Florida Statute 7.01 - Full Text and Legal Analysis

The 2025 Florida Statutes

Title II
STATE ORGANIZATION

Chapter 7
COUNTY BOUNDARIES

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 7.01

7.01 Alachua County.—The boundary lines of Alachua County are as follows: Begin where the range line between ranges sixteen and seventeen east intersects the thread of the Santa Fe River; thence run south on said range line to the southwest corner of section seven, township eleven south, range seventeen east; thence run east along the south line of sections seven, eight, nine, ten, eleven and twelve to the northwest corner of section eighteen, township eleven south, range eighteen east; thence run south along the west line of sections eighteen, nineteen, thirty and thirty-one, township eleven south, range eighteen east to southwest corner of said section thirty-one; thence run east along south line of sections thirty-one, thirty-two, thirty-three and thirty-four to southeast corner of section thirty-four, township eleven south, range eighteen east outside of Arredonda Grant; thence run north along east line of said section thirty-four to southwest corner of section thirty-four, township eleven south, range eighteen east inside said grant; thence run east along the township line between townships eleven and twelve, south, to its intersection with the west margin of Orange Lake; thence following the western and southern margin of Orange Lake to its intersection with the range line between range twenty-two and twenty-three east; thence run north along said range line to where same is intersected by the north and east margin of Santa Fe Lake; thence run north following the east margin of said Santa Fe Lake to its westernmost intersection with a line which is the prolongation of the north line of McManus Subdivision as per plat book “A”, page 117 of the public records of Alachua County; thence west along the north line of said subdivision to its intersection with the east line of government lot three of section twenty-one, township eight south, range twenty-two east; thence north along said east line to the southeast corner of the southwest quarter of the northwest quarter of said section twenty-one; thence north along the line between the east half and the west half of the northwest quarter of said section twenty-one to the north line of said section twenty-one; thence west along the north line of said section twenty-one to the southeast corner of section seventeen, township eight south, range twenty-two east; thence west to the southwest corner of the southeast quarter of the southeast quarter of said section seventeen; thence north to the southeast corner of the southwest quarter of the northeast quarter of said section seventeen; thence west to the southwest corner of the east half of the southwest quarter of the northeast quarter of said section seventeen; thence north to the northwest corner of the east half of the southwest quarter of the northeast quarter of said section seventeen; thence west to the southwest corner of the northwest quarter of the northeast quarter of said section seventeen; thence north to the half-mile corner of the south line of section eight, township eight south, range twenty-two east; thence west to the southwest corner of the east half of the southeast quarter of the southwest quarter of said section eight; thence north to the northwest corner of the east half of the northeast quarter of the northwest quarter of said section eight; thence north to the northeast corner of the west half of the southeast quarter of the southwest quarter of section five, township eight south, range twenty-two east; thence west to the northwest corner of the southwest quarter of the southwest quarter of said section five; thence north along the west line of said section five to the northeast corner of the southeast quarter of the northeast quarter of section six, township eight south, range twenty-two east; thence west to the southwest corner of the northeast quarter of the northeast quarter of said section six; thence north to the northwest corner of the northeast quarter of the northeast quarter of said section six; thence west along the north line of said section six to the northwest corner of said section six; thence north along the east line of section one, township eight south, range twenty-one east to the southeast corner of section thirty-six, township seven south, range twenty-one east; thence north along the east line of said section thirty-six to the northeast corner of the southeast quarter of the southeast quarter of said section thirty-six; thence west to the northwest corner of the southwest quarter of the southwest quarter of said section thirty-six; thence north along the west line of said section thirty-six to its intersection with the thread of the Santa Fe River; thence northerly and westerly along the thread of the Santa Fe River to its intersection with the east line of the southwest quarter of the northwest quarter of section thirty-three, township seven south, range twenty-one east; thence north to the northeast corner of the southwest quarter of the northwest quarter of said section thirty-three; thence west to the northeast corner of the southeast quarter of the northeast quarter of section thirty-two, township seven south, range twenty-one east; thence west to the northwest corner of the southwest quarter of the northwest quarter of said section thirty-two; thence west to the southwest corner of the northeast quarter of the northeast quarter of section thirty-one, township seven south, range twenty-one east; thence north to the northwest corner of the northeast quarter of the northeast quarter of said section thirty-one; thence west to the half-mile corner of the south line of section thirty, township seven south, range twenty-one east; thence north on the quarter section line of said section thirty to its intersection with the thread of the Santa Fe River; thence southerly and westerly along the thread of said Santa Fe River to its intersection with the south line of the southwest quarter of the northeast quarter of section twenty-eight, township seven south, range twenty east; thence west to the southwest corner of the northeast quarter of said section twenty-eight; thence north to the northwest corner of the northeast quarter of said section twenty-eight; thence west to the northwest corner of said section twenty-eight; thence north along the east line of section twenty, township seven south, range twenty east to the southeast corner of the northeast quarter of said section twenty; thence west on the quarter section line of said section twenty to its intersection with the thread of the Santa Fe River; thence northerly and westerly along the thread of the Santa Fe River to its southernmost intersection with the east line of section two, township seven south, range seventeen east; thence run south along the east line of said section two to the northeast corner of section eleven, township seven south, range seventeen east; thence run south along the east line of said section eleven to the northeast corner of government lot four in said section eleven; thence run west to the northwest corner of said government lot four; thence run south along west line of said government lot four to the southwest corner of said government lot four; thence run west along the south line of said section eleven to the northwest corner of section fourteen, township seven south, range seventeen east; thence run south along the west line of said section fourteen to the southwest corner of said section fourteen; thence run east along south line of said section fourteen to its intersection with the thread of the Santa Fe River; thence run southerly and westerly along the thread of said river to the point of beginning.

