The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
10-15403; 10-15404; 10-15419; 10-15422•USA v. Union Four Corporation, S.A.
10-15403; 10-15404; 10-15419; 10-15422Court of Appeals for the Eleventh CircuitApr 23, 2012
FILED
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
APRIL 23, 2012
JOHN LEY
CLERK
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 10-15403
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 1:99-cv-00672-FAM
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
JAIME GONZALEZ,
MARIA ELENA GONZALEZ,
Defendants-Appellants.
________________________
No. 10-15404
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 1:99-cv-00669-FAM
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
-- 1 of 4 --
SIGMA LAND CORPORATION,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________
No. 10-15419
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 1:00-cv-03983-FAM
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
UNION FOUR CORPORATION, S.A.,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________
No. 10-15422
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 1:96-cv-01813-FAM
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
MONTEGO LAND CORPORATION,
2
-- 2 of 4 --
a Florida corporation,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________
Appeals from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Florida
_________________________
(April 23, 2012)
Before HULL and FAY, Circuit Judges, and WALTER, * District Judge.
PER CURIAM:
In these consolidated appeals, several landowners appeal the district court’s
judgments and fair-market-value findings in the government’s condemnation
claims for land used to expand Everglades National Park. After review and with
the benefit of oral argument, we conclude that the district court properly rejected
the Land Commission’s application of a 5% annual appreciation in the value of the
recreational parcels. We also conclude that the district court properly rejected the
Land Commission’s “summation approach” to valuing the parcel at issue in Appeal
No. 10-15422. Finally, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its
discretion by enforcing its pretrial order and refusing to extend the discovery
deadline or to continue the trial before the Land Commission. Accordingly, we
*Honorable Donald E. Walter, United States District Judge for the Western District of
Louisiana, sitting by designation.
3
-- 3 of 4 --
affirm the judgments of the district court and its September 22, 2010 orders, which
adopted the thorough and well reasoned report and recommendation of the
magistrate judge.
AFFIRMED.
4
-- 4 of 4 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.