## Facts

- The Florida Department of Transportation (DOT) initiated an eminent domain action to acquire property owned by Fortune Federal Savings and Loan Association for a road-widening project.
- DOT needed only a portion of Fortune’s parcel for the road improvement but sought to condemn the entire parcel.
- Under Florida’s eminent domain compensation scheme, a partial taking would require DOT to pay the value of the land taken plus statutory “business damages,” totaling about $2,225,000.
- If DOT took the entire parcel, Fortune would receive only the parcel’s value, about $480,000, and business damages would not be payable.
- DOT relied on a statute authorizing, in certain circumstances, acquisition of more property than strictly necessary to reduce right-of-way acquisition costs.
- The trial court limited DOT’s taking to the portion needed for the road project.
- The district court of appeal affirmed, concluding that taking extra property solely to save money and avoid business damages was not a constitutionally valid public purpose.
- The Florida Supreme Court accepted review.

## Issues

1. Whether DOT may condemn an entire parcel when only part is needed for a road project solely to avoid paying statutory business damages that would be owed in a partial taking.
2. Whether cost savings, standing alone, constitute a sufficient public purpose under the Florida Constitution to justify taking more property than is necessary for the project.

## Decision

- The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the decision limiting DOT to the taking actually needed for the road-widening project.
- The court held DOT may not condemn an entire parcel solely to avoid paying business damages that would be required in a partial taking.
- The court concluded that “saving the state money,” by itself, is not a constitutionally adequate public purpose for expanding the scope of a taking beyond project needs.

## Legal Principles

- Under the Florida Constitution, eminent domain requires both a public purpose and full compensation as defined by Florida’s compensation framework.
- Statutory business damages in partial takings are part of Florida’s legislatively defined compensation scheme and cannot be nullified by structuring the taking to avoid them.
- A statute permitting acquisition beyond strict necessity does not authorize an expanded taking when the sole objective is to reduce compensation otherwise owed.
- Cost efficiency may be considered among otherwise valid public-purpose alternatives, but cost savings alone cannot supply the required public purpose for taking additional property.
- Eminent domain may not be used as a means to defeat compensation rights created by the Legislature.

## Conclusion

Florida’s high court held that DOT could not take Fortune’s entire parcel merely to eliminate statutory business damages that would accompany a partial taking; an expanded taking must be supported by a genuine public purpose connected to the project, not cost savings alone.


Dep’t of Transp. v. Fortune Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass’n, 532 So. 2d 1267 (Fla. 1988)