Syfert Injury Law Firm

Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation

Call Now: 904-383-7448
Florida Statute 77.02 | Lawyer Caselaw & Research
Link to State of Florida Official Statute
Statute is currently reporting as:
F.S. 77.02 Case Law from Google Scholar Google Search for Amendments to 77.02

The 2024 Florida Statutes

Title VI
CIVIL PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE
Chapter 77
GARNISHMENT
View Entire Chapter
F.S. 77.02
77.02 Garnishment in tort actions.Before judgment against a defendant no writ of garnishment shall issue in any action sounding in tort.
History.s. 1, ch. 7352, 1917; RGS 3432; CGL 5285; s. 27, ch. 67-254.

F.S. 77.02 on Google Scholar

F.S. 77.02 on Casetext

Amendments to 77.02


Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 77.02
Level: Degree
Misdemeanor/Felony: First/Second/Third

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 77.02.



Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases Citing Statute 77.02

Total Results: 20

Robert Baldwin v. Laboratory Corporation of America

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2024-09-27

Snippet: Davis, 339 So. 3d 318, 321 (Fla. 2022). Section 559.77(2) permits a prevailing plaintiff to recover “actual

Einath Bach Levy v. Samuel Salomon Levy

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2024-03-06

Snippet: costs, for a total of $104,295.77. 2 Wife’s need for interim fees

HORACIO SEQUEIRA v. GATE SAFE INC.

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2021-07-21

Snippet: 426, 428 n.4 (Fla. 3d DCA 2019) (“Section 218.077(2) of the Florida Statutes is a preemption statute

QUEST DIAGNOSTICS, INC. v. CHERI HAYNIE

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2021-04-28

Snippet: 00 in statutory damages pursuant to section 559.77(2), Florida Statutes (2019); injunctive relief to

Edward Michael Kelly v. Julie Duggan

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2019-10-23

Snippet: 000 and other monetary damages under section 559.77(2), Florida Statutes. Duggan moved to dismiss the

Ultra Aviation Services v. Cruz Clemente

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2019-02-13

Citation: 272 So. 3d 426

Snippet: lease agreement or otherwise. 4Section 218.077(2) of the Florida Statutes is a preemption statute

City of Miami Beach v. Florida Retail Federation

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2017-12-13

Snippet: We agree with the trial court that section 218.077(2) of the Florida Statutes is a preemption statute

Banner v. Law Office of David J. Stern, P.A.

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2016-08-24

Citation: 198 So. 3d 1133, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 12810, 2016 WL 4493351

Snippet: Banner was awarded fees pursuant to section 559.77(2); defendants were awarded fees under section 501

In Re: Standard Jury Instructions in Civil Cases – Report No. 15-01 – Corrected Opinion

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 2016-06-16

Snippet: 3. This instruction conflicts with F.S. 768.77(2)(a)2. and should not be given in medical malpractice

In re Standard Jury Instructions in Civil Cases-Report No. 15-01

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 2016-04-21

Citation: 192 So. 3d 1183

Snippet: 1983). 3. This instruction conflicts' with F.S. 768.77(2)(a)2. and should not be given in medical malpractice

In Re: Standard Jury Instructions in Civil Cases - Report No. 15-01

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 2016-04-21

Citation: 192 So. 3d 1183, 2016 WL 1592719

Snippet: 3. This instruction conflicts with F.S. 768.77(2)(a)2. and should not be given in medical malpractice

Shirley B. Baker, Personal Representative of the Estate of Elmer P. Baker v. R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Company

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2015-02-18

Snippet: negligent). Id. at 1276-77. 2 “In [Engle I], the jury

Baldwin v. Regions Financial Corp.

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2012-09-19

Citation: 98 So. 3d 1210, 2012 WL 4094147, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 15557

Snippet: express statutory remedy provided by section 559.77(2), and, therefore, the arbitration clause is void

Dish Network Service L.L.C. v. Myers

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2012-04-25

Citation: 87 So. 3d 72, 2012 WL 1414936, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 6480

Snippet: Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”). See § 559.77(2), (5); 15 U.S.C. § 1692 (2000). Accordingly, we

Morrison v. United States Ex Rel. Farm Service Agency

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2011-10-31

Citation: 73 So. 3d 336, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 17227

Snippet: acknowledge Appellants' argument that under section 559.77(2), Florida Statutes, the issue of attorney's fees

Mid-Continent Casualty Co. v. First Coast Energy, L.L.P.

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2011-08-15

Citation: 71 So. 3d 899, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 12789, 2011 WL 3558160

Snippet: extended reporting period. See also 54 Fed.Reg. 47,077-02 (Nov. 9, 1989) (codified at 40 C.F.R. § 280.97(b)(1

In Re Standard Jury Instructions in Civil Cases—Report No. 09-01

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 2010-03-04

Citation: 35 So. 3d 666, 35 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 149, 2010 Fla. LEXIS 302

Snippet: noneconomic losses, and punitive damages. F.S. 768.77(2), however, requires further itemization for medical

Sweet v. Sweet

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2008-10-08

Citation: 993 So. 2d 91, 2008 WL 4482581

Snippet: paying the mortgage and property expenses. See § 61.077(2) (requiring court to consider whether alimony is

Reeves v. Ace Cash Express, Inc.

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2006-08-11

Citation: 937 So. 2d 1136, 2006 WL 2347789

Snippet: provides that punitive damages may be awarded. § 559.77(2). Thus, in this case neither the language of the

Howell v. State

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 2004-05-06

Citation: 877 So. 2d 697, 2004 WL 1057629

Snippet: and imposed death for the murder. See id. at 676-77.[2] On direct appeal, this Court affirmed Howell's