Teat v. City of Apalachicola
District Court of Appeal of Florida
1Per curiam
Appellants, Wanda and Eric Teat, appeal a final order in which the trial court found that they did not possess riparian rights and denied appellants’ claims for damages and injunctive relief for negligence, trespass, and inverse condemnation. Because we find that appellants did possess riparian rights, we reverse.
Appellants live along the banks of Huckleberry Creek, a tidal and navigable waterway, and their deed conveys land that runs to the bank of this creek. The trial court held that, under Axline v. Shaw, 35 Fla. 305, 17 So. 411 (1895), appellants did not possess riparian rights because…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Axline v. ShawSupreme Court of Florida · 1895
3Cited by4 opinions
- Mildenberger v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2010
- Save Our Beaches, Inc. v. Florida Department of Environmental ProtectionDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2006
- Colgan v. Shadow PointDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2018
- Save Our Beaches, Inc. v. Florida Department of Environmental ProtectionDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2006