed a ruling allowing Florida to undertake beach-widening projects without paying beachfront property owners who lose exclusive access to the water.
The court, by an 8-0 vote Thursday, rejected a challenge by six homeowners in Florida's panhandle who argued that a beach-widening project changed their oceanfront property into oceanview. Justice John Paul Stevens took no part in the case.
Private property advocates had hoped the court would rule for the first time that a court decision can amount to a taking of property.
beachmouse
Beach Fanatic
If anyone wants to read the full decision, it's currently a pdf on the sidebar here:
Supreme Court of the United States
Seems like the Court is saying that if the State wants to put sand on top of submerged lands that it has legal title for, (ie. the Gulf of Mexico seabed) then putting sand on those lands does not constitute a Taking of the upland private property owners' lands under federal law.
Supreme Court of the United States
Seems like the Court is saying that if the State wants to put sand on top of submerged lands that it has legal title for, (ie. the Gulf of Mexico seabed) then putting sand on those lands does not constitute a Taking of the upland private property owners' lands under federal law.
Capricious
Beach Fanatic
so you thought you owned the beach...
June 17 (Bloomberg) -- The U.S. Supreme Court, in a defeat for Florida beachfront property owners, upheld a state program that fights erosion by adding sand along the shoreline and creating strips of public beach.
In ruling against the landowners, the Florida Supreme Court said for the first time that beachfront property owners don?t necessarily have the right to be in direct contact with the water.
Beach Property Rights Limited by U.S. Supreme Court (Update1) - Bloomberg.com
June 17 (Bloomberg) -- The U.S. Supreme Court, in a defeat for Florida beachfront property owners, upheld a state program that fights erosion by adding sand along the shoreline and creating strips of public beach.
In ruling against the landowners, the Florida Supreme Court said for the first time that beachfront property owners don?t necessarily have the right to be in direct contact with the water.
Beach Property Rights Limited by U.S. Supreme Court (Update1) - Bloomberg.com
This is great news for free beaches. this should kill all the scoundrels putting up private property signs. JUST FOR EVERYONES INFO. 6 WEEKS AGO SANCTUARY BY THE SEA CALLED THE POLICE ON A BEACH TRESPASSER. POLIE CAME OUT TOOK HIS PICTURE AND GAVE CITATION. COUNTY ATTORNEY TOLD SANCTUARY UNLESS YOU SURVEY THE PROPERTY DAILY YOU HAVE NO LEGAL BOUNDRY SO THE COMPLEX CAN NO LONGER LEGALLY ENFORCE THE BOUNDRYS