History.—s. 6, Dec. 29, 1824; s. 3, Nov. 23, 1828; s. 1, Feb. 10, 1835; s. 1, ch. 106, 1846; s. 1, ch. 923, 1859; s. 1, ch. 1765, 1870; RS 38; GS 36; s. 1, ch. 6243, 1911; s. 1, ch. 6509, 1913; RGS 39; s. 1, ch. 11371, 1925 CGL 41; s. 1, ch. 28312, 1953.

F.S. 7.01 on Google Scholar

F.S. 7.01 on CourtListener

Amendments to 7.01

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases Citing Statute 7.01

Total Results: 126

Farley v. Nationwide Mutual Ins.

197 F.3d 1322

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Dec 14, 1999 | Docket: 395651

Cited 193 times | Published

Civil Cases, Age Discrimination in Employment Act § 7.1 (West, 1990). The ADA instructions were taken with

Boyd v. Homes of Legend, Inc.

188 F.3d 1294, 39 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. 2d (West) 642, 1999 U.S. App. LEXIS 22417, 1999 WL 721832

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Sep 16, 1999 | Docket: 395527

Cited 51 times | Published

punitive damages are not recoverable. Alabama Code § 7-1-1Ó6 (1997), titled “Remedies,” states that:

Farley v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance

197 F.3d 1322, 10 Am. Disabilities Cas. (BNA) 87, 1999 U.S. App. LEXIS 32407, 1999 WL 1142914

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Dec 14, 1999 | Docket: 395650

Cited 43 times | Published

Cases, Age Discrimination in Employment Act § 7.1 (West, 1990). The ADA instructions were taken with

CAFÉ EROTICA OF FLORIDA, INC., a FLORIDA CORPORATION, CAFÉ EROTICA / WE DARE TO BARE / ADULT TOYS / GREAT FOOD / EXIT 94, INC., a FLORIDA CORPORATION, PLAINTIFFS-COUNTER-DEFENDANT-APPELLEES v. ST. JOHNS COUNTY, a POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, DEFENDANT-COUNTER-CLAIMANT-APPELLANT. CAFE EROTICA/WE DARE TO BARE/ADULT TOYS/GREAT FOOD/EXIT 94, INC., a FLORIDA CORPORATION v. ST. JOHNS COUNTY, a POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

360 F.3d 1274, 2004 U.S. App. LEXIS 3243

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Feb 23, 2004 | Docket: 875166

Cited 38 times | Published

square feet if located along the interstate. See LDC § 7.01.03(A)-(B). Billboards are defined as signs "over

Tidmore Oil Company, Inc. v. Bp Oil Company/gulf Products Division, a Division of Bp Oil Company

932 F.2d 1384, 1991 U.S. App. LEXIS 11425, 1991 WL 82903

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Jun 7, 1991 | Docket: 1002947

Cited 38 times | Published

provision of the Uniform Commercial Code, Ala.Code Ann. § 7-1-203, does not create a cause of action either in

Bank of New York v. Sunshine-Jr. Stores, Inc. (In Re Sunshine-Jr. Stores, Inc.)

456 F.3d 1291, 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 17990, 46 Bankr. Ct. Dec. (CRR) 224

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Jul 18, 2006 | Docket: 12794

Cited 33 times | Published

of Indenture Trustee was created. Similarly, Section 7.01 of the Trust Indenture Agreement placed the

Boyd v. Homes of Legend

188 F.3d 1294

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Sep 16, 1999 | Docket: 395519

Cited 31 times | Published

punitive damages are not recoverable. Alabama Code § 7-1-106 (1997), titled “Remedies,” states that:

Waters v. International Precious Metals Corp.

190 F.3d 1291, 45 Fed. R. Serv. 3d 300, 1999 U.S. App. LEXIS 24281

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Sep 30, 1999 | Docket: 395477

Cited 29 times | Published

plus their costs and expenses.” Id., § 7.1, at 54-55. 2 Finally, the stipulation

Smith v. Coalition to Reduce Class Size

827 So. 2d 959, 2002 WL 31051569

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Sep 13, 2002 | Docket: 1726413

Cited 26 times | Published

initiation of and referendum on ordinances...." Section 7.01 of the Charter carries out the constitutional

United States v. Gunby

112 F.3d 1493, 1997 WL 228566

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: May 22, 1997 | Docket: 73837

Cited 23 times | Published

1983 Act repealed the 1982 Act, see § 7-1, 1983 Ga. Laws at 928, and therefore left local

BOARD OF CTY. COM'RS OF DADE CTY. v. Wilson

386 So. 2d 556, 1980 Fla. LEXIS 4321

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Jul 25, 1980 | Docket: 477063

Cited 23 times | Published

for respondent. *558 SUNDBERG, Chief Justice. Section 7.01 of the Dade County Home Rule Charter provides

Brown v. State

24 So. 3d 671, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 19763, 2009 WL 4874530

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 18, 2009 | Docket: 1648361

Cited 22 times | Published

interpretation. See 3 Wayne R. LaFave, Search and Seizure § 7.1(d) (4th ed. 2009) (acknowledging two plausible interpretations

Johnny E. Walker v. Southern Company Services

279 F.3d 1289, 27 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 1417, 2002 U.S. App. LEXIS 886, 2002 WL 86676

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Jan 23, 2002 | Docket: 238764

Cited 21 times | Published

implied in every contract under Alabama law. Ala.Code § 7-1-203. As the Supreme Court observed, the effect of

In Re Celotex Corp.

