Cases from cite.case.law:

CSC SERVICEWORKS, INC. a v. BOCA BAYOU CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC. a a, 240 So. 3d 12 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . such as a suit for ejectment, or trespass to try title, or removal of tennant proceedings under Sec. 83.20 . . .

FRANK S LANDING INDIAN COMMUNITY, v. NATIONAL INDIAN GAMING COMMISSION,, 242 F. Supp. 3d 1156 (W.D. Wash. 2017)

. . . . § 83.20 and show that it satisfies the criteria set forth in 25 C.F.R. § 83.11. B. . . .

PALM BEACH FLORIDA HOTEL a TRS II, LLC, a LLC, a LP, a v. NANTUCKET ENTERPRISES, INC. a, 211 So. 3d 42 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . landlord shall recover possession of rented premises only: (a) In an action for possession under s. 83.20 . . . abrogate the landlord’s right to obtain possession—unless he files an action for possession under section 83.20 . . . in which the tenant remains on the premises after having been given the notice provided in section 83.20 . . .

HALLEY, v. AETNA LIFE INSURANCE CO., 141 F. Supp. 3d 855 (N.D. Ill. 2015)

. . . and all four occupations were rated “sedentary” by the Dictionary of Occupational Titles and paid $83.20 . . . App. at 00435-36,' 00438. $83.20 is greater than the reasonable wage for Plaintiff allowed under the . . .

EDGE PILATES CORPORATION, v. TRIBECA AESTHETIC MEDICAL SOLUTIONS, LLC, a, 162 So. 3d 246 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . presented satisfied all the requirements for establishing a prima facie claim for eviction under section 83.20 . . . Section 83.20, Florida Statutes (2010), states, in pertinent part: Any tenant or lessee at will or sufferance . . . prima facie claim for eviction as follows: Eviction of a non-residential tenant is governed by section 83.20 . . . Under section 83.20(2), appellant was required to offer evidence of the following elements to establish . . . to satisfy each of the requirements necessary to prove a prima facie case for eviction under section 83.20 . . .

BRANTLEY d b a v. H. KUNTZ, Jr. N. F., 98 F. Supp. 3d 884 (W.D. Tex. 2015)

. . . Code § 83.20(e). . . .

MISHA ENTERPRISES, v. GAR ENTERPRISES, LLC,, 117 So. 3d 850 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2013)

. . . Section 83.20(3), Florida Statutes (2011), explicitly authorizes claims for possession for breach of . . .

In SLABBINCK, 482 B.R. 576 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 2012)

. . . apply to members of the bar of this court and attorneys who practice in this court as permitted by LR 83.20 . . . LR 83.20.” The Michigan Rules of Professional Conduct (“MRPC”) therefore govern BOC’s conduct. . . .

T. BURBO, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,, 877 F. Supp. 2d 526 (E.D. Mich. 2012)

. . . neither a party to this litigation, nor counsel, and her signing of the motion violates Local Rule 83.20 . . .

In CITRUS TOWER BOULEVARD IMAGING CENTER, LLC, LLC, v. LLC,, 460 B.R. 334 (Bankr. N.D. Ga. 2011)

. . . See § 83.20 Fla. Stat. At this point, neither party asserted that the Lease was terminated. . . . terminated and eviction, satisfied the statutory three-day notice requirement in Florida Statute § 83.20 . . . the complaint in Fontaine was based on the default statutory notice requirement in Florida Statute § 83.20 . . .

WINDSOR PLACE, v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES,, 649 F.3d 293 (5th Cir. 2011)

. . . . § ¿83.20(b)(2)(H) 42 C.F.R. § 483.20(b)(2)(ii) requires that a facility conduct a significant-change . . .

LANTANA ROAD PARTNERS, LLC, a v. PALM BEACH PAIN MANAGEMENT, INC. a, 57 So. 3d 966 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2011)

. . . Eviction of a non-residential tenant is governed by section 83.20, Florida Statutes. . . . Under section 83.20(2), appellant was required to offer evidence of the following elements to establish . . . The notice requirement is set by section 83.20(2), Florida Statutes, and may be waived by the parties . . .

