The 2023 Florida Statutes (including Special Session C)

Title IV
EXECUTIVE BRANCH

Chapter 23
MISCELLANEOUS EXECUTIVE FUNCTIONS

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 23.30

23.30 Florida Customer Service Standards Act.—

(1) SHORT TITLE.—This section may be cited as the “Florida Customer Service Standards Act.”

(2) PURPOSE.—It is the purpose of this section to direct state departments to practice and employ all the measures set forth in this section.

(3) DEFINITIONS.—As used in this section:

(a) “Customer” means any member of the public who uses or requests services or information provided by a state department or who is required by statute to interact with the department.

(b) “Department” means a principal administrative unit within the executive branch of state government, as set forth in chapter 20, and also includes the Public Service Commission.

(4) MEASURES TO BE IMPLEMENTED.—State departments shall:

(a) Designate an employee or employees in the department who shall be responsible for facilitating the resolution of customer complaints, including any customer complaints regarding unsatisfactory treatment by department employees.

(b) Provide available information, except information which is confidential pursuant to any other state or federal law, and accurate responses to questions and requests for assistance in a prompt manner.

(d) Provide local or toll-free telephonic or electronic access either through a centralized complaint-intake call center or directly to a department employee or employees designated to resolve customer complaints.

(e) Develop a process for review by upper-level management of any customer complaints not resolved by the department employee or employees designated to resolve customer complaints. In evaluating the appropriateness of response time, management may consider periodic, high volume inquiries as a justifiable cause of delay.

(f) Develop customer satisfaction measures as part of the department’s performance measurement system.

(g) Employ a system by which customer complaints and resolutions of those complaints are tracked.

(h) Provide statistical data on customer complaints and resolutions of those complaints, and on customer satisfaction measures in annual reports or other performance publications, and use this data when conducting management and budget planning activities.

(i) Provide training to employees on improving customer service and on the role of the department employee or employees designated to resolve customer complaints.

(j) Include in the departmental strategic plan a program outline or goal regarding customer service.

(k) Conduct interdepartmental discussions on methods of providing and improving customer service.

(5) OPERATING HOURS.—Departments shall be staffed and open to the public for business on all regular business days.

(6) FUNDING.—Departments shall use available resources to achieve the purposes of this section.

(7) FAILURE TO COMPLY.—No cause of action shall arise in favor of any person due to a department’s failure to comply with any provision of this section.

(8) EXCEPTIONS.—This section does not apply to a person who uses or requests services or information from a department when such service or information is related to that person’s:

(a) Pending or current criminal prosecution;

(b) Current incarceration;

(d) Current lawful state or local government custody.

History.—s. 1, ch. 2001-80.

F.S. 23.30 on Google Scholar

F.S. 23.30 on Casetext

Amendments to 23.30

Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 23.30

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

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 23.30.

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases from cite.case.law:

GILL, v. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE,, 246 F. Supp. 3d 1264 (N.D. Cal. 2017)

. . . . § 23.30; 28 C.F.R. §. 23.40. . . .

BLATCHFORD, v. ALASKA NATIVE TRIBAL HEALTH CONSORTIUM,, 645 F.3d 1089 (9th Cir. 2011)

. . . AS 34.35.450-34.35.480 do not apply to a claim, right of action, or money accruing under AS 23.30 (Workers . . .

REIBSTEIN, v. RITE AID CORPORATION,, 761 F. Supp. 2d 241 (E.D. Pa. 2011)

. . . of $650 for a total of $60,580 in fees; (2) Elise Garber, a paralegal/law clerk of the firm, spent 23.30 . . .

In NEOPHARM, INC. SECURITIES LITIGATION, 705 F. Supp. 2d 946 (N.D. Ill. 2010)

. . . As requested by the defendants, the court takes judicial notice that NeoPharm stock closed at $23.30 . . .

In A. REID,, 399 B.R. 307 (Bankr. W.D. Ky. 2008)

. . . This results in a deduction of $8,367 (2 x 2.5 @ $230 = $575; 23.30 x $240 = $5,592; and 8.8 x $250 = . . .

In DIMAS, LLC,, 357 B.R. 563 (Bankr. N.D. Cal. 2006)

. . . judg- 3.00 ment; continue drafting papers for entry of default and default judgment. 495.00 _TOTAL_ 23.30 . . .

In M. WILLIAMS, M. v. G., 241 B.R. 387 (Bankr. E.D. Va. 1999)

. . . 14 1998 $394.47 $22.69 $29,581.30 22 SEP 14 1998 $394.17 $22.99 $29,558.31 23 OCT 14 1998 $393.86 $23.30 . . .

UNITED STATES v. BROWN,, 102 F.3d 1390 (5th Cir. 1996)

. . . several rounds of shotgun ammunition in the right armrest console; four baggies containing a total of 23.30 . . .

HAYS, v. STATE OF LOUISIANA,, 936 F. Supp. 360 (W.D. La. 1996)

. . . 60.32% District 3 602,839 443,616 142,167 330,048 250,432 76,915 100.00% 73.59% 23.58% 100.00% 75.88% 23.30% . . .