204 B.R. 586, 1996 Bankr. LEXIS 1687, 1996 WL 755143

United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Dec 6, 1996 | Docket: 1440626

Cited 21 times | Published

the designated representative (as defined in Section 7.1 of the Settlement Agreement), (e) the Veil Piercing

Intercorp, Inc. v. Pennzoil Company, Pennzoil Products Company, a Division of Pennzoil Company, Intercorp, Inc. v. Pennzoil Company

877 F.2d 1524, 9 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. 2d (West) 454, 1989 U.S. App. LEXIS 10771, 1989 WL 73724

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Jul 25, 1989 | Docket: 72431

Cited 21 times | Published

do not displace the common law principles. See § 7-1-103. Section 7-2-202 contains the Code’s version

Dickinson v. State

227 So. 2d 36

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Jul 30, 1969 | Docket: 1723631

Cited 21 times | Published

L.R. 394 (1940): 1 F.L.P., Administrative Law, § 7; 1 Fla.Jur., Administrative Law, § 35. The exact meaning

In Re Managed Care Litigation

132 F. Supp. 2d 989, 2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19247, 2000 WL 33180826

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Dec 11, 2000 | Docket: 2329731

Cited 15 times | Published

the Master Group Service Agreement provides in § 7.01 that a dispute "relating to the performance of

Vierling v. Celebrity Cruises, Inc.

339 F.3d 1309, 2003 A.M.C. 1966, 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 15373, 2003 WL 21757223

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Jul 31, 2003 | Docket: 212913

Cited 12 times | Published

capacity on board a vessel....” Id. at § 7.01[C][l][d][ii] (citation omitted). 22

John S. Freund v. Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General

117 F.3d 1543, 1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 17918, 1997 WL 397181

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Jul 16, 1997 | Docket: 418899

Cited 11 times | Published

W. Wolfram, Modem Legal Ethics, § 7.1.1, at 312 (practitioner’s ed.1986). 68

City of Miami Beach v. Mr. Samuel's, Inc.

351 So. 2d 719

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Oct 27, 1977 | Docket: 1247028

Cited 11 times | Published

but pawn shops are not mentioned. Pursuant to Section 7-1 of the Zoning Ordinance, an application for conditional

Sierra Club v. Flowers

423 F. Supp. 2d 1273, 62 ERC (BNA) 1265, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12579, 2006 WL 760489

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Mar 22, 2006 | Docket: 2452046

Cited 10 times | Published

included in the compensatory mitigation proposed in Section 7.1 [of the EIS] will attract mammalian wildlife

Freehling v. Garson (In Re Top Sport Distributors, Inc.)

41 B.R. 235, 1984 Bankr. LEXIS 5434

United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Florida. | Filed: Jun 21, 1984 | Docket: 1111942

Cited 10 times | Published

(IRA's) and the Plan was terminated. Pursuant to § 7.01 of the Plan, upon termination, each participant

Halifax Area Coun. v. City of Daytona

385 So. 2d 184

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 9, 1980 | Docket: 1700502

Cited 9 times | Published

and SHARP, J., concur. NOTES [1] Article 21, section 7.1 of the City Zoning Ordinance requires that the

Rivergate Rest. Corp. v. METRO. DADE CTY.

369 So. 2d 679

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 17, 1979 | Docket: 1516687

Cited 9 times | Published

Rule Charter for Metropolitan Dade County, art. 7, § 7.01 (1957). [2] Chapters 561 & 562, Fla. Stat. (1977)

Carol Morris, Administratrix of the Estate of Linda Louis Grimes, Deceased v. Sse, Inc.

912 F.2d 1392, 12 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. 2d (West) 628, 1990 U.S. App. LEXIS 16911, 1990 WL 129268

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Sep 26, 1990 | Docket: 826850

Cited 8 times | Published

relation to this state. 3 Ala.Code § 7-1-105(1) (1975) (emphasis supplied). Although some

Kobrin v. Leahy

528 So. 2d 392, 1988 WL 18574

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 3, 1988 | Docket: 1717416

Cited 8 times | Published

chief purpose of the measure" and to Article 7, Section 7.01(4)(b) of the Metropolitan Dade County Home Rule

LPJ, Inc. v. Royal Crown Cola Co. (In Re LPJ, Inc.)

22 B.R. 556, 1982 Bankr. LEXIS 3694, 9 Bankr. Ct. Dec. (CRR) 853

United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Florida. | Filed: Jul 19, 1982 | Docket: 1401599

Cited 8 times | Published

The Bottler's Agreement of January 2, 1982, Section 7.1(4) provides: "TERMINATION WITHOUT NOTICE. This

Aaron v. State

345 So. 2d 641

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Feb 25, 1977 | Docket: 1739602

Cited 8 times | Published

Criminal Justice, The Function of the Trial Judge, Section 7.1 (1974), which prescribes: "Inherent power of

Waters v. International Precious

190 F.3d 1291

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Sep 30, 1999 | Docket: 395481

Cited 7 times | Published

Settlement Fund plus their costs and expenses.” Id., § 7.1, at 54-55.2 Finally, the stipulation included a

United States v. Pizdrint

983 F. Supp. 1110, 1997 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18514, 1997 WL 722048

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Nov 10, 1997 | Docket: 1806493

Cited 7 times | Published

S.C. § 7(1) and (8) to provide "special maritime and territorial jurisdiction."[1] Section 7(1) defines

