The 2023 Florida Statutes (including Special Session C)

Title V
JUDICIAL BRANCH

Chapter 26
CIRCUIT COURTS

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 26.52

26.52 Travel expenses, circuit judges.—Each circuit judge shall be reimbursed for travel expenses as provided in s. 112.061.

History.—s. 4, ch. 6912, 1915; RGS 3004; s. 2, ch. 8480, 1921; CGL 4738, s. 19, ch. 63-400.

F.S. 26.52 on Google Scholar

F.S. 26.52 on Casetext

Amendments to 26.52

Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 26.52

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

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 26.52.

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases from cite.case.law:

W. HERRMANN v. UNITED STATES,, 127 Fed. Cl. 22 (Fed. Cl. 2016)

. . . Practice § 26.52[1] at 26-399 (3d ed. 2012) (“Discovery rules apply to the United States as a party just . . . Moore’s Federal Practice § 26.52[1] at 26-400 (“Courts have been more willing to find government privilege . . . See Moore’s Federal Practice § 26.52[6][f] at 26-418 (“Neither the [Housekeeping Act’s] text nor its . . .

GRIER v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING URBAN DEVELOPMENT,, 797 F.3d 1049 (D.C. Cir. 2015)

. . . . § 26.52(k), the Secretary may “affirm, modify, reduce, reverse, compromise, remand, or settle any relief . . .

GRIER v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING URBAN DEVELOPMENT,, 418 U.S. App. D.C. 185 (D.C. Cir. 2015)

. . . . § 26.52(k), the Secretary may “affirm, modify, reduce, reverse, compromise, remand, or settle any relief . . .

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, v. FREEMAN,, 288 F.R.D. 92 (D. Md. 2012)

. . . Feb. 23, 2009); see also 7B Moore’s Federal Practice § 26.52 (3d ed. 1999) (“Because frank discussion . . .

TROMBLEY, v. NATIONAL CITY BANK,, 826 F. Supp. 2d 179 (D.D.C. 2011)

. . . Edgeworth also adjusted this amount downward assuming a 26.52% rate of reversed and/or uncollectible . . .

In METHYL TERTIARY BUTYL ETHER MTBE PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION. v. Co., 274 F.R.D. 106 (S.D.N.Y. 2011)

. . . Moore et al., Moore’s Federal Practice ("Moore's”), ¶ 26.52. . . . .

En HUANG, v. ATTORNEY GENERAL OF UNITED STATES,, 620 F.3d 372 (3d Cir. 2010)

. . . . § 26.52(k) (providing that the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, when reviewing decisions . . .

In SHARPE, D. v. GE LLC GE, 425 B.R. 620 (Bankr. N.D. Ala. 2010)

. . . Therefore the defendant argues for a round trip, per day mileage amount of 26.52. . . .

ISLANDER EAST PIPELINE COMPANY, LLC, v. McCARTHY,, 525 F.3d 141 (2d Cir. 2008)

. . . See id. at 55 (indicating that 3-millimeter sedimentation would affect 26.52 acres of Branford shellfish . . .

In BAKER,, 374 B.R. 489 (Bankr. E.D.N.Y. 2007)

. . . Phone charges $ 0.20 Telecopier $ 48.00 Overnight Delivery $ 26.52 Transcripts-Compu-Scribe, Inc. . . .

GEORGIA, v. ASHCROFT,, 195 F. Supp. 2d 25 (D.D.C. 2002)

. . . The voting age population of non-Hispanic individuals identifying themselves as black only is 26.52% . . .

CEH, INC. v. F V SEAFARER O. N. In A. In, 880 F. Supp. 940 (D.R.I. 1995)

. . . totaling $378.81; 68 fathoms of V poly-pro rope for snoods at a cost of $0.39 per fathom, totaling $26.52 . . .

UNITED STATES v. CENTRAL STATE BANK C., 621 F. Supp. 1276 (W.D. Mich. 1985)

. . . to 1979 when it became the third largest, having total deposits of $13,136,000 and a market share of 26.52% . . . occurred at a time when State’s market share was decreasing, albeit slightly, from 27.59% in 1977 to 26.52% . . . State’s share of the market fell very little, from 26.52% in 1979 to 25.46% in 1984. . . .

JACKSON, v. PEOPLE S REPUBLIC OF CHINA, a, 550 F. Supp. 869 (N.D. Ala. 1982)

. . . Unpaid Percent Yearly December 15,1951 25.24 1,034.82 June 15,1952 25.87 1,060.69 December 15,1952 26.52 . . .

BUGHER v. SOUTHLAND FABRICATORS AND ERECTORS, INC., 452 F. Supp. 870 (W.D. La. 1978)

. . . 14.00 2.80 Mav. 1975: Harry Desota 34 - 13.26 8.50 1.70 Wilbur Newsome (T) 34 13.26 8.50 1,70 0- 0 26.52 . . .

AMHERST LEASING CORPORATION v. EMHART CORPORATION, 65 F.R.D. 121 (D. Conn. 1974)

. . . Moore, Federal Practice ¶ 26.52[2] (Rel. No. 11—1970). . . .

ESSEX, E. v. P. VINAL, 499 F.2d 226 (8th Cir. 1974)

. . . with a payment of the remaining tax shown as due on the return, $5,132.21, together with interest of $26.52 . . . The payment of $5,132.21 plus interest of $26.52 made January 9, 1967, was made as a payment of the remainder . . .

In ESTATE V. DALTON,, 246 So. 2d 612 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1971)

. . . N.E. 493 (1934); In Re Carothers’ Estate, 300 Pa. 185, 150 A. 585 (1930); 3 Page, Wills § 26.52 and 57 . . .

DeFONTES v. J. CELEBREZZE,, 226 F. Supp. 327 (D.R.I. 1964)

. . . former employer which provided for the payment of workmen’s compensation benefits to her in the sum of $26.52 . . .

KINNEY v. UNITED STATES, 54 F. 313 (C.C.D. Conn. 1893)

. . . The items of $26.52, $53.10, 60 cents, and $13.20 are allowed. . . .