The 2023 Florida Statutes (including Special Session C)

Title V
JUDICIAL BRANCH

Chapter 26
CIRCUIT COURTS

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 26.19

26.19 Abatement of actions because of change of judge, etc.—No civil or criminal cases, suits in equity, actions at law, statutory or otherwise; and no writs, process, pleading, motion, information, presentment, indictment or other proceedings, order, finding, decree, judgment or sentence, shall abate, be quashed, set aside, reversed, qualified, dismissed, defeated, or held to be in error because of the changes in any circuit or circuits, or judge or judges, state attorneys, or other prosecuting officers.

History.—s. 5, ch. 17085, 1935; CGL 1936 Supp. 4738(5).

F.S. 26.19 on Google Scholar

F.S. 26.19 on Casetext

Amendments to 26.19

Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 26.19

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

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 26.19.

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases from cite.case.law:

UNITED STATES v. CITY OF EASTPOINTE,, 378 F. Supp. 3d 589 (E.D. Mich. 2019)

. . . proposed districts as follows: 61.73% in District 1, 34.22% in District 2, 23.85% in District 3, and 26.19% . . .

WHITT, Jr. Sr. v. KALEIDA HEALTH,, 298 F. Supp. 3d 558 (W.D.N.Y. 2018)

. . . As a result of this pay raise, Whitt earned $26.19 per hour. (Id. at 2). . . .

MILWAUKEE ELECTRIC TOOL CORPORATION, LLC, AC Co. v. SNAP- ON INCORPORATED,, 271 F. Supp. 3d 990 (E.D. Wis. 2017)

. . . The prototype pack was observed to produce an average discharge current of 26.19 amps. . . .

PACKGEN, v. BP EXPLORATION INC. BP, 754 F.3d 61 (1st Cir. 2014)

. . . goods marketable by the seller to others, then the exception does apply. 9 Williston on Contracts § 26.19 . . . difficult or impossible to sell to others” because of their unique nature. 9 Williston on Contracts § 26.19 . . .

ECKERMAN, v. TENNESSEE DEPARTMENT OF SAFETY,, 636 F.3d 202 (6th Cir. 2010)

. . . In re Eckerman, No. 26.19-095351J (Tenn.Civ.Serv.Comm. Mar. 8, 2008). . . . In re Eckerman, No. 26.19-095351J (Tenn.Civ.Serv.Comm. Mar. 8, 2008). . . .

MESSIER, v. BOUCHARD TRANSPORTATION,, 756 F. Supp. 2d 475 (S.D.N.Y. 2010)

. . . Norris, Law of Seamen, § 26.19 (5th Ed. 2002). . . .

UNITED STATES v. TOLBERT,, 272 F. App'x 803 (11th Cir. 2008)

. . . Thus, 26.19 grams of crack cocaine were attributed to Tolbert. . . .

CARRIGER, v. L. STEWART,, 95 F.3d 755 (9th Cir. 1996)

. . . . ¶¶ 26.19-26.20) found him competent to be sentenced. Id. at ¶¶ 26.19-26.20; ER Exs. 39-41. . . .

AYALA, M. M. W. By D. Jr. By L. K. N. T. By By L. L. M. By L. I. W. E. E. By K. T. By By v. UNITED STATES, 49 F.3d 607 (10th Cir. 1995)

. . . . § 26.19. . . .

DIAL- A- MATTRESS OPERATING CORP. v. MATTRESS MADNESS, INC. d b a A- a, 841 F. Supp. 1339 (E.D.N.Y. 1994)

. . . date, and (4) use prior to the registrant on the goods or services that are in issue. 2 McCarthy § 26.19 . . .

L. v., 90 T.C. 1154 (T.C. 1988)

. . . Louisiana 35.45 32.44 30.02 29.67 27.24 Texas 35.06 31.77 29.35 28.87 26.80 United States 31.77 28.52 26.19 . . .