Miami Heat Ltd. Partnership v. Leahy

682 So. 2d 198, 1996 WL 607973

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 24, 1996 | Docket: 2555724

Cited 7 times | Published

initiation of and referendum on ordinances...." Section 7.01 of the Charter carries out the constitutional

Hunter v. State

651 So. 2d 1258, 1995 WL 104091

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 14, 1995 | Docket: 476382

Cited 7 times | Published

69-835, § 7, at 106, Laws of Fla.; Ch. 89-521, § 7(1)(a), at 405, Laws of Fla. Turning next to the question

Meyer v. Austin

319 F. Supp. 457

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Aug 14, 1970 | Docket: 1960799

Cited 7 times | Published

furthermore, make five specific challenges to the Florida statute[7]: (1) the Florida statute is unconstitutional

Estate of Joseph P. Kosow, Deceased. Eleanor C. Kosow, Personal Representative v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

45 F.3d 1524, 75 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 1272, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 3781, 1995 WL 57198

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Feb 28, 1995 | Docket: 380219

Cited 6 times | Published

assert their holdings as a shield, Rev.Proc. 89-14, § 7.01(4), (5), 1989-1 C.B. 814, 815 (1989), they do not

Chino Elec., Inc. v. US Fidelity & Guar. Co.

578 So. 2d 320, 1991 WL 40069

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 26, 1991 | Docket: 2546951

Cited 6 times | Published

F. Harper, F. James & O. Gray, The Law of Torts § 7.1 (2d ed. 1986); Restatement (Second) of Torts § 525

State v. Williams

516 So. 2d 1081, 1987 WL 2902

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 16, 1987 | Docket: 1267129

Cited 6 times | Published

the arrest. See 3 W. LaFave, Search and Seizure, § 7.1(c) n. 69. In Lafayette, cited and quoted in Bertine

Bradley, Arant, Rose & White, a Partnership v. United States

802 F.2d 1323, 1986 U.S. App. LEXIS 32413

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Oct 20, 1986 | Docket: 971893

Cited 6 times | Published

statutes, in pertinent parts, provide: Alabama Code § 7-1-201: Subject to additional definitions contained

City of Sunrise v. DCA Homes, Inc.

421 So. 2d 1084

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 8, 1982 | Docket: 1719353

Cited 6 times | Published

location from where the sign is installed. [3] Section 7.1(e) of the ordinance provides: "One sign shall

Dunkin' Donuts Franchised Restaurants LLC v. D & D Donuts, Inc.

566 F. Supp. 2d 1350, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 56207, 2008 WL 2853259

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Jul 22, 2008 | Docket: 2288257

Cited 5 times | Published

causing irreparable harm." (Doc. # 34-3 at 11, § 7.1.) . Plaintiffs have established that the franchise

In Re Joe Morgan, Inc.

985 F.2d 1554, 20 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. 2d (West) 401, 1993 U.S. App. LEXIS 5198

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Mar 22, 1993 | Docket: 841993

Cited 5 times | Published

his order or to bearer or in blank." Ala.Code § 7-1-201(20). There is no dispute that UCON was a holder

Diaz v. Board of County Com'rs of Dade County

502 F. Supp. 190, 1980 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14647

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Oct 17, 1980 | Docket: 1048254

Cited 5 times | Published

Home Rule Charter for Metropolitan Dade County, § 7.01 (1957). The petitions were certified by the defendants

Pena v. VECTOUR OF FLORIDA, INC.

30 So. 3d 691, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 3867, 2010 WL 1136210

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 25, 2010 | Docket: 2409458

Cited 4 times | Published

PHILIP J. PADOVANO, FLORIDA APPELLATE PRACTICE, § 7.1 (2008 ed.). AFFIRMED. VAN NORTWICK, CLARK, and MARSTILLER

Investacorp, Inc. v. Arabian Investment Banking Corp.

722 F. Supp. 719, 1989 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11683, 1989 WL 113929

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Sep 5, 1989 | Docket: 298835

Cited 4 times | Published

64, 58 S.Ct. 817, 82 L.Ed. 1188 (1938). Id. at § 7.01[1]. See also Skil Corporation v. Rockwell Int'l

Investacorp, Inc. v. Arabian Investment Banking Corp.

722 F. Supp. 719, 1989 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11683, 1989 WL 113929

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Sep 5, 1989 | Docket: 298835

Cited 4 times | Published

64, 58 S.Ct. 817, 82 L.Ed. 1188 (1938). Id. at § 7.01[1]. See also Skil Corporation v. Rockwell Int'l

Kernal Records Oy v. Mosley

794 F. Supp. 2d 1355, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 60666, 2011 WL 2223422

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Jun 7, 2011 | Docket: 2015389

Cited 3 times | Published

Melville B. Nimmer & David Nimmer, Nimmer on Copyright § 7.01[A], at 7-8-7-9 (2011) (for non-U.S. Berne Convention

Peebles v. Sheridan Healthcare, Inc.

853 So. 2d 559, 2003 WL 22047616

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 3, 2003 | Docket: 1660160

Cited 3 times | Published

terms of the employment agreements referenced in Section 7.01(1) hereof, (v) understands and acknowledges

Harrington v. Batchelor

781 So. 2d 1133, 2001 WL 193791

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 28, 2001 | Docket: 434838

Cited 3 times | Published

Law Institute, Principles of Corporate Governance § 7.01 & cmt. f (1994). "[A] shareholder can sue for breach

Orlando Regional Healthcare System, Inc. v. Columbia/HCA Healthcare Corp.