COSTA LLC, a JVK LLC, a v. CARAMBOLA PARTNERS, LLC, a JS LLP, a L. Jr. XYZ ABC, 590 F. Supp. 2d 1141 (D. Minn. 2008)

. . . . §§ 83.20 et seq. (“MSLSPA”). . . .

PERRY v. CITY OF PONTIAC, a, 254 F.R.D. 309 (E.D. Mich. 2008)

. . . Rule 4.2, made applicable to attorneys practicing in this Court by way of Local Rule 83.20(j), provides . . . LR 83.20(j); E.D. Mich. LR 83.22(b); Nat’l Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, Pa. v. . . .

PRO- ART DENTAL LAB, INC. v. V- STRATEGIC GROUP, LLC,, 986 So. 2d 1244 (Fla. 2008)

. . . Stat. (2006); see also §§ 66.021 (ejectment), 82.04-05 (unlawful detainer), 83.20-.21(tenant removal . . .

NATIONAL UNION FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY OF PITTSBURGH, PENNSYLVANIA v. ALTICOR, INC., 466 F.3d 456 (6th Cir. 2006)

. . . LR 83.20(j)) (adopting MRPC). . . . .

Ae BOUDREAU, v. M H FOOD CORPORATION, 895 So. 2d 501 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005)

. . . Section 83.20(2), Florida Statutes (2002), provides guidance. . . . .” § 83.20(2). . . .

A. Z. INC. a d b a BCBG v. TAMPA WESTSHORE ASSOCIATES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, a, 869 So. 2d 42 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004)

. . . This notice was sent pursuant to section 83.20(2), Florida Statutes (2000), the statutory three-day notice . . . three days of receipt of the notice, rendering it insufficient as a three-day notice under section 83.20 . . . notice to adhere to the requirements of Florida’s statutory three-day notice provision under section 83.20 . . . and unambiguously waived the three-day notice provision, resulting in a valid eviction under section 83.20 . . .

BURT LAKE BAND OF OTTAWA AND CHIPPEWA INDIANS, v. NORTON,, 217 F. Supp. 2d 76 (D.D.C. 2002)

. . . . §§ 83.7(b), (e)-(g), 83.20. . . .

BANNER, v. CITY OF FLINT, 136 F. Supp. 2d 678 (E.D. Mich. 2000)

. . . Lr 83.20(j). . . .

BALDWIN SOD FARMS, INC. a v. D. CORRIGAN P. Jr. Co- J., 746 So. 2d 1198 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)

. . . On April 21, 1999, Corrigan attempted to serve a three-day notice letter under section 83.20, Florida . . . Baldwin that “[i]n accordance with Paragraph 15 of the Lease, and to the extent, it applies, Section 83.20 . . . argued below that there is no right to a jury trial in a summary eviction proceeding under sections 83.20 . . .

MARTIN, DIRECTOR, MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, v. HADIX, 527 U.S. 343 (U.S. 1999)

. . . Michigan Rules of Professional Conduct (1999), which apply to counsel in both Hadix and Glover, see Rule 83.20 . . .

BELL, v. A. KORNBLATT,, 705 So. 2d 113 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998)

. . . previously held that a three-day notice under an earlier version of a landlord tenant statute, section 83.20 . . . Section 83.20(2), Florida Statutes (1995), is substantially the same as the 1969 version of the statute . . .

CAVALLO, v. UTICA- WATERTOWN HEALTH INSURANCE COMPANY, INC. f k a, 985 F. Supp. 72 (N.D.N.Y. 1997)

. . . Subtracting 2% of $4,190.92 ($83.20) for the prompt payment discount would result in a net billing amount . . .

JETTON, v. McDONNEL DOUGLAS CORPORATION,, 121 F.3d 423 (8th Cir. 1997)

. . . Moore, Moore’s Federal Practice § 83.20 (3d ed.1997), and the parties are charged with knowledge of the . . .

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

. . . Further, the trial court found that Talbert had given the proper three-day notice pursuant to section 83.20 . . .

WEINBERGER, v. GREAT NORTHERN NEKOOSA CORP. BTZ, INC. v. GREAT NORTHERN NEKOOSA CORP. RYAN, v. GREAT NORTHERN NEKOOSA CORP., 801 F. Supp. 804 (D. Me. 1992)

. . . .: 83.20 Milberg Weiss Bershad Specthrie & Lerach: 1,972.25 (includes $361.50 for courier service) Murray . . .

