Home
Menu
Call attorney Graham Syfert at 904-383-7448
Personal Injury Lawyer
Florida Statute 80.04 | Lawyer Caselaw & Research
F.S. 80.04 Case Law from Google Scholar
Statute is currently reporting as:
Link to State of Florida Official Statute Google Search for Amendments to 80.04

The 2023 Florida Statutes (including Special Session C)

Title VI
CIVIL PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE
Chapter 80
QUO WARRANTO
View Entire Chapter
F.S. 80.04
80.04 Quo warranto; effect of judgment.When an individual institutes an action without the consent of the Attorney General, the judgment is conclusive as between the parties other than the state. The judgment is not a bar to any quo warranto by the state nor shall a judgment instituted by the Attorney General be a bar to actions by any claimant other than the parties thereto. The party receiving judgment shall be entitled to exercise the office until removed by quo warranto or until his or her rights thereto shall otherwise cease.
History.s. 3, ch. 1874, 1872; RS 1783; GS 2260; RGS 3583; CGL 5448; s. 30, ch. 67-254; s. 421, ch. 95-147.

F.S. 80.04 on Google Scholar

F.S. 80.04 on Casetext

Amendments to 80.04


Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 80.04
Level: Degree
Misdemeanor/Felony: First/Second/Third

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 80.04.



Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases from cite.case.law:

IN RE MOLYCORP, INC. SECURITIES LITIGATION, 157 F. Supp. 3d 987 (D. Colo. 2016)

. . . The price of Moly-corp’s preferred stock dropped from a November 8, 2011 closing price of $80.04 per . . .

G. M. v., 143 T.C. 149 (T.C. 2014)

. . . During the years at issue petitioners were 80.04% partners in Barkett Family Partners, a limited partnership . . .

CROPLIFE AMERICA, INC. d b a s LLC LLC v. CITY OF MADISON, N., 373 F. Supp. 2d 905 (W.D. Wis. 2005)

. . . LAWN FERTILIZER APPLICATION AND SALE 80.01 Authority. 80.02 Purpose And Intent 80.03 Applicability. 80.04 . . . ordinances that include standards at least as restrictive as those described in ss, 80.05 - 80.08. 80.04 . . .

In TOY KING DISTRIBUTORS, INC. v. FSB,, 256 B.R. 1 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 2000)

. . . 9 11,625.00 LOC 10/25/89 2,092.50 1 10/25/89 930.00 2 10/25/89 871.88 3 10/25/89 930.00 4 10/25/89 80.04 . . .

SMITH Jr. v. WISCONSIN DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, TRADE AND CONSUMER PROTECTION C. T. D. J. C. s A Z,, 23 F.3d 1134 (7th Cir. 1994)

. . . Otherwise, Wis.Admin.Code § Ag 80.04(1) directed an inspector who found a violation of the dairy farm . . . Wis.Admin.Code § Ag 80.04. . . . The double debit procedure of Wis.Admin.Code § Ag 80.04(1) allowed DATCP to suspend a dairy farmer’s . . .

WESCH, v. HUNT,, 785 F. Supp. 1491 (S.D. Ala. 1992)

. . . 2,847 100.00% 77.95% 21.80% 12 10 10 0.09% 0.08% 0.08% Calhoun County 116,034 92,873 21,578 100.00% 80.04% . . .

C. COTTON, v. CITY OF ALAMEDA, a M. I X,, 812 F.2d 1245 (9th Cir. 1987)

. . . Then in November, Alameda hired two more applicants who had scored 80.04% and a third who had scored . . .

G. MUSLEH v. DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATION, STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION,, 299 So. 2d 101 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1974)

. . . incidentally along the northerly right-of-way line of Broadway or State Road 40, and found another monument 80.04 . . . He then measured the “back line” and found another monument 80.04 feet from the monument from whence . . . unidentified persons) which, measured from monument to monument, reflected a southerly boundary of 80.04 . . . feet, a westerly boundary of 119.4 feet, a northerly boundary of 80.04 feet, and an easterly boundary . . .