Cases from cite.case.law:

LOUGAS a k a v. SOPHIA ENTERPRISES, INC., 117 So. 3d 839 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2013)

. . . payments before an action for eviction was filed,” a month-to-month tenancy is created); see also § 83.04 . . .

GRASS, v. REITZ,, 643 F.3d 579 (8th Cir. 2011)

. . . after both Kolocotronis and Jones were decided, the Missouri Supreme Court amended Supreme Court Rule 83.04 . . .

BURNS, v. PRUDDEN W., 588 F.3d 1148 (8th Cir. 2009)

. . . R. 83.04. . . . .

TAYLOR, v. ROPER,, 561 F.3d 859 (8th Cir. 2009)

. . . See Missouri Supreme Court Rule 83.04 ("Transfer by this Court is an extraordinary remedy that is not . . . Kemna, 276 F.3d 401, 404 (8th Cir.2002) ("Rule 83.04 ... makes clear that Missouri does not consider . . .

BEN- YAH ADC v. NORRIS,, 570 F. Supp. 2d 1086 (E.D. Ark. 2008)

. . . R. 83.04. . . . R. 83.04, 83.01. . . . The Court also found petitioner’s reliance on Missouri Supreme Court Rule 83.04 to be misplaced. . . . The Court noted that Rule 83.04 was promulgated in response to the holding in O’Sullivan v. . . . While Rule 83.04 controlled whether a habeas petitioner had exhausted his remedies in state court, it . . .

RIDDLE, v. KEMNA,, 523 F.3d 850 (8th Cir. 2008)

. . . R. 83.04. . . . R. 83.04, 83.01. . . . R. 83.04 (amended October 23, 2001). Rule 83.04 is a response to O’Sullivan v. . . . Rule 83.04, however, does not control the issue in this case. . . . Rule 83.04 permits Riddle to meet the exhaustion requirement in 28 U.S.C. § 2254(b)(1). . . .

C. HAMILTON, v. W. TANNER,, 962 So. 2d 997 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

. . . Tanner relies on section 83.04, Florida Statutes, which reads: Holding over after term, tenancy at sufferance . . . Therefore, he argues, pursuant to section 83.04, the postexpiration arrangement between the parties was . . . the existence of an oral lease, as opposed to a written instrument, took the tenancy out of section 83.04 . . . Hamilton alone forecloses his claim that the tenancy was a holdover under section 83.04 such that Mrs . . . The text of section 83.04 is the same for all years relevant to this case. . Mr. . . .

L. PIERSON, v. DORMIRE,, 484 F.3d 486 (8th Cir. 2007)

. . . P. 83.04. . . .

E. ADAMS, v. J. HOLLAND,, 330 F.3d 398 (6th Cir. 2003)

. . . Missouri rule, the Eighth Circuit rejected the State’s argument that “because the amendment to Rule 83.04 . . .

RANDOLPH, v. L. KEMNA,, 276 F.3d 401 (8th Cir. 2002)

. . . On October 23, 2001, that court issued an order amending Supreme Court Rule 83.04, which governs petitions . . . We believe that the amendment to the Rule 83.04 constitutes an unequivocal statement about where Missouri . . . The State argues that because the amendment to Rule 83.04 has an effective date of July 1, 2002, its . . .

M. DIXON, v. DORMIRE, J. L. v. C. v., 263 F.3d 774 (8th Cir. 2001)

. . . Pursuant to Missouri Supreme Court Rules 83.02 and 83.04 (2001), a defendant may apply to transfer his . . . Missouri Supreme Court Rules 88.02 and 83.04 provide that a case disposed of by an opinion of the Missouri . . .

In W. POLK,, 215 B.R. 250 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1997)

. . . The trustee seeks the statutory maximum fee in this case of $990.04, plus expenses of $83.04. 5. . . . application for compensation is granted in the requested amount of $990.04, along with expenses of $83.04 . . .

In L. STENTZ, W. STENTZ, L. v. L. STENTZ,, 197 B.R. 966 (Bankr. D. Neb. 1996)

. . . The recliner was purchased for Howard’s use at a cost of $83.04. . . .

THEODOROPOULOS v. TALBERT,, 666 So. 2d 1056 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)

. . . See §§ 83.58, 83.04, 83.05, Fla.Stat. (1993). . . .

MELI INVESTMENT CORP. v. O. R., 621 So. 2d 676 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)

. . . against tenants as holdover tenants, § 83.58, Fla.Stat. (1991), seeking damages pursuant to section 83.04 . . .

In SAFE- T- BRAKE OF FLORIDA, INC., 127 B.R. 68 (Bankr. S.D. Fla. 1991)

. . . Board, 183 So.2d 242, 244 (Fla. 3d D.C.A. 1966); F.S. 83.04. . . .

LINCOLN OLDSMOBILE, INC. f k a d b a a v. O. BRANCH H., 574 So. 2d 1111 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1990)

. . . See § 83.04, Fla.Stat. (1985). . . .