AVIS RENT- A- CAR SYSTEMS, INC. v. ABRAHANTES,, 517 So. 2d 25 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1987)

. . . Herin’s ruling constituted an order that could not be reversed by a successor judge pursuant to Section 26.19 . . .

M. VAN ALLSBURG, v. CITY OF KANSAS CITY, MISSOURI,, 600 F. Supp. 1226 (W.D. Mo. 1984)

. . . Charitable and Religious Solicitations (g) § 26.14 — Elections; Unlawful Use Of City Property (h) § 26.19 . . .

In DAVIDSON,, 10 B.R. 374 (Bankr. W.D. Mich. 1981)

. . . why her payments should stop at 32.11 months and not continue for 36 months which would result in a 26.19% . . .

J. WHITE, v. ARLEN REALTY DEVELOPMENT CORP., 374 F. Supp. 151 (D. Md. 1974)

. . . My current billing statement in the amount of $26.19 is due for payment on February 25th and, as I threatened . . .

H. EVANS, v. LOCAL UNION INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS, AFL- CIO, I- T- E, 313 F. Supp. 1354 (N.D. Ga. 1969)

. . . and location of persons or witnesses having knowledge of relevant facts. 4 Moore’s Federal Practice ¶ 26.19 . . .

ST. PAUL FIRE MARINE INSURANCE COMPANY, a v. F. H. KING,, 45 F.R.D. 521 (W.D. Okla. 1968)

. . . names of trial witnesses is extensively discussed in 4 Moore’s Federal Practice (Second Edition), § 26.19 . . .

B- H TRANSPORTATION CO. v. GREAT ATLANTIC AND PACIFIC TEA COMPANY,, 44 F.R.D. 436 (N.D.N.Y. 1968)

. . . R.Civ.P. 4 Moore’s Fedex’al Practice ¶1 33.22, at 2379-80, and |J 26.19 [1], at 1241 (2d ed. 1967). . . .

UNITED STATES v. An ARTICLE OF DRUG CONSISTING OF INDIVIDUALLY CARTONED JARS, MORE OR LESS, LABELED IN PART AHEAD HAIR RESTORER FOR NEW HAIR GROWTH Wt. Oz. A Oz. Wt., 43 F.R.D. 181 (D. Del. 1967)

. . . .; 4 Moore 26.19, p. 1241 and see 1966 Supplement, p. 84; 26.19, n. 2. . . .

v., 46 T.C. 711 (T.C. 1966)

. . . of Hugo Goldsmith, 36 B.T.A. 1201 (1937); 4 Mertens, Law of Federal Gift and Estate Taxation, sec. 26.19 . . .

F. BRADFORD, a a v. FOUNDATION MARINE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, a, 182 So. 2d 447 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1966)

. . . The appellee argues that Sections 26.19 and 38.12, Florida Statutes, F.S.A., govern the outcome of this . . . Section 26.19 states, in pertinent part: “No civil or criminal cases, suits in equity, * * * finding, . . . The clear purpose of Section 26.19 was to obviate the necessity of discontinuance of an action in a case . . .

GRIFFIN, v. MEMPHIS SALES AND MANUFACTURING COMPANY, 38 F.R.D. 54 (N.D. Miss. 1965)

. . . See 4 Moore’s Federal Practice § 26.19, p. 1075 and cases there cited. . . .

UNITED STATES v. An BOTTLES, MORE OR LESS, SUDDEN CHANGE BY LANOLIN PLUS LAB. DIV. HAZEL BISHOP INC. N. J., 36 F.R.D. 695 (E.D.N.Y. 1965)

. . . knowledge of the facts would accomplish this purpose. 4 Moore’s Federal Practice (Second Edition) 1950, ¶26.19 . . .

C. BUTLER, v. UNITED STATES, 226 F. Supp. 341 (W.D. Mo. 1964)

. . . .; 4 Moore, Federal Practice j[ 26.19 [2], pp. 1241-1247. . . .