923 F. Supp. 1534, 1996 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6245, 1996 WL 233174

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Apr 29, 1996 | Docket: 1794029

Cited 3 times | Published

claims, the court concludes that HTI breached section 7.1(g) of the Agreement in its merger with Columbia

Walter v. Celotex Corp. (In Re Hillsborough Holdings Corp.)

197 B.R. 366, 1996 Bankr. LEXIS 623, 1996 WL 307277

United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Apr 11, 1996 | Docket: 1442390

Cited 3 times | Published

elements required for the § 524(g) injunction: § 7.1(b) The Confirmation Order will provide that the

R. Wayne Lowe v. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation

958 F.2d 1526, 1992 U.S. App. LEXIS 7412

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Apr 22, 1992 | Docket: 126986

Cited 3 times | Published

under the banking laws of Georgia, Ga.Code Ann. § 7-1-490(a) (Michie 1989),32 bank directors are required

Bowdoin v. Showell Growers, Inc.

817 F.2d 1543, 3 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. 2d (West) 1366, 1987 U.S. App. LEXIS 6963

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Jun 2, 1987 | Docket: 66225278

Cited 3 times | Published

215 Kan. 185, 523 P.2d 709. . See Ala. Code § 7-1-201(10) (1984) (defining the term "conspicuous”

Nachwalter v. Christie

611 F. Supp. 655, 1985 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18962

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Jun 12, 1985 | Docket: 1832242

Cited 3 times | Published

procedure for amending the Plans is detailed in Section 7.01 of the Plans. Beyond the substantive restrictions

Wilson v. Dade County

369 So. 2d 1002

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 17, 1979 | Docket: 1516631

Cited 3 times | Published

number of voter signatures provided by Article 7, § 7.01(2) of the Dade County Charter, proposed the adoption

Merrill v. Dade County

272 So. 2d 187

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 19, 1973 | Docket: 1644042

Cited 3 times | Published

adoption by the voters would also conflict with Section 7.01(6)(a)[1] of the Charter if the effective date

Optima Tobacco Corp. v. US Flue-Cured Tobacco Growers, Inc.

171 F. Supp. 3d 1303, 2016 WL 1045838, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 34030

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Mar 16, 2016 | Docket: 64307705

Cited 2 times | Published

service liaison between UETA and USFC, see id. § 7.1. Optima’s duties included receiving purchase orders

Boroski v. Dyncorp International

662 F.3d 1197

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Oct 27, 2011 | Docket: 1021843

Cited 2 times | Published

Schoenbaum, 1 Admiralty & Mar. Law § 7-1, at 533-34 (5th ed.2011). The fact that various

Community State Bank v. Strong

651 F.3d 1241, 2011 WL 3715769

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Apr 27, 2007 | Docket: 525248

Cited 2 times | Published

seq.; the Georgia Check Cashing Statute, O.C.G.A. § 7-1-700, et seq.; and the Georgia Racketeer Influenced

Heidkamp v. Galliher (In Re Hunger)

272 B.R. 792, 15 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. B 66, 47 Collier Bankr. Cas. 2d 1300, 2002 Bankr. LEXIS 88, 2002 WL 180951

United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Jan 9, 2002 | Docket: 1861413

Cited 2 times | Published

State of New York. N.Y. Est. Powers and Trust Law § 7-1.5(a)(1) sets forth when a trust interest is inalienable

Abreau v. Cobb

670 So. 2d 1010, 1996 WL 60838

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 14, 1996 | Docket: 1245651

Cited 2 times | Published

insufficient and it failed, but was not "defeated." *1013 § 7.01(3), Art. 7, Dade County Charter. The common definition

Martin v. Metropolitan Dade County

637 So. 2d 313, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 4987, 1994 WL 201390

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 24, 1994 | Docket: 515099

Cited 2 times | Published

initiative process. The trial judge found that (a) section 7.01(7) of the Dade County Home Rule Charter, which

Martin Bros. Toolmakers, Inc. v. Industrial Development Board

796 F.2d 1435

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Aug 18, 1986 | Docket: 66218341

Cited 2 times | Published

Central Bank sought a § 365 order. . Ala.Code § 7-1-201(37) eliminates two considerations in distinguishing

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation v. R. Charles Loudermilk, Sr.

930 F.3d 1280

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Jul 22, 2019 | Docket: 15949217

Cited 1 times | Published

failed to vote against such action. O.C.G.A. § 7-1-494(b). 7 As the Court explained

Federer v. Zurich American Insurance Co.

701 F. App'x 835

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Jul 11, 2017 | Docket: 65965932

Cited 1 times | Published

requirements established by the GRMA, see O.C.G.A. § 7-1-1000 et seq., mortgage lenders wishing to do business

Sanchez v. Lopez

219 So. 3d 156, 2017 WL 1713311, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 6171

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 3, 2017 | Docket: 6057954

Cited 1 times | Published

Clerk to RECALL Mayor Orlando Lopez pursuant to Section 7.01, Article VII of the Sweetwater City Charter

SP Healthcase Holdings, LLC v. Surgery Center Holdings, LLC

208 So. 3d 775, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 18212

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 9, 2016 | Docket: 4550686

Cited 1 times | Published

misrepresentation. (Emphasis added.) Moreover, section 7.1 of the agreement defines “losses” as follows:

Local Access, LLC v. Peerless Network, Inc.

222 F. Supp. 3d 1113, 2016 WL 6984522, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 164153

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Nov 29, 2016 | Docket: 64311604

Cited 1 times | Published

Illinois law by a noncompetition agreement). Section 7.1 of the noncompetition agreement is enforceable

Federal Deposit Insurance v. Skow

741 F.3d 1342, 2013 WL 6726918, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 25490

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Dec 23, 2013 | Docket: 99036

Cited 1 times | Published

based on the standard of care set forth in O.C.G.A. § 7-1-490; but the district court went on to say that

Boroski v. DynCorp Intern.

