STBRSecure Tactical Briefing Room
References in periodicals archive ?
The court specially discussed Belvedere, which STBR and the First District had relied upon to conclude the act affected a taking of the upland owner's property right to access.
STBR focused its merits brief on four key arguments: 1) The shore at the subject location was not critically eroded, and the renourishment project was simply undertaken to create a purely public beach; 2) prior to the Florida Supreme Court's decision, Florida's background principles of littoral property law established rights to direct and exclusive, immediate, and direct access to the ocean and the right to accretions; 3) the Florida Supreme Court's decision was a judicial taking of STBR's property rights to accretion and direct contact with the water; and, critically 4) the court should recognize, for the first time in constitutional jurisprudence, a judicial taking of private property without just compensation in violation of the Constitution of the United States.
On the issue of judicial takings, STBR tracked language used by Justice Stewart in his concurring opinion in Hughes v.