SC03-1685 - Henry H. Blanton, Etc., Et Al. v. City Of Pinellas Park, Florida, Et Al

State: Florida

Docket No: SC03-1685

Case Date: 10/21/2004

Preview:Supreme Court of Florida
____________ No. SC03-1685 ____________ HENRY H. BLANTON, etc., et al., Petitioners, vs. CITY OF PINELLAS PARK, FLORIDA, et al., Respondents.

[October 21, 2004]

PARIENTE, C.J. The issue in this case is whether the Marketable Record Title to Real Property Act (MRTA), chapter 712, Florida Statutes (2003), can operate to extinguish a valid claim to a statutory way of necessity authorized by section 704.01(2), Florida Statutes (2003). Relying on this Court's decision in H & F Land, Inc. v. Panama City-Bay County Airport & Industrial District, 736 So. 2d 1167 (Fla. 1999), the Second District Court of Appeal answered this question in the affirmative. See Blanton v. City of Pinellas Park, 854 So. 2d 729, 731 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003). However, recognizing that H & F Land concerned a common law

way of necessity and not the statutory right, the Second District certified the following question to be of great public importance: Does the Marketable Record Title to Real Property Act, Chapter 712, Florida Statutes, operate to extinguish an otherwise valid claim of a statutory way of necessity when such claim was not timely asserted under the provisions of that Act? Id. For the reasons that follow we answer the certified question in the negative and hold that MRTA does not apply to a valid claim to a statutory way of necessity. 1 FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY Henry Blanton, in his capacity as trustee for a profit-sharing plan, filed suit against Yale Mosk and Co., Yale Mosk individually (hereinafter collectively referred to as "Mosk"), and the City of Pinellas Park to force the defendants to allow access to a landlocked ten-acre parcel of land in Pinellas County, Florida, that Blanton purchased in 1975. 2 In his second amended complaint, Blanton asserted as one of several claims for relief that he was entitled to a statutory way of necessity as authorized by section 704.01(2). To support this claim, Blanton alleged that in order to access the nearest practical road he had to cross Mosk's property. Blanton further alleged that he attempted to negotiate access with Mosk,

1. We have jurisdiction. See art. V,

Download SC03-1685 - Henry H. Blanton, Etc., Et Al. v. City Of Pinellas Park, Florida,