ROCKLAND MORTGAGE CORP. a v. SHAREHOLDERS FUNDING, INC. a d b a, 835 F. Supp. 182 (D. Del. 1993)

. . . however, "good faith intentions of an infringer are no defense to a finding of liability.” 2 McCarthy § 23.30 . . .

ESTRADA, M. Jr. v. SECRETARY OF DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES,, 29 Fed. Cl. 78 (Fed. Cl. 1993)

. . . The special master pared 17.05 hours of attorney time from petitioner’s requested amount and 23.30 hours . . .

VEL ZQUEZ HERN NDEZ, v. L. MORALES,, 810 F. Supp. 25 (D.P.R. 1992)

. . . 13.65 hours X $100.00/hour = 1.365.00 Total 1990-91: $ 4,442.00 1992 (High hourly rate of $125.00) Low: 23.30 . . .

WESCH, v. HUNT,, 785 F. Supp. 1491 (S.D. Ala. 1992)

. . . 64.51% 5,395 31 35.09% 0.20% 6 24 0.04% 0.16% Houston County 81,331 61,513 100.00% 75.63% 18,954 287 23.30% . . .

ROBINSON, v. U- HAUL COMPANY,, 785 F. Supp. 1378 (D. Alaska 1992)

. . . . § 23.30.-055 deprived any allocation of less than 100% fault to the employer of any significance. . . .

HADIX, v. JOHNSON,, 740 F. Supp. 433 (E.D. Mich. 1990)

. . . Contempt +23.30 hrs. TOTAL 162.00 hrs. Patricia Streeter: Classification 142.50 hrs. . . .

UNITED STATES v. FOULKS, Jr., 905 F.2d 928 (6th Cir. 1990)

. . . of funds in and out of this account was tracked, revealing that the account balance was reduced to $23.30 . . .

Dr. SHUSHAN, Dr. K. v. UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO AT BOULDER, 132 F.R.D. 263 (D. Colo. 1990)

. . . Moore, Federal Practice ¶¶ 23.30, 23.31 (1987). . . .

BROWN, By v. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF TOPEKA, SHAWNEE COUNTY, KANSAS,, 892 F.2d 851 (10th Cir. 1989)

. . . 96.3 Shaner 2.00 21.90 9.1 90.9 State Street 1.30 22.90 5.7 94.3 Stout 2.00 20.60 9.7 90.3 Sumner 1.85 23.30 . . .

ZENITH ELECTRONICS CORPORATION, v. UNITED STATES, DAEWOO ELECTRONICS CO. LTD., 884 F.2d 556 (Fed. Cir. 1989)

. . . actually lower than had been determined, and that Daewoo’s cash deposit rates should be lowered from 23.30 . . .

v. Co., 12 Ct. Int'l Trade 932 (Ct. Int'l Trade 1988)

. . . actually lower than had been determined, and that related cash deposit rates should be lowered from 23.30% . . .

ZENITH ELECTRONICS CORPORATION, v. UNITED STATES, Co., 699 F. Supp. 296 (Ct. Int'l Trade 1988)

. . . actually lower than had been determined, and that related cash deposit rates should be lowered from 23.30% . . .

MIRON, v. ALL ALASKAN SEAFOODS, INC., 705 F. Supp. 518 (W.D. Wash. 1988)

. . . paid Miron $16,433.51 in benefits as required by Alaska’s Workers’ Compensation Act, Alaska Statutes 23.30 . . .

STATE OF VERMONT, v. STACO, INC. I., 684 F. Supp. 822 (D. Vt. 1988)

. . . Detectable mercury-in-air was found in 19 (82%) of the 23 houses sampled (range 0-23.30 mcg/cubic meter . . .

J. COLLINS, v. STATE OF ALASKA, 823 F.2d 329 (9th Cir. 1987)

. . . Ch. 23.30. . . .

BUTLER, v. M. HECKLER,, 639 F. Supp. 14 (E.D.N.C. 1985)

. . . for affirmance and attorney fees, plaintiff’s counsel requested $1762.50 in attorney fees based on 23.30 . . .

COLLINS, v. STATE OF ALASKA, 621 F. Supp. 722 (W.D. Wash. 1985)

. . . Section 23.30.-045(b). . . .

C L CONSTRUCTION CO. v. UNITED STATES, 6 Cl. Ct. 791 (Cl. Ct. 1984)

. . . Id. at § 23.30[4]. . . .

ST. CHARLES MANUFACTURING CO. v. ST. CHARLES FURNITURE CORP., 482 F. Supp. 397 (N.D. Ill. 1979)

. . . Thomas McCarthy, Trademarks and Unfair Competition 23.30-§ 23.32. . . .

LOS ANGELES WOMEN S COALITION FOR BETTER BROADCASTING, v. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION, CBS, LOS ANGELES WOMEN S COALITION FOR BETTER BROADCASTING, v. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION, LOS ANGELES WOMEN S COALITION FOR BETTER BROADCASTING, v. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION, KCOP, 584 F.2d 1089 (D.C. Cir. 1978)

. . . At KTTV there were 23.30% minority workers in all jobs and 12.94% in the upper four job classifications . . .