WEALOT, v. ARMONTROUT,, 740 F. Supp. 1436 (W.D. Mo. 1990)

. . . Had the motion to transfer been granted, under Missouri Supreme Court Rules 83.04 and 83.08 the briefs . . .

BROWN, v. ARMONTROUT,, 853 F.2d 624 (8th Cir. 1988)

. . . Second, under Missouri Rules of Civil Procedure 83.04 and 83.08, a movant must forward a copy of the . . .

ZINN, v. MIMS THOMAS MIAMI COMPANY,, 504 So. 2d 60 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1987)

. . . . § 83.04, Fla.Stat. (1985). . . .

BURBRIDGE REALTY COMPANY, v. CRAVEY ARMS CORP., 24 Fla. Supp. 2d 24 (Fla. Cir. Ct. 1986)

. . . for August, September, and October, 1984, is a “further instrument in writing” as required by Section 83.04 . . .

SHARICK, v. SAGER, 8 Fla. Supp. 2d 122 (Fla. Cir. Ct. 1984)

. . . Appellant argues that Appellee was a tenant at sufferance under F.S. 83.04; he owed no legal duty to . . .

UNITED STATES v. DALLAS COUNTY COMMISSION,, 548 F. Supp. 794 (S.D. Ala. 1982)

. . . broad discretion granted this Court by Rule 83, F.R.C.P. 7 Moore’s Federal Practice, Sections 83.03, 83.04 . . .

EXECUTIVE SQUARE OFFICE BUILDING, a v. O CONNOR AND ASSOCIATES, INC., 19 B.R. 143 (Bankr. N.D. Fla. 1981)

. . . Section 83.04, Florida Statutes, provides that a tenant who holds over after expiration of his term without . . .

A. YOUNG, a v. M. KLUTZNICK, P., 652 F.2d 617 (6th Cir. 1981)

. . . Of the remaining one-third or 5,362 persons, 83.04 percent of the individuals contacted by the Census . . .

In HURDLE,, 11 B.R. 304 (Bankr. E.D. Va. 1981)

. . . The debtors’ amended plan proposes to make thirty-two (32) payments to the trustee of $83.04 over a term . . .

L. CAREY, I. L. E. v. M. KLUTZNICK, P. F. G. L. Jr., 508 F. Supp. 420 (S.D.N.Y. 1980)

. . . Of the remaining one-third or 5,362 persons, 83.04 percent of the individuals contacted by the Census . . .

In ALFRAN CORPORATION, ALFRAN CORPORATION, v. PARK ISLES, INC., 7 B.R. 95 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1980)

. . . Florida Statute § 83.04 (1979) sets forth the proper procedure which governs renewal of leases. . . . by Park Isles is not only not supported, it is actually refuted by judicial decisions interpreting § 83.04 . . . DCA 1977), the court held that a total reliance on § 83.04 of the Florida Statutes (1975) is not justified . . . payment and acceptances of rent justified the court to disregard the written notice requirement of § 83.04 . . . the Hancheys did not operate as a waiver of the written notice requirement of the lease, as well as § 83.04 . . .

BURCH, v. A. BRINKLEY, Jr., 382 So. 2d 440 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1980)

. . . appellant failed to plead facts in the complaint negativing the application of Sections 689.01 and 83.04 . . . lease agreement alleged in Count I, and that, in the absence of a showing of special circumstances, § 83.04 . . .

HENRY, v. D. S. M. COMPANY,, 352 So. 2d 1230 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1977)

. . . Appellant’s total reliance on Section 83.04 Florida Statutes (1975), is not justified in this case. . . .

KAROWARE, INC. v. UNITED STATES,, 564 F.2d 77 (C.C.P.A. 1977)

. . . wood (heading 44.27), and office equipment of base metal (e. g., sorting boxes, paper trays) (heading 83.04 . . .

KAROWARE, INC. v. UNITED STATES, 427 F. Supp. 402 (Cust. Ct. 1976)

. . . wood (heading 44.27), and office equipment of base metal (e. g., sorting boxes, paper trays) (heading 83.04 . . .

M. LEDFORD E. v. T. S. SKINNER, 328 So. 2d 219 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1976)

. . . Sec. 83.04, F.S. 1975. . . . The jury, which was properly charged on the effect of § 83.04, F.S., found from all the circumstances . . . In Painter, supra, 79 So.2d at 767, the Court recognized that the effect of § 83.04, F.S., might be varied . . . To hold in these circumstances that § 83.04, F.S., transformed the Skinners’ payments after September . . .

J. NELSON, v. GROWERS FORD TRACTOR CO. a a, 282 So. 2d 664 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1973)

. . . Section 83.04, Florida Statutes 1971, F.S.A. . . .

CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, a v. FLEETWOOD HOTEL, INC., 261 So. 2d 801 (Fla. 1972)

. . . by the City Council, and that the Ordinance conflicted with state law, specifically Sections 83.03, 83.04 . . . the trial court that this rent control ordinance does conflict with Florida Statutes Sections 83.03, 83.04 . . . F.S. 83.04, F.S.A. provides a tenancy at will may be terminated by either party upon giving of specified . . . F.S. 83.04, F.S.A. provides that a tenant who holds over after a written lease has expired is a tenant . . .

