Home
Menu
Call attorney Graham Syfert at 904-383-7448
Personal Injury Lawyer
Florida Statute 75.04 | Lawyer Caselaw & Research
F.S. 75.04 Case Law from Google Scholar
Statute is currently reporting as:
Link to State of Florida Official Statute Google Search for Amendments to 75.04

The 2023 Florida Statutes (including Special Session C)

Title VI
CIVIL PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE
Chapter 75
BOND VALIDATION
View Entire Chapter
F.S. 75.04
75.04 Complaint.
(1) The complaint shall set out the plaintiff’s authority for incurring the bonded debt or issuing certificates of debt, the holding of an election and the result when an election is required, the ordinance, resolution, or other proceeding authorizing the issue and its adoption, all other essential proceedings had or taken in connection therewith, the amount of the bonds or certificates to be issued and the interest they are to bear; and, in case of a drainage, conservation, or reclamation district, the authority for the creation of such district, for the issuance of bonds, for the levy and assessment of taxes and all other pertinent matters.
(2) In the case of an independent special district as defined in s. 218.31(7), the complaint shall allege the creation of a trust indenture established by the petitioner for a bonded trustee acceptable to the court who shall certify the proper expenditure of the proceeds of the bonds.
History.s. 2, ch. 6868, 1915; RGS 3297; s. 2, ch. 12003, 1927; CGL 5107, 5123, 5124; s. 1, ch. 14504, 1929; s. 25, ch. 67-254; s. 13, ch. 80-281.

F.S. 75.04 on Google Scholar

F.S. 75.04 on Casetext

Amendments to 75.04


Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 75.04
Level: Degree
Misdemeanor/Felony: First/Second/Third

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 75.04.



Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases from cite.case.law:

MITTAL STEEL GALATI S. A. S. A. v. UNITED STATES,, 491 F. Supp. 2d 1273 (Ct. Int'l Trade 2007)

. . . Plaintiff contends that Commerce erred in assigning Plaintiff a total adverse facts available rate of 75.04 . . . As discussed further below, Plaintiffs total adverse facts available rate of 75.04 percent is supported . . . Plaintiff instead challenges the 75.04 percent rate that Commerce selected and assigned as total adverse . . . The only rate higher than 48.90 percent was the all-others rate of 75.04 percent, which Commerce first . . . Contrary to Plaintiffs claims, Commerce’s corroboration of the 75.04 percent rate was reasonable. . . .

S. A. S. A. v., 31 Ct. Int'l Trade 730 (Ct. Int'l Trade 2007)

. . . Plaintiff contends that Commerce erred in assigning Plaintiff a total adverse facts available rate of 75.04 . . . As discussed further below, Plaintiff’s total adverse facts available rate of 75.04 percent is supported . . . Plaintiff instead challenges the 75.04 percent rate that Commerce selected and assigned as total adverse . . . The only rate higher than 48.90 percent was the all-others rate of 75.04 percent, which Commerce first . . . Contrary to Plaintiff’s claims, Commerce’s corroboration of the 75.04 percent rate was reasonable. . . .

L. LEWIS, v. HORACE MANN INSURANCE CO., 410 F. Supp. 2d 640 (N.D. Ohio 2005)

. . . value, because Haller’s damage estimate ($13,-620.25) divided by CCC’s valuation ($18,-150.00) yields 75.04% . . .

CITY OF GAINESVILLE, v. STATE, 863 So. 2d 138 (Fla. 2003)

. . . The City filed a complaint under section 75.04, Florida Statutes (2001), seeking to validate its proposed . . .

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

. . . Democratic perfor-manee of benchmark District 134, with an overall Democratic performance score of 75.04% . . .

D. SORENSON v. CONCANNON,, 161 F. Supp. 2d 1164 (D. Or. 2001)

. . . 53,960.55 (202.96 state; 109.29 federal) 1996: $ 14,943.78 (55.8 state; 30.05 federal) 1997: $ 20,214.20 (75.04 . . .

CITY OF OLDSMAR, v. STATE, 790 So. 2d 1042 (Fla. 2001)

. . . Section 75.04, Florida Statutes (2000), sets forth the requirements for the complaint, including that . . .

TURNER, v. CITY OF CLEARWATER,, 789 So. 2d 273 (Fla. 2001)

. . . In accordance with section 75.04, the complaint alleged the City’s authority to issue the bonds, the . . .

STATE v. OSCEOLA COUNTY,, 752 So. 2d 530 (Fla. 1999)

. . . In compliance with section 75.04, the complaint alleged the County’s authority to issue the bonds, the . . . at rates not to exceed the maximum rate permitted by law at time of issuance” complied with section 75.04 . . . See §§ 75.04, .05; Broward County v. . . .

BATES H. D. J. M. J. v. JONES, J. F. K., 958 F. Supp. 1446 (N.D. Cal. 1997)

. . . She received 46.81% of the vote in the 1992 Democratic primary and 75.04% in the general election. . . .

