Syfert Injury Law Firm

Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation

Call Now: 904-383-7448
Florida Statute 17.42 | Lawyer Caselaw & Research
Link to State of Florida Official Statute
Statute is currently reporting as:
F.S. 17.42 Case Law from Google Scholar Google Search for Amendments to 17.42

The 2024 Florida Statutes

Title IV
EXECUTIVE BRANCH
Chapter 17
CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
View Entire Chapter
F.S. 17.42
17.42 Opioid Settlement Clearing Trust Fund.—
(1) The Opioid Settlement Clearing Trust Fund is created within the department.
(2) Funds to be credited to the Opioid Settlement Clearing Trust Fund shall consist of payments received by the state from settlements reached with distributors as part of In re Mallinckrodt PLC, Case No. 20-12522 (Bankr. D. Del. 2021) and any other similar settlements in opioid-related litigation or bankruptcy. Funds received from such settlements and deposited into the trust fund are exempt from the service charges imposed under s. 215.20.
(3) Funds deposited into the Opioid Settlement Clearing Trust Fund shall be subdivided as follows:
(a) Regional subfund.—The following amounts shall be deposited into the regional subfund each year:
1. From 2022 to 2027, inclusive, 47 percent.
2. From 2028 to 2030, inclusive, 41 percent.
3. From 2031 to 2033, inclusive, 40 percent.
4. From 2034 to 2036, inclusive, 39 percent.
5. From 2037 to any subsequent year, inclusive, 35 percent.
(b) State subfund.—The state subfund shall be funded with all remaining funds after funds allocated for the regional subfund are deposited.
(4) The department is authorized to draw warrants for amounts for which the Department of Legal Affairs notifies the Chief Financial Officer to draw warrants and withdraw such amounts from the regional subfund to pay amounts due pursuant to the terms of any allocation agreement or settlement to a county within the state that:
(a) Has a population of at least 300,000 according to the United States Census Bureau population estimates as of July 1, 2019, released March 2020, or the United States Decennial Census of 2020, released August and September 2021;
(b) Has an opioid task force of which the county is a member or operates in connection with its municipalities or others on a local or regional basis. As used in this paragraph, the term “task force” includes any department, committee, commission, or bureau established by the county to collect information related to substance abuse disorders in the county and provide that information to the county, along with recommendations on responding to the opioid epidemic, so long as the department, committee, commission, or bureau allows municipalities and others to participate in whatever process is undertaken;
(c) As of December 31, 2021, has an abatement plan that has been adopted or is being used to respond to the opioid epidemic;
(d) As of December 31, 2021, provides or contracts with others to provide substance abuse prevention, recovery, and treatment services to its citizens; and
(e) Enters or has entered into an interlocal written agreement with a majority of the municipalities located within the county’s boundaries. As used in this paragraph, the term “majority” means more than 50 percent of the population of the municipalities located within the boundaries of a county. For purposes of calculating a majority, individuals living in unincorporated portions of a county may not be counted.
(5) The department shall disburse funds from the state subfund, by nonoperating transfer, of the Opioid Settlement Clearing Trust Fund to the opioid settlement trust funds of the various agencies, as appropriate, as provided in the General Appropriations Act.
(6) Funds disbursed or transferred under this section shall be used by the state, its agencies, its contractors, and its subdivisions and their contractors to abate the opioid epidemic.
(7) Pursuant to s. 19(f)(3), Art. III of the State Constitution, the Opioid Settlement Clearing Trust Fund is exempt from the termination provisions of s. 19(f)(2), Art. III of the State Constitution.
History.—s. 1, ch. 2022-161.

F.S. 17.42 on Google Scholar

F.S. 17.42 on Casetext

Amendments to 17.42


Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 17.42
Level: Degree
Misdemeanor/Felony: First/Second/Third

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 17.42.

