Florida Statutes
Fla. Stat. § 15.13 (2025)
Administration of certain laws.
✓ 2025 Florida Statutes — current through the 2025 Regular Session
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us
JustiaFla. Statutes
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
15.13 Administration of certain laws.—The Department of State shall have general supervision and administration of the election laws, corporation laws and such other laws as are placed under it by the Legislature and shall keep records of same.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 17
cases, 1960–2020 · leading case: Madera v. Detzner, 325 F. Supp. 3d 1269 (N.D. Fla. 2018).
Madera v. Detzner, 325 F. Supp. 3d 1269 (N.D. Fla. 2018). “" Fla. Stat. § 15.13 . 10 Under rules the Department of State has promulgated, "[b]allots shall be translated into other languages that are required by law or court order.”
Nancy Carola Jacobsen v. Florida Sec'y of State, 974 F.3d 1236 (11th Cir. 2020). “” See Fla. Stat. §§ 15.13 ; 20.10(1), (2)(a). The Secretary is the “chief election officer of the state” responsible for “[o]btain[ing] and maintain[ing] uniformity in the interpretation and implementation of the election laws.”
Am. Ass'n of People With Disabilities v. Hood, 310 F. Supp. 2d 1226 (M.D. Fla. 2004). “117, § IX, ¶ 8; Fla. Stat. § 15.13 . 10. Before a Florida county may legally purchase a voting system, the voting system must be certified by the Division of Elections (DOE) of the Florida Department of State.”
Smith v. Mogelvang, 432 So. 2d 119 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983). “1975); 3 Moore's Federal Practice, section 15.13[2] (2d ed. 1982), involving Federal Rule 15(b) which is the counterpart of Florida Rule 1.”
State Ex Rel. Siegendorf v. Stone, 266 So. 2d 345 (Fla. 1972). “In view of the necessity for expediency in this matter, privilege of filing rehearing is dispensed with and this opinion shall be effective immediately. Accordingly, the peremptory writ of mandamus should not issue and the alternative writ is hereby discharged.”
Petit v. Adams, 211 So. 2d 565 (Fla. 1968). “Section 15.13, Florida Statutes, F.S.A., provides: “The secretary of state shall have general supervision and administration of the election laws, corporation laws and such other laws as are placed under his office by the legislature and shall keep records of same.”
Sentry Ins. v. Brown, 424 So. 2d 780 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982). “2 Long, The Law of Liability Insurance, § 15.13 at 15-28 to 15-29 (rev. ed. 1981) (footnotes omitted).”
Toyota of Pensacola v. Maines, 558 So. 2d 1072 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990). “1 Larson § 15.13(b), at 4-29. As to the first component, we agree that there exists competent, substantial evidence supporting the presence of a special hazard at the particular place where the accident in question occurred.”
State Ex Rel. Shevin v. Stone, 279 So. 2d 17 (Fla. 1972). “Respondent Richard Stone, as Secretary of State, is charged under Fla. Stat. § 15.13 , [3] F.S.A., with "general supervision and administration of the election laws," which laws include Fla.”
Sack v. Sack, 184 So. 2d 434 (Fla. 3d DCA 1966). “991-992, it is stated: “The purpose of an amendment to conform to proof is to bring the pleadings in line with the actual issues upon which the case was tried; therefore an amendment after judgment is not permissible which brings in some entirely extrinsic issue or changes the…”
Seabreeze Indus., Inc. v. Phily, 118 So. 2d 54 (Fla. 2d DCA 1960). “There are several well-recognized exceptions to this general rule, however, the most common of these being, as expressed in section 15.13, p. 197, Larson’s Workmen’s-Compensation Law, that if the off-premises-point where the injury occurred lies on the only route or at least on…”
Pillsbury Co. v. Chernin & Pila Dairy & Livestock Co., 280 So. 2d 49 (Fla. 2d DCA 1973). “2d 383 ; 3 Moore, Federal Practice § 15.13 [2],”
— 15.13(2) — 1 case
Sack v. Sack, 184 So. 2d 434 (Fla. 3d DCA 1966). “991-992, it is stated: “The purpose of an amendment to conform to proof is to bring the pleadings in line with the actual issues upon which the case was tried; therefore an amendment after judgment is not permissible which brings in some entirely extrinsic issue or changes the…”
— 15.13(b) — 1 case
Toyota of Pensacola v. Maines, 558 So. 2d 1072 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990). “1 Larson § 15.13(b), at 4-29. As to the first component, we agree that there exists competent, substantial evidence supporting the presence of a special hazard at the particular place where the accident in question occurred.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.