Home
Menu
Call attorney Graham Syfert at 904-383-7448
Personal Injury Lawyer
Florida Statute 56.28 | Lawyer Caselaw & Research
F.S. 56.28 Case Law from Google Scholar
Statute is currently reporting as:
Link to State of Florida Official Statute Google Search for Amendments to 56.28

The 2023 Florida Statutes (including Special Session C)

Title VI
CIVIL PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE
Chapter 56
FINAL PROCESS
View Entire Chapter
F.S. 56.28
56.28 Executions; failure of officer to pay over moneys collected.If any officer collecting money under execution fails or refuses to pay it over within 30 days after it has been received by him or her, or within 10 days after demand by the levying creditor or the levying creditor’s attorney of record made in writing and delivered during regular business hours to the civil process bureau, the officer is liable to pay the same and 20 percent damages, to be recovered by motion in court.
History.s. 7, Feb. 17, 1853; RS 1207; GS 1637; RGS 2841; CGL 4528; s. 11, ch. 67-254; s. 308, ch. 95-147; s. 6, ch. 98-410; s. 17, ch. 2016-33.
Note.Former s. 55.51.

F.S. 56.28 on Google Scholar

F.S. 56.28 on Casetext

Amendments to 56.28


Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 56.28
Level: Degree
Misdemeanor/Felony: First/Second/Third

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 56.28.



Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases from cite.case.law:

NEW JERSEY CARPENTERS AND THE TRUSTEES THEREOF, v. TISHMAN CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION OF NEW JERSEY, 760 F.3d 297 (3d Cir. 2014)

. . . . § 34:11-56.28. . . .

PKF MARK III INC. E. P. L. A. v. FOUNDATION FOR FAIR CONTRACTING St. a k a G. P. FFC LLC, 496 F. App'x 260 (3d Cir. 2012)

. . . . §§ 34:11-56.25; 34:11-56.26(9); 34:11-56.28; 34:11-56.30. . . .

UNITED STATES v. C. DIMORA,, 836 F. Supp. 2d 534 (N.D. Ohio 2011)

. . . For example, the Neiheiser Cellular Telephone contained the highest percentage of minimized calls, 56.28% . . .

UNITED STATES v. M. McCAFFERTY,, 772 F. Supp. 2d 863 (N.D. Ohio 2011)

. . . For example, the Neiheiser Cellular Telephone contained the highest percentage of minimized calls, 56.28% . . .

TOKYO KIKAI SEISAKUSHO, LTD. TKS USA v. UNITED STATES,, 403 F. Supp. 2d 1287 (Ct. Int'l Trade 2005)

. . . antidumping duty order on imports of LNPPs from Japan on September 4, 1996, assessing a dumping margin of 56.28 . . .

TKS USA v., 29 Ct. Int'l Trade 1280 (Ct. Int'l Trade 2005)

. . . antidumping duty order on imports of LNPPs from Japan on September 4, 1996, assessing a dumping margin of 56.28 . . .

MITSUBISHI HEAVY INDUSTRIES, LTD. v. UNITED STATES,, 275 F.3d 1056 (Fed. Cir. 2001)

. . . antidumping determination finding sales at less than fair value and announcing a dumping margin of 56.28 . . .

In GRAYSON, AT T UNIVERSAL CARD SERVICES CORP. v. GRAYSON, In L. MOBLEY, Sr. AT T UNIVERSAL CARD SERVICES CORP. v. L. MOBLEY, Sr., 199 B.R. 397 (Bankr. W.D. Mo. 1996)

. . . Mobley made five purchases totaling $56.28 and one cash advance totaling $2,000.00. Doc. # 1, ¶ 5. . . .

GILBERT, O v. CITY OF LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS E. E., 799 F.2d 1210 (8th Cir. 1986)

. . . Long, J. 38.40 22 15.40 53.80 15 Mahaffey, G. 38.40 22 13.77 52.17 28 Mahoney, P. 38.80 16.5 17.48 56.28 . . .

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. A LOT OF SILK GOODS AND OTHER MERCHANDISE S., 4 D. Haw. 137 (D. Haw. 1912)

. . . auctioneer] . 2.00 “Marshal's commission for collecting $1751.50; 5% on first $500.00 and on $1251.50 . 56.28 . . .