662 F.3d 1197, 2011 WL 5555686

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Nov 16, 2011 | Docket: 1213070

Cited 1 times | Published

" Thomas J. Schoenbaum, 1 Admiralty & Mar. Law § 7-1, at 533-34 (5th ed.2011). The fact that various

Gulf Power Co. v. Coalsales II, L.L.C.

661 F. Supp. 2d 1270, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 95949, 2009 WL 3190459

District Court, N.D. Florida | Filed: Sep 30, 2009 | Docket: 2281928

Cited 1 times | Published

bolster its position, Gulf Power argues that Section 7.01, "Coal Specifications," which states: "If during

The Florida Bar v. Martinez-Genova

959 So. 2d 241, 32 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 325, 2007 Fla. LEXIS 1048, 2007 WL 1703457

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Jun 14, 2007 | Docket: 2508417

Cited 1 times | Published

sanction in the present disciplinary action. Section 7.1 states: Disbarment is appropriate when a lawyer

MAVERICK MEDIA GROUP v. Hillsborough County, Fla.

508 F. Supp. 2d 1126, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 35731, 2007 WL 1455963

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: May 16, 2007 | Docket: 2341633

Cited 1 times | Published

political campaign signs (with limitations). See § 7.01.00. Twenty-one categories of signs were expressly

VFW John O'Connor Post 4833 v. Santa Rosa County

506 F. Supp. 2d 1079, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17150, 2007 WL 781356

District Court, N.D. Florida | Filed: Mar 12, 2007 | Docket: 2378329

Cited 1 times | Published

certificate of zoning compliance or waiver.[3] Section 7.01.13 of the Santa Rosa County Land Development

In Re Celotex Corp.

377 B.R. 345, 2006 WL 4847510

United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Mar 27, 2006 | Docket: 1103610

Cited 1 times | Published

and rights provided in the Trust Agreement." Section 7.1 of the Trust Agreement provides as follows: ARTICLE

Jones Ex Rel. Estate of Hill v. Hill Development Co. (In Re Hill)

265 B.R. 296, 2001 Bankr. LEXIS 902, 2001 WL 849350

United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Jun 14, 2001 | Docket: 1470940

Cited 1 times | Published

substitution of general partners. Additionally, § 7.1 of HDC's Limited provides "[t]he Partnership shall

Huntsville Hospital v. Mortara Instrument

57 F.3d 1043

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Jul 12, 1995 | Docket: 72935

Cited 1 times | Published

taken within the time agreed. Ala.Code § 7-1-204(3). Here, the parties set the time for rejection

Metropolitan Dade County v. Lehtinen

528 So. 2d 394, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 612, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 910, 1988 WL 18575

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 3, 1988 | Docket: 1367674

Cited 1 times | Published

unambiguous language," nor that of Article 7, Section 7.01(4)(b) of the Metropolitan Dade County Home Rule

First Maryland Leasecorp. v. M/V Golden Egret

764 F.2d 749, 41 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. (West) 600

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Jul 1, 1985 | Docket: 66207833

Cited 1 times | Published

sufficient to support a simple contract. Ala.Code § 7-1-201(44) (1984) (emphasis added). FML suggests several

Georgia Railroad Bank & Trust Co. v. Federal Deposit Insurance

758 F.2d 1548

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Apr 30, 1985 | Docket: 66205733

Cited 1 times | Published

Railroad. The note was issued pursuant to Ga.Code Ann. § 7-1-419 and was subordinated to the claims of all other

Caterpillar Financial Services Corporation v. Venequip Machinery Sales Corporation

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Aug 7, 2025 | Docket: 70916299

Published

Argued: Jul 25, 2025

the Court 23-14237 A § 7.01(a)–(b), Dkt. No. 1-3. Default would also occur

Gustavo Bojorquez, etc. v. State of Florida

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Jun 5, 2025 | Docket: 70463023

Published

certificate and one or more permits. Ch. 2001-299, § 7(1), Laws of Fla. A “certificate” was defined as “the

Pinellas County, Florida v. Gary Joiner, etc.

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Jun 27, 2024 | Docket: 68891393

Published

subdivisions of the state, including counties); § 7.01-.67, Fla. Stat. (2014) (establishing boundaries

Randy Mcllenan, Kayla Mcllenan, and Charles Williams v. Cypress Chase North Condominium No. 4 Association, Inc.

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 5, 2024 | Docket: 68829290

Published

the Declaration. The association claims that Section 7.1, which enumerates the unit owners’ repair responsibilities

In Re: Judicial Circuit Assessment

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Dec 21, 2023 | Docket: 68107501

Published

of the Court, 2 Fla. Prac., Appellate Practice § 7:1 (2023 ed.). 11 Art. V, §§ 1, 5(a), Fla. Const.