WIEN CONSOLIDATED AIRLINES, INC. v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, WIEN CONSOLIDATED AIRLINES, INC. v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE,, 528 F.2d 735 (9th Cir. 1976)

. . . . §§ 23.30.-045; 23.30.215. . . .

RODWAY v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, 514 F.2d 809 (D.C. Cir. 1975)

. . . years ................................. 4.40 19.20 6-9 years ................................. 5.40 23.30 . . .

In TRANSIT COMPANY TIRE ANTITRUST LITIGATION. M. D. L. No., 67 F.R.D. 59 (W.D. Mo. 1975)

. . . .-3), p. 23.30 (1974 ed.). . . .

W. T. M. III, Co- T. v., 63 T.C. 289 (T.C. 1974)

. . . estate in 1963,1964, and 1966 as follows: Year Interest Gross rents Sale profits Total income 1963 _ $23.30 . . .

M. KRALL, v. ROYAL INNS OF AMERICA, INC. ROYAL INNS OF AMERICA, INC. v. RED- E- STEEL COMPANY, INC., 374 F. Supp. 146 (D. Alaska 1973)

. . . See A.S. 23.30. Finally, reliance upon the finder of fact does not reject the underlying policy. . . .

TRANS OCEAN VAN SERVICE v. THE UNITED STATES, 200 Ct. Cl. 122 (Ct. Cl. 1972)

. . . plaintiff is entitled to compensation in the amount of $489.30 based on the single-factor rate of $23.30 . . .

GRANT OIL TOOL COMPANY v. UNITED STATES, 381 F.2d 389 (Ct. Cl. 1967)

. . . Of this sum, 23.30 percent, or $1,584,285.62, were receipts derived from the tool bodies, as follows: . . .

GRANT OIL TOOL COMPANY v. THE UNITED STATES, 180 Ct. Cl. 620 (Ct. Cl. 1967)

. . . Of this sum, 23.30 percent, or $1,584,285.62, were receipts derived from the tool bodies, as follows: . . . Of this total, 23.30 percent, or $1,584,285.62, represented the receipts derived from the tool bodies . . .

E. PARKER, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, v. E. PARKER,, 365 F.2d 792 (8th Cir. 1966)

. . . It cost the recipient $23.30 and promised earnings of $1,000 within six months. . . .

DELANEY v. UNITED SERVICES LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, 201 F. Supp. 25 (W.D. Tex. 1961)

. . . amendment form requested the insurer to “cancel Limitation Due to Aviation Hazard and increase premium to $23.30 . . . well as new forms indicating that the increase in the monthly allotment would be $28.30, instead of $23.30 . . .

NORTHERN NATURAL GAS COMPANY, v. A. O MALLEY, W. O NORTHERN NATURAL GAS COMPANY, v. L. McCRORY,, 277 F.2d 128 (8th Cir. 1960)

. . . Id., § 23.30. . . .

N. CARR, v. UNITED STATES, 136 F. Supp. 527 (E.D. Va. 1955)

. . . The total area of libellant’s oyster leases aggregated 23.30 acres, but all of this area was admittedly . . .

NORFOLK SHIPBUILDING DRY DOCK CORPORATION v. THE UNITED STATES, 63 Ct. Cl. 246 (Ct. Cl. 1927)

. . . Hall, subcontractor_ 21.18 10% for profit- 2.12 Total_ 23.30 Replacement of steering gear: Direct labor . . .

MICHIGAN CENTRAL RAILROAD COMPANY v. MARK OWEN COMPANY, 256 U.S. 427 (U.S. 1921)

. . . The total loss, is alleged to have been 126 baskets of grapes of the value of $23.30. . . .

In BERKELEY. BUSHBY, 203 F. 7 (2d Cir. 1913)

. . . Levy specified as Scheideberg’s claim assigned to him §23.30 of costs, for which an execution had been . . .

McCALDIN v. CARGO OF LUMBER SAME v. PHILADELPHIA G. S. S. CO., 198 F. 328 (E.D. Pa. 1912)

. . . the vessel, to recover $2,375 charter hire from March 28 to April 14, 1910, and the further sum of $23.30 . . .

TRINIDAD ASPHALT MFG. CO. v. TRINIDAD ASPHALT REFINING CO., 119 F. 134 (8th Cir. 1902)

. . . to be made from time to time in car-load or boat-load lots, as the roofing company might desire, at $23.30 . . .

v. v. v., 12 F. 449 (C.C.D. Or. 1882)

. . . McGraw, on a cash entry on July 18, 1871, and the payment of $23.30; and that patents were issued upon . . .

v., 104 U.S. 245 (U.S. 1881)

. . . They awarded that the defendant should convey to the complainant' 23.30. acres to equalize the partition . . .

v., 76 U.S. 108 (U.S. 1869)

. . . interest, and that this balance was extinguished on the 1st of January, 1863, leaving an'overplus of $23.30 . . .