UNITED PAPERWORKERS INTERNATIONAL UNION, AFL- CIO, CLC, AFL- CIO, CLC, v. ALDEN CORRUGATED CONTAINER CORPORATION, UNITED PAPERWORKERS INTERNATIONAL UNION LOCAL v. BATES CORRUGATED BOX CORPORATION v. FIRST FEDERAL SAVINGS BANK OF AMERICA, 901 F. Supp. 426 (D. Mass. 1995)

. . . Berche 9.95 - 79.60 George Baptiste 9.67 - 77.36 Dennis Langevin 10.55 1/2 - 84.44 David Belanger 9.38 - 75.04 . . .

BROWARD COUNTY, STATE, 515 So. 2d 1273 (Fla. 1987)

. . . . §§ 75.01, 75.02, 75.04, 75.05. . . .

S. DORMAN, v. HIGHLANDS COUNTY HOSPITAL DISTRICT,, 417 So. 2d 253 (Fla. 1982)

. . . They contend that the district’s complaint does not comply with section 75.04, Florida Statutes (1981 . . . Under subsection 75.04(1) a complaint seeking bond validation must set out the interest that the bonds . . . The appellants claim that subsection 75.04(1) should be read to require the setting forth of a specific . . . We find that the complaint satisfies subsection 75.04(l)'s requirement regarding rate of interest. . . . Subsection 75.04(2) states that bond validation complaints filed by special districts must “allege the . . .

E. HOLLOWAY, v. LAKELAND DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,, 417 So. 2d 963 (Fla. 1982)

. . . Section 75.04, Florida Statutes (1979), requires that all bond validation complaints set forth “the interest . . .

STATE v. LEON COUNTY, FLORIDA,, 410 So. 2d 1346 (Fla. 1982)

. . . be final and conclusive; and (3) the failure to allege the interest rate as required by subsection 75.04 . . . The state’s third claim is that subsection 75.04(1) requires an agency’s complaint seeking bond validation . . . In view of this language, we can find no legislative intent that would mandate reading subsection 75.04 . . . proponents have cited none, that clearly shows why we are free to ignore the plain language of section 75.04 . . .

CATHOLIC MEDICAL CENTER OF BROOKLYN AND QUEENS, INC. St. s v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD,, 589 F.2d 1166 (2d Cir. 1978)

. . . Davis, Administrative Law Treatise § 75.04, especially at 372-73 (1958); Friendly, The Federal Administrative . . .

STATE v. CITY OF SUNRISE, a, 354 So. 2d 1206 (Fla. 1978)

. . . The matters which must be alleged and proved are set forth in Sec. 75.04, Fla.Stat. (1975) which provides . . .

W. HOPE H. a v. CITY OF GAINESVILLE, a, 195 So. 2d 849 (Fla. 1967)

. . . . § 75.04, F.S.A. 4. . . . As for Point 3: The requirements of F.S. § 75.04, F.S.A., with which we are concerned regarding the petition . . .

STATE v. CITY OF TAMPA, a, 95 So. 2d 409 (Fla. 1957)

. . . In answer to the second question, it is sufficient to say that in Sections 75.03 and 75.04, Florida Statutes . . .

STATE v. FLORIDA STATE TURNPIKE AUTHORITY, a, 80 So. 2d 337 (Fla. 1955)

. . . the debt and issue the bonds, and the proceedings providing for the issue must be set out, Section 75.04 . . .

STATE v. STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION, 67 So. 2d 627 (Fla. 1953)

. . . contended that Section 3.02 of the resolution of petitioner to validate said bonds is violative of Section 75.04 . . . Section 75.04, Florida Statutes, F.S.A., among other things, provides that “the petition for validation . . . Reciting the maximum rate of interest satisfies the requirement of Section 75.04, Florida Statutes, F.S.A . . .

UNITED STATES v. BRODBECK,, 139 F.2d 916 (3d Cir. 1944)

. . . record on appeal from the district courts * * Moore’s Federal Practice, Cumulative Supplement,' See. 75.04 . . .

In GOTHAM CAN CO. MERCHANTS TRANSFER STORAGE CO. v. RAFFERTY, 48 F.2d 540 (2d Cir. 1931)

. . . sums: Amount advanced by it in excess of collections which it had received from assigned accounts $ 75.04 . . . uncollected accounts receivable, then amounting to $1,854.57, to the trustee upon payment by him of $75.04 . . . The loans have been repaid, except for the small balance of $75.04, and all other claims, have been liquidated . . . No one disputes that the balance of $75.04 should be repaid by the trustee out of the $529.52, which . . . to pay to the finance company from the proceeds of the accounts in his hands the foregoing items of $75.04 . . .

In GOTHAM CAN CO., 45 F.2d 849 (E.D.N.Y. 1930)

. . . turn over all accounts receivable to the trustee upon the payment by the trustee to it of the sum of $75.04 . . . trustee all accounts receivable held by it, upon the payment by the trustee to the Merchants’ Company of $75.04 . . . There is a conceded sum owing by the trustee to the finance company of $75.04, which the referee has . . . be directed to turn over all accounts receivable to the trustee upon the payment of the said sum of $75.04 . . .