Landcastle Acquisition Corp. v. Renasant Bank

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Jan 12, 2023 | Docket: 66719224

Published

quoting Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 7); 1 Corbin on Contracts, supra, § 1.6. It bears USCA11

Linda Prentice, etc. v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Mar 17, 2022 | Docket: 63166170

Published

not being cheated.” Harper, et al., supra p.11, § 7.1, at 378. This interest is different in kind from

Pine Mountain Preserve, LLLP v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Oct 22, 2020 | Docket: 18571795

Published

See Restatement (Third) of Property (Servitudes) § 7.1 (2000) (observing that a property servitude “may

Pine Mountain Preserve, LLLP v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Oct 22, 2020 | Docket: 18564573

Published

See Restatement (Third) of Property (Servitudes) § 7.1 (2000) (observing that a property servitude “may

Pine Mountain Preserve, LLLP v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Oct 22, 2020 | Docket: 18564573

Published

See Restatement (Third) of Property (Servitudes) § 7.1 (2000) (observing that a property servitude “may

CHRISTINA ANAMARIA ALEXANDER v. CLIFFORD GARLAND HARRIS

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 17, 2019 | Docket: 15638081

Published

cover" (quoting N.Y. Estates Powers & Trusts Law § 7-1.12(a)(5) (McKinney 1998)). Because the special

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation v. R. Charles Loudermilk, Sr.

887 F.3d 1250

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Apr 24, 2018 | Docket: 6374659

Published

question in the negative, holding that O.C.G.A. § 7-1-490(a) authorizes ordinary negligence claims against

& SC14-1056 The Florida Bar v. Robert D. Adams and The Florida Bar v. Adam Robert Filthaut

198 So. 3d 593, 2016 WL 4493453

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Aug 25, 2016 | Docket: 4416256

Published

Duties Owed as a Professional Pursuant to section 7.1, disbarment is appropriate when “a lawyer intentionally

Jensen v. Pinellas County

198 So. 3d 754, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 2864, 2016 WL 746442

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 26, 2016 | Docket: 3039678

Published

069, as it may be amended. (Ord. No. 99-6, § 7,1-26-99) Secs. 86-93-86-100. — Reserved.

Florida Digestive Health Specialists, LLP v. Ramon E. Colina, M.D.

192 So. 3d 491, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 16611, 2015 WL 6874913

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 4, 2015 | Docket: 3010568

Published

Colina remains subject to the restrictions of Section 7.1 relating to trade secrets, and that Dr. Coli-na

United States Liability Insurance v. Kelley Ventures, LLC

137 F. Supp. 3d 1312, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 135619, 2015 WL 5827903

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Sep 30, 2015 | Docket: 64304712

Published

“for any purpose or purposes.” See LLC Agreement § 7.1 [DE 1-1]. Accordingly, because Kelley Auto owns

Florida Digestive Health Specialists, LLP v. Ramon E. Colina, M.D.

170 So. 3d 946, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 11556, 2015 WL 4605677

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 31, 2015 | Docket: 2680244

Published

Colina remains subject to the restrictions of Section 7.1 relating to trade secrets, and that Dr. Coli-

Dade County Police Benevolent Ass'n v. Miami-Dade County Board of County Commissioners

160 So. 3d 482, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 2699, 2015 WL 798849

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 26, 2015 | Docket: 60246863

Published

meeting thereafter.” Commission Rules of Procedure, § 7.01 (k). The effect of the Commission’s approval of

Atlantic Marine Florida, LLC v. Evanston Insurance Company

775 F.3d 1268, 2014 WL 7331580, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 24415

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Dec 24, 2014 | Docket: 2618723

Published

contract.” See Ostrager & Newman § 7.01 ("The phrase ... liability imposed by law' refers

Atlantic Marine Florida, LLC v. Evanston Insurance Company

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Dec 24, 2014 | Docket: 2900721

Published

“the law of contract.” See Ostrager & Newman § 7.01 (“The phrase . . . ‘liability imposed by law’ refers

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation v. Steven M. Skow

769 F.3d 1306, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 20461, 2014 WL 5394321

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Oct 24, 2014 | Docket: 1425091

Published

violate the standard of care established by O.C.G.A. § 7-1-490 when he acts in good faith but fails to act

Colony Beach & Tennis Club Ass'n v. Colony Beach & Tennis Club, Inc. (In Re Colony Beach & Tennis Club Ass'n)

423 B.R. 690, 22 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. B 297, 2010 Bankr. LEXIS 148, 2010 WL 286615

United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Jan 15, 2010 | Docket: 1638474

Published

Hotel are made by the General Partner. (Ex. 19 at § 7.1.) The Declaration provides that the Unit Owners

Ago

Florida Attorney General Reports | Filed: Jan 4, 2010 | Docket: 3257653

Published

ad valorem taxes or utility services taxes. Section 7.01, Marco Island City Charter, provides that the

Uscardio Vascular, Inc. v. Florida Department of Revenue

993 So. 2d 81, 2008 WL 4298547

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 23, 2008 | Docket: 64856234

Published

“Service Fee” shall have the meaning given in Section 7.1. Article VII of the Agreement, entitled “Financial

Community State Bank v. Strong

485 F.3d 597, 2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 9577, 2007 WL 1225343

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Apr 27, 2007 | Docket: 65657969

Published

seq.; the Georgia Check Cashing Statute, O.C.G.A. § 7-1-700, et seq.; and the Georgia Racketeer Influenced

Cullum v. Packo

947 So. 2d 533, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 21349, 2006 WL 3740785

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 21, 2006 | Docket: 64848695

Published

not cured within ten (10) days as required by Section 7.01 of the lease. Further, the trial court found

Asbestos Settlement Trust v. Port Authority of New York & New Jersey

377 B.R. 345, 2006 Bankr. LEXIS 4423

United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Mar 27, 2006 | Docket: 65783323

Published

and rights provided in the Trust Agreement.” Section 7.1 of the Trust Agreement provides as follows: ARTICLE

Ranieri v. Paincare Holdings, Inc.