W. WIRTZ, v. CONTINENTAL FINANCE LOAN CO. OF WEST END,, 326 F.2d 561 (5th Cir. 1964)

. . . See 4 Moore, Fed.Prac., Section 26.19 [4] at 1252 (2d ed. 1963). See also Wirtz v. B. A. C. . . .

v., 51 Cust. Ct. 401 (Cust. Ct. 1963)

. . . and for export for the years 1955 through 1957 was as follows: Germany Export 1955 30.30% 69.70% 1956 26.19% . . .

M. MAGELSSEN, v. LOCAL UNION NO. OPERATIVE PLASTERERS AND CEMENT MASONS INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION,, 32 F.R.D. 464 (W.D. Mo. 1963)

. . . .¶ 26.19 [4], pp. 1247-56; 2A Barron & Holtzoff, Federal Practice and Procedure § 650, pp. 90-93 and . . .

EDGAR, v. FINLEY, a, 312 F.2d 533 (8th Cir. 1963)

. . . discovery process, including many cases decided subsequent to Hickman, see 4 Moore, Federal Practice, § 26.19 . . .

McKEON, Sr. C. C. T. D. A. v. HIGHWAY TRUCK DRIVERS AND HELPERS, LOCAL INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS, CHAUFFEURS, WAREHOUSEMEN AND HELPERS OF AMERICA,, 28 F.R.D. 592 (D. Del. 1961)

. . . United Aircraft Corp., supra. . 4 Moore, Ibid, ¶¶ 26.19, 33.03 [7], and 33.21. . 4 Moore, Ibid., ¶ 33.20 . . .

F. BELL, v. SWIFT COMPANY,, 283 F.2d 407 (5th Cir. 1960)

. . . See 4 Moore’s Federal Practice § 26.19, p. 1075 and cases there cited. . . .

UNITED STATES v. RENAULT, INC., 27 F.R.D. 23 (S.D.N.Y. 1960)

. . . General Motors Corp., D.C.N.D.Ill., 2 F.R.D. 528; 4 Moore, Federal Practice par. 26.19, at page 1081. . . . written statements of witnesses or memoranda of interviews of witnesses, see 4 Moore, Federal Practice § 26.19 . . .

H. WOHLFIEL, v. T. MORRIS,, 122 So. 2d 235 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1960)

. . . In addition, Florida Statutes § 26.19, F.S.A., provides that no change of judge shall abate, quash, set . . .

E. I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS COMPANY, v. PHILLIPS PETROLEUM COMPANY, 23 F.R.D. 237 (D. Del. 1959)

. . . entitled to know the names of the persons who conducted the tests, Moore’s Federal -Practice, Vol. 4, Sec. 26.19 . . .

A. RICHARDS, v. MAINE CENTRAL RAILROAD, 21 F.R.D. 595 (D. Me. 1957)

. . . Barron and Holtzoff, Federal Practice and Procedure, Sec. 650 (1950); 4 Moore Federal Practice, par. 26.19 . . .

UNITED STATES PIPE FOUNDRY CO. v. THE UNITED STATES, 140 Ct. Cl. 132 (Ct. Cl. 1957)

. . . allowable to list date___ $ 927.77 Year Amount From To Interest 1942 EP $ 156.23PWO . 13-15-43 12-31-45 $ 26.19 . . .

FIDELIS FISHERIES, v. THORDEN THE KRISTINA THORDEN, 12 F.R.D. 179 (S.D.N.Y. 1952)

. . . support of the furnishing of a list of trial witnesses; 4 Moore’s Federal Practice, Second Edition, ¶26.19 . . .

BANKERS SECURITIES CORPORATION v. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, 146 F.2d 88 (3d Cir. 1944)

. . . 1939 18,787 914,684 The Company cites figures to show that its real estate investments in 1940 were 26.19% . . .

THE TALUS, 242 F. 954 (S.D. Ala. 1917)

. . . wages on February 22, 1917, he had earned $90.10; that there had been then paid to him by the vessel $26.19 . . .