HomeMy WebLinkAboutR-79-0431GMM/S/1
6/18/79
RESOLUTION NO. 7 9- 4 3 1
ESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF FINANCE TO PAY
TO FLORIDA EAST COAST RAILWAY COMPANY THE SUM OF $60,882.82
IN FULL AND COMPLETE SETTLEMENT OF ITS CLAIM AGAINST THE
CITY OF. MIAMI FOR DAMAGES SUFFERED BY SAID RAILWAY COMPANY
AS A RESULT OF THE ORDER OF TAKING ENTERED ON APRIL 27,
1976, BY DADE,COUNTY-`CIRCUIT COURT WHICH VESTED TITLE TO
CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY OWNED BY SAID RAILWAY COMPANY IN THE
►�� •�,
Ldd O RTIV• DEPRIVING SAID RAILWAY COMPANY FROM ITS BENEFICIAL USE OF
CITY OF MIAMI FOR A PERIOD OF THIRTEEN MONTHS, THEREBY
SAID PROPERTY.
°A R
hJCUMENTS
FOLLOW"
WHEREAS, the Florida East Coast Railway Company filed its Petition for.
of Miami to recover for damages it sustained as
Taking entered by Dade County Circuit Court, pursuant
Restitution against the City
a result of the Order of
to which title to certain p
Company. was
arcels of real property owned by said Railway
vested in the City of Miami for a period of thirteen months until
Third DistrictCourt of Appeals, thus
said Order of Taking was reversed by the
reverting title in said. Railway Company;
WHEREAS,to
Railway
a Summary, Judgment as
Company by the Circuit Court itt and for Dade County on said Petition
for Restitution; and
WHEREAS, in said Summary Judgment as to Liability, the Court found that
the City of Miami is liable for any and all damages incurred by said Florida
East Coast Railway Company as a result of the Order of Taking, pursuant to
which title to the aforementioned real property located in the City of Miami
City of Miami for the aforementioned" thirteen` months period;
was vested in said
and
and
Liability was
amount of damages
the total
could exceed the amont of $100,000; and
ITMe1Q .
E
entered in . favor of said
has
WHEREAS,
which said Railway Companysuffered
"DOCUMENT INDEX
r1.
t e Railway Company
WHEREAS,.. after considerable negotiations, c
ou r
agreed to accept the amount of $60,882.82, excluding attorneys' fees
and complete satisfaction of all damages suffered by it in the afnredescribed
eminent domain Proceeding; and
WHEREAS, it is advantageous
a saving and to stop the running of interest;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT. RESOLVED BY THE COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI,
FLORIDA:
for the City of Miami to
pay till's sum to
Section 1.'"The Director of Finance is hereby directed
in full
effect
CITY COMMISSION
MEETING OF
JUN2 5 1979
Imoumos Net
•
1
_ Florida -East Coast -Railway. Company the sum of $60,882.82 'in full and complete;
satisfaction of any and all -damages suffered by.said.RailwayCompany,,
PASSED AND ADOPTED -this 2 5th•day of June
CITY CLERK
PREP ED AND
APPROVED BY:
G. MIRIAM MAER
ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY
APPAS TO FORM D CORRECTNESS:
ORGE F. KNOX, '.,
TY ATTORNEY/
79-431
Z 3
711IAh•11. Ft.: 711OA
71.;4 ti:al, •11.7.4.3`.
The Honorable Members of
T"` the City Commission
Geo
Cit
F. Knox,
Attorney
r.,
June 18, 1979
City of Miami v. FEC,:;etc.
f'"'"'" Case No. 71-17071
GNCCOC,URC5;`
In July of 1977, the Third District Court of Appeals reversed the
CircuitCourt's Order of Taking pursuant to whichtitle to three parcels of
property ownedby FEC,had- :been vested in'the City of Miami. ',Subsequent to
said reversal, FEC, as well as several other defendants in the original
eninent-`domain .proceeding, filed Petitions for Restitution against the City
of Miami to recoverfor:damages.sustained by -them during the thirteen month
period in which the City held title .to the subject property. The Circuit
Court recently entered a` Summary Judgment as to Liability against the City of
Miami, ruling;. thatthe ;City 'is liable for any` and all damages` suffered by the.
FEC''Railway Company during said thirteen month period.
If this case goes to trial on the amount of damages, the exposure to the
City will probably be in the range of $100,000 to $120,000. After extensive
negotiation and discussion, a settlement figure has been reached in the amount
of$60,882.82,, including interest. It is, therefore, recommendedthat this
settlement be approved to avoid the obvious exposure to the City of a verdict
higher than the settlement amount,plus the high cost oflitigation.
GFK/I.1ft%,S�l