Florida Statute 17.26 | Lawyer Caselaw & Research

The 2024 Florida Statutes

Title IV
EXECUTIVE BRANCH

Chapter 17
CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 17.26

17.26 Cancellation of state warrants not presented within 1 year.—

(1) If any state warrant issued by the Chief Financial Officer or Comptroller against any fund in the State Treasury is not presented for payment within 1 year after the last day of the month in which it was originally issued, the Chief Financial Officer may cancel the warrant and credit the amount of the warrant to the fund upon which it is drawn. If the warrant so canceled was issued against a fund that is no longer operative, the amount of the warrant shall be credited to the General Revenue Fund. The Chief Financial Officer shall not honor any state warrant after it has been canceled.

(2) The funds represented by a warrant canceled under subsection (1) are presumed abandoned by the payee or person entitled to the warrant and shall be reported and remitted as unclaimed property under s. 717.117, except that written notice to the apparent owner of the unclaimed property is not required before filing of the report. An action may not be commenced thereafter for recovery of funds represented by the warrant, except as provided by chapter 717. This subsection applies to all warrants issued on or after July 1, 1992.

(3) When a warrant canceled under subsection (1) represents funds that are in whole or in part derived from federal contributions and disposition of the funds under chapter 717 would cause a loss of the federal contributions, the Governor shall certify to the Chief Financial Officer that funds represented by such warrants are for that reason exempt from treatment as unclaimed property. Obligations represented by warrants are unenforceable after 1 year from the last day of the month in which the warrant was originally issued. An action may not be commenced thereafter on the obligation unless authorized by the federal program from which the original warrant was funded and unless payment of the obligation is authorized to be made from the current federal funding. When a payee or person entitled to a warrant subject to this subsection requests payment, and payment from current federal funding is authorized by the federal program from which the original warrant was funded, the Chief Financial Officer may, upon investigation, issue a new warrant to be paid out of the proper fund in the State Treasury, provided the payee or other person executes under oath the statement required by s. 17.13 or surrenders the canceled warrant.

(4) If a valid obligation of the state is due, owing, and unpaid and it becomes unenforceable for any reason because of the provisions and limitations contained in this section, the person entitled to payment on the obligation may present a claim for relief to the Legislature, provided the claim is made within the time limitations presently provided by law.

(5) This section does not extend any applicable statute of limitations or revive any barred claim with respect to any state obligation outstanding and unpaid on July 1, 1995.

History.—ss. 1, 2, ch. 22006, 1943; s. 1, ch. 29645, 1955; s. 1, ch. 73-220; s. 2, ch. 85-61; s. 1, ch. 88-256; s. 7, ch. 95-312; s. 2, ch. 2001-60; s. 38, ch. 2003-261.

F.S. 17.26 on Google Scholar

F.S. 17.26 on Casetext

Amendments to 17.26

Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 17.26

Level: Degree
Misdemeanor/Felony: First/Second/Third

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 17.26.

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases Citing Statute 17.26

Total Results: 10

HERBERT JEAN v. BAYVIEW LOAN SERVICING, LLC, etc.

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2021-02-10

Snippet: Stat.; Specht v. Netscape Commc’ns Corp., 306 F.3d 17, 26 (2d Cir. 2002) (“It is well settled that a court

Nicholas Dwight Byram v. State of Florida

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2019-02-15

Snippet: FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL STATE OF FLORIDA _____________________________ No. 1D17-26 _____________________________ NICHOLAS DWIGHT BYRAM, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. _____________________________ On appeal from the Circuit Court for Baker County. James M. Colaw, Judge. February 15, 2019 PER CURIAM. Nicholas Byram (“Byram”) appeals

Directv, Inc., etc. v. State of Florida, Dept. of Revenue

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2015-06-10

Snippet: discrimination. Roberts, slip op. at 17. 26 as asserted by the satellite

Boyd v. State

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1991-01-08

Citation: 578 So. 2d 718, 1991 WL 1496

Snippet: 464 U.S. 16, 26, 104 S.Ct. 296, 302, 78 L.Ed.2d 17, 26 (1983). The statute, however, reaches wholly criminal

Stipp v. State

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1978-02-07

Citation: 355 So. 2d 1217

Snippet: violations of municipal ordinances. In addition Sec. 17.26 of the ordinances of *1218 the City of Plantation

City of Plantation v. Roberts

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 1976-12-22

Citation: 342 So. 2d 69

Snippet: except at high tide. In Perry v. Haines, 191 U.S. 17, 26, 24 S.Ct. 8, 10, 48 L.Ed. 73 (1903), the United

Heinlein v. Metropolitan Dade County

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1970-10-06

Citation: 239 So. 2d 635, 1970 Fla. App. LEXIS 7081

Snippet: adduced tending to show Section 17-23, 17-24, 17-25, 17-26 and 17-27 as applied to the plaintiffs are so unreasonably

Weber v. City of Hollywood

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1960-04-06

Citation: 120 So. 2d 826, 1960 Fla. App. LEXIS 2571

Snippet: Kirkland v. City of Tampa, 75 Fla. 271, 78 So. 17; 26 C.J.S. Dedication § 60, p. 548. The final question

Camp Phosphate Co. v. Anderson

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 1904-06-15

Citation: 48 Fla. 226

Snippet: 30 S. E. Rep. 216; Davis v. Settle, 43 W. Va. 17, 26 S. E. *246Rep. 557. See, also, Weston v. Stoddard

Thalheim v. State

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 1896-06-15

Citation: 38 Fla. 169

Snippet: N. W. Rep. 898; Gardner vs. State, 55 N. J. L. 17, 26 Atl. Rep. 30; State vs. Orrick, 106 Mo. 111, 17