889 So. 2d 106, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 17811, 2004 WL 2623950

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 19, 2004 | Docket: 64834971

Published

that it meant any other termination for cause (section 7.1) and any other termination without cause, other

Café Erotica of Florida, Inc. v. St. Johns County

360 F.3d 1274

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Feb 23, 2004 | Docket: 212951

Published

billboards, which can be as large as 560 square feet. Section 7.01.03 regulates the size of billboards and contains

Godwin v. Solutia, Inc.

215 F. Supp. 2d 1291, 28 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 2449, 2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16332, 2002 WL 1837851

District Court, N.D. Florida | Filed: Jul 31, 2002 | Docket: 2370896

Published

the date the Participant becomes vested under Section 7.1, the Participant or, in the case of the Participant's

City of Miami v. ASS'N OF FIREFIGHTERS

744 So. 2d 555

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 29, 1999 | Docket: 1721523

Published

subject requirement on the exclusive provisions of Section 7.01 of the Miami-Dade Home Rule Charter, which relates

Ago

Florida Attorney General Reports | Filed: Aug 24, 1998 | Docket: 3256104

Published

5(1) and (2), Ch. 80-603, Laws of Florida. 3 Section 7(1), Chapter 80-603, Laws of Florida. 4 Section

Aruvision Holding and Exploitation v. Disney/ABC Television International Inc.

992 F. Supp. 1370, 1997 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21748, 1997 WL 833304

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Oct 31, 1997 | Docket: 66021179

Published

to CCABC and its controlled entities. (Agreement § 7.1(c) (emphasis added).)3 Defendant contends that this

Underwriters at Lloyd's v. Capri of Palm Beach, Inc.

932 F. Supp. 1444, 1996 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10878, 1996 WL 429001

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Apr 24, 1996 | Docket: 66006121

Published

first class registered mail.” See ’93 Policy, Section 7(1) (emphasis added). The Court thus must look to

Utility Contractors Financial Services, Inc. v. Amsouth Bank N.A. (In re Joe Morgan, Inc.)

985 F.2d 1554

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Mar 22, 1993 | Docket: 66280280

Published

to his order or to bearer or in blank.” Ala.Code § 7-1-201(20). There is no dispute that UCON was a holder

Savers Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n v. Amberley Huntsville, Ltd.

934 F.2d 1199

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Jun 28, 1991 | Docket: 66265043

Published

faith” in the context of loan acceleration. Ala.Code § 7-1-208 (1984) provides that a party possessing the

Langston ex rel. Langston v. ACT

890 F.2d 380

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Dec 13, 1989 | Docket: 66249809

Published

F.2d 1361, 1367 n. 5 (11th Cir.1983); Ala.Code § 7-1-203 (1984).9 The registration materials provided

Adams v. Bainbridge-Decatur County Hospital Authority

888 F.2d 1356

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Nov 24, 1989 | Docket: 66249419

Published

Policy Handbook, Grievance Procedure, ch. VII, § 7.1. Chapter VIII, concerning termination of employment

James B. Beam Distilling Co. v. Department of Business Regulation, Division of Alcoholic Beverages & Tobacco

530 So. 2d 450, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 2008, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 3855, 1988 WL 89498

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 31, 1988 | Docket: 64636715

Published

concur. . The relevant Indiana statutes are section 7.1-4-4-1, Indiana Code Annotated, exacting a 27-cent

Orlando Utilities Commission v. State

478 So. 2d 341, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 587, 1985 Fla. LEXIS 4027

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Oct 31, 1985 | Docket: 64615455

Published

previously amended, to read in pertinent part: Section 7. (1) In addition to the power and authority to borrow

White v. I.T.T.

718 F.2d 994, 114 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 3132

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Oct 31, 1983 | Docket: 66194071

Published

and creates no executory obligations. 34 Ga.Code § 7-1 (1982); Murphine v. Hospital Authority of Floyd

Maas Bros., Inc. v. Vincent (In re Vincent)

10 B.R. 549, 1981 Bankr. LEXIS 4657

United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Mar 19, 1981 | Docket: 65777878

Published

Bender’s U.C.C. Service, Sales and Bulk Transfers, § 7.01[4]; Lucas v. Firestone Tire and Rubber Co., 458

Board of County Commissioners v. Wilson

382 So. 2d 431, 1980 Fla. App. LEXIS 16389

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 15, 1980 | Docket: 64575565

Published

petition needed to activate the provisions of Section 7.01(4) of the Home Rule Charter which required the

City of Miami Beach v. Breitbart

358 So. 2d 564, 1978 Fla. App. LEXIS 15884

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 25, 1978 | Docket: 64564342

Published

Approval of site plan shall be in accordance with Section 7-1, D, as applied to conditional uses.”

Ago

Florida Attorney General Reports | Filed: Aug 7, 1974 | Docket: 3256611

Published

executive director of the department; and under section 7(1) of the act [s. 943.09], they have the duty to

City of Miami Beach v. State ex rel. Consolo

279 So. 2d 76, 1973 Fla. App. LEXIS 7929

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 15, 1973 | Docket: 64532760

Published

said property in accordance with the provisions of § 7-1 of the zoning ordinances of the “city”. We have

Winter Park Pines Development Co. v. Kohloss

244 So. 2d 493, 1971 Fla. App. LEXIS 7020

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 15, 1971 | Docket: 64518947

Published

59-1658 amends § 7 of chapter 59-1646 to read: “Section 7 (1) No plat shall be recorded hereafter unless

Dekle v. Valrico Sandstone Co.

74 Fla. 346, 77 So. 95

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Nov 19, 1917 | Docket: 60408352

Published

complaint, others to section 7, and still others to section 7 1-2 of the bill of complaint. These several special