SPROUSE REITZ CO. P. Co. v. UNITED STATES, 332 F. Supp. 209 (Cust. Ct. 1971)

. . . work (heading 4417), and office equipment of base metal (e. g., sorting boxes, paper trays) (heading 83.04 . . .

RODIN, v. LERMAN,, 237 So. 2d 278 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1970)

. . . Town of Groveland, Fla. 1955, 79 So.2d 765, §§ 83.02, 83.04, Fla.Stat., F.S.A. . . .

FLEETWOOD HOTEL, v. CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, 33 Fla. Supp. 192 (Dade Cty. Cir. Ct. 1970)

. . . As to the third issue, portions of the ordinance conflict with state law, particularly §§83.03, 83.04 . . .

GRIZZARD, v. HESS OIL COMPANY, 33 Fla. Supp. 128 (Lake Cty. Cir. Ct. 1970)

. . . . §83.04 — When any tenancy created by an instrument in writing, the term of which is limited, has expired . . . See F.S. §83.04. . . .

L. TRASK, v. SUSSKIND, 376 F.2d 17 (5th Cir. 1967)

. . . The pertinent Florida statute, Florida Statutes Annotated, Section 83.04, provides as follows: “When . . .

LEADERS INTERNATIONAL JEWELRY, INC. a v. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DADE COUNTY,, 183 So. 2d 242 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1966)

. . . construing its possession of the premises after November 1, 1964 as a tenancy at sufferance under § 83.04 . . . Section 83.04, supra, reads as follows: “When any tenancy shall have been created by an instrument of . . . agree that these actions taken either alone or as a whole constitute a written consent required under § 83.04 . . . permissive occupancy is generally inconsistent with a tenancy at sufferance the Legislature has by § 83.04 . . . hold-over tenant who is already in possession might create a situation such as that presented here and by § 83.04 . . .

ENGEL v. CHABNER, 24 Fla. Supp. 68 (Dade Cty. Small Cl. Ct. 1965)

. . . Plaintiff contends that she did not renew the lease and cites §83.04 F. . . . agreement and conduct of the parties thereunder that would take this case out of the requirements of §83.04 . . . evidence of any conduct on the part of the parties that would take this case out of the requirements of §83.04 . . . would be tantamount to an indirect enforcement of a renewal lease, thus subverting the provisions of §83.04 . . .

MOSSLER ACCEPTANCE COMPANY, d b a v. MARTIN, C. E. t d b a, 322 F.2d 183 (5th Cir. 1963)

. . . . §§ 83.01-83.04; Painter v. Town of Groveland, Fla., 79 So.2d 765. . 51 C.J.S. . . .

S. FILARETOU, v. CHRISTOU, 133 So. 2d 652 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1961)

. . . Section 83.04, F.S.A., provides, in effect, that if the tenant holds over without renewing the said lease . . .

S. LEMEL, INC. a v. AVENUE FARMERS MARKET, INC. a, 126 So. 2d 167 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1961)

. . . complaint on its face manifests that the appellants are holdover tenants, coming within the provisions of § 83.04 . . . In view of the clearly expressed legislative intent contained in § 83.04, it would appear that here the . . . agreement and no written authority, were tenants at sufferance and have no cause of action, because of § 83.04 . . . Without new written leases § 83.04, Fla.Stat., F.S.A., would relegate the lessees to tenants at sufferance . . .

MARWOOD COMPANY, v. CLEARVIEW DORWINDO CORP., 12 Fla. Supp. 143 (Palm Beach Cty. Cir. Ct. 1957)

. . . Also, section 83.04, Florida Statutes, provides that when a lease has terminated without a renewal by . . .

L. PAINTER D. v. TOWN OF GROVELAND,, 79 So. 2d 765 (Fla. 1955)

. . . Our statute, Section 83.04, Fla. . . . over under a written lease containing an option to renew is “subject to the provisions of” Section 83.04 . . . At most, the Painters were tenants at will, under the provisions of Section 83.04, supra, that “if such . . .

G. W. ROSAMOND, v. H. J. MANN S., 80 So. 2d 317 (Fla. 1955)

. . . . § 83.04, which provides in part that a hold-over tenancy after a written lease without written renewal . . . F.S.A. § 83.04 was originally enacted as Sec. 4 of Laws. 1905, c. 5441. . . . The constitutionality of the 1931 amendment to F.S.A. § 83.04, supra, is not raised, and we express no . . . ” has been under the statute subsequently held unconstitutional, and so far as we are informed Sec. 83.04 . . . Statutes such as Sec. 83.04, rendering a hold-over tenancy -one at sufferance are not uncommon. . . .

JOHN S. KERNACHAN v. THE UNITED STATES, 63 Ct. Cl. 592 (Ct. Cl. 1927)

. . . Said return disclosed a net income of $3,383.95 and a tax liability of $83.04, which amount the plaintiff . . . The plaintiff paid $83.04 under his return as aforesaid, and the United States is entitled to retain . . .