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases Citing Statute 17.42

Total Results: 20

Lee Memorial Health System, d/b/a Lee Health v. Office of the Attorney General, Department of Legal Affairs, State of Florida

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2024-08-14

Snippet: settlements. 8 § 17.42(1), Fla. Stat. The legislation also created a task

North Broward Hospital District, d/b/a Broward Health v. Office of the Attorney General, Department of Legal Affairs, State of Florida

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2024-08-14

Snippet: settlements. 8 § 17.42(1), Fla. Stat. The legislation also created a task

Putnam County School Board v. Office of the Attorney General, Department of Legal Affairs, State of Florida

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2024-08-14

Snippet: settlements. 8 § 17.42(1), Fla. Stat. The legislation also created a task

Sarasota County Public Hospital District, d/b/a Sarasota Memorial Healthcare System, Inc. v. Office of the Attorney General, Department of Legal Affairs, State of Florida

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2024-08-14

Snippet: settlements. 8 § 17.42(1), Fla. Stat. The legislation also created a task

School Board of Miami-Dade County and Putnam County School Board v. Office of the Attorney General, Department of Legal Affairs, State of Florida

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2024-08-14

Snippet: settlements. 8 § 17.42(1), Fla. Stat. The legislation also created a task

South Broward Hospital District, d/b/a Memorial Healthcare System v. Office of the Attorney General, Department of Legal Affairs, State of Florida

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2024-08-14

Snippet: settlements. 8 § 17.42(1), Fla. Stat. The legislation also created a task

Halifax Hospital Medical Center v. Office of the Attorney General

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2024-08-14

Snippet: settlements. 8 § 17.42(1), Fla. Stat. The legislation also created a task

Robert Craft v. State of Florida

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 2021-02-25

Snippet: added); see generally Hayward v. State, 24 So. 3d 17, 42 (Fla. 2009) (explaining that unpreserved errors

Robert Craft v. State of Florida

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 2020-11-19

Snippet: added); see generally Hayward v. State, 24 So. 3d 17, 42 (Fla. 2009) (explaining that unpreserved errors

Rodney Tyrone Lowe v. State of Florida

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 2018-10-19

Citation: 259 So. 3d 23

Snippet: the alleged error.' " Hayward v. State , 24 So.3d 17, 42 (Fla. 2009) (quoting Simpson v. State , 3 So.3d

Mitchell v. Mitchell

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2016-08-24

Citation: 198 So. 3d 1096, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 12823, 2016 WL 4445936

Snippet: his mother as she has filled his head with * * * 17:42 Appellant: I HAVE NOTHIN IN LIFE IVONNE 17:45 Appellant:

Wayne C. Doty v. State of Florida

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 2015-07-09

Citation: 170 So. 3d 731, 40 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 442, 2015 Fla. LEXIS 1468

Snippet: (quoting Hayward v. State, 24 So.3d 17, 42 (Fla.2009)). This Court has long prohibited

Snelgrove v. State

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 2012-04-19

Citation: 107 So. 3d 242, 37 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 303, 2012 WL 1345485, 2012 Fla. LEXIS 754

Snippet: fundamental error. See Hayward v. State, 24 So.3d 17, 42 (Fla.2009). Fundamental error is error that “ ‘reaches

Chrysler Realty Corp. v. Davis

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2004-07-21

Citation: 877 So. 2d 903, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 10845, 2004 WL 1620839

Snippet: Realty Services, Inc. (“Frontier”), with respect to 17.42 acres of Trust property. Frontier intended to either

City of Orlando v. Central Florida Police Benevolent Ass'n

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1992-03-20

Citation: 595 So. 2d 1087, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 2726, 1992 WL 51246

Snippet: 802 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979). . Rules 38D-17.024, 38D-17.042 pertain to the unit clarification petition; Rules

DEPT. OF TRANSP., STATE v. Heathrow Land & Dev. Corp.

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1991-04-11

Citation: 579 So. 2d 183, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 3329, 1991 WL 50594

Snippet: Relocation Act Amendments of 1987 (Pub.L. 100-17), 42 U.S.C. § 4601, et seq. (the "Federal Uniform Act")

Jones v. Crews

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1967-11-13

Citation: 204 So. 2d 24

Snippet: summary adjudication. 6 Moore, Federal Practice, § 56.17 [42], at 2583. On the question of contributory negligence

Lab v. Hall

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1967-06-27

Citation: 200 So. 2d 556

Snippet: summary adjudication. 6 Moore Federal Practice, § 56.17[42], page 2583. This is particularly true in malpractice

Booth v. Mary Carter Paint Company

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1966-01-21

Citation: 182 So. 2d 292

Snippet: manner. 6 Moore's Federal Practice (2d Ed.), par. 56.17(42), p. 2232. Warring v. Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc., Fla

Dubov ex rel. Dubov v. Ropes

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1960-11-07

Citation: 124 So. 2d 34

Snippet: adjudication. 6 Moore’s Federal Practice, § 56.17(42), p. 2232.” Roucher v. Traders & General Insurance