In GISC, INC., 130 B.R. 346 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1991)

. . . . § 83.20 to the Debtor notifying the Debtor that it was in default under the lease in the amount of . . .

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

. . . refused the tender and, on the same day (May 1, 1986), filed a tenant eviction proceeding under section 83.20 . . .

MILMAR ROOFING CO. INC. v. JONES,, 566 So. 2d 25 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1990)

. . . Cf Section 61.12(h), and 83.20, Larson’s Workmen’s Compensation Law. Affirmed. . . .

R. BODDEN COIN- OP LAUNDRY, INC. v. BRANDYCHASE CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC., 557 So. 2d 663 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1990)

. . . such as a suit for ejectment, or trespass to try title, or removal of tenant proceedings under Sec. 83.20 . . .

LIFESPRING, INC. v. WEST OAKLAND CORP., 38 Fla. Supp. 2d 221 (Fla. Cir. Ct. 1990)

. . . . § 83.20(2). . . . in this action, the record below shows that such service was proper and in conformity with F.S.A. § 83.20 . . . record in this case, the Lessor complied with the legal requirements of service as set forth in F.S.A. § 83.20 . . .

DAYTONA PLAZA, INC. v. HOWARD,, 38 Fla. Supp. 2d 151 (Fla. Cir. Ct. 1990)

. . . Section 83.20(2) Fla. . . .

MILLARD, v. D. BRANNAN, d b a, 553 So. 2d 1248 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1989)

. . . landlord shall recover possession of rented premises only: (a) In an action for possession under s. 83.20 . . . premises for a period of 30 consecutive days; (b) The rent is not current; and (c) A notice pursuant to s. 83.20 . . . Section 83.20(2), Florida Statutes (1983) provides: Where such person holds over without permission as . . .

OLD COACH DEVELOPMENT CORP. INC. s v. M. TANZMAN, J. E. E. G. III,, 881 F.2d 1227 (3d Cir. 1989)

. . . . § 83.20 et seq. (West 1986); Haw.Rev.Stat. § 484-1 et seq. (1985). . . .

McLAUGHLIN, U. S. v. DIALAMERICA MARKETING, INC., 716 F. Supp. 812 (D.N.J. 1989)

. . . Rate Pay 1/20/80 $3.10 1359 416 0.20 $83.20 the inquiry here is what number of cards/hour would this . . . wage X cards processed gross pay Inserting the known sample data, cards/hour = $3.10 x 1359 = 51. $83.20 . . . This solution demonstrates that this employee would have had to process 51 cards/hour in order for $83.20 . . . 50 = 27.18 X $3.10 - $83.20 = $84.26 - $83.20 = $1.06 Therefore, the hypothetical employee should have . . . Since the actual pay was only $83.20, a minimum wage violation of $1.06 occurred. . . .

RUSSO v. MANFREDO, 35 Fla. Supp. 2d 23 (Fla. Cir. Ct. 1989)

. . . . § 83.20(2) (1987) which allows tenant three days to pay rent or vacate. . . .

RIVER BRIDGE CENTRE v. STECCO, 33 Fla. Supp. 2d 15 (Fla. Cty. Ct. 1989)

. . . Plaintiff served Defendant with a three day notice to pay rent or vacate the premises pursuant to section 83.20 . . . Where a lease provides for a longer grace period than that called for by section 83.20, the landlord . . .

KAPLAN, d b a v. McCABE,, 532 So. 2d 1354 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1988)

. . . the instant action, Kaplan presented McCabe with a “NOTICE TO PAY RENT OR QUIT” pursuant to section 83.20 . . .

STREET SHOPPING CENTER v. CEVICHE OCEAN STAR, INC., 31 Fla. Supp. 2d 86 (Dade Cty. Ct. 1988)

. . . FS § 83.20(2). 4. . . .

LAKEWAY MANAGEMENT COMPANY OF FLORIDA, INC. a d b a v. STOLOWILSKY, 527 So. 2d 950 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1988)

. . . Only after the lessor sent a three-day notice pursuant to Section 83.20(2), Florida Statutes (1985) did . . .

In HICKORY POINT INDUSTRIES, INC. WALLING CRATE COMPANY, INC. v. HICKORY POINT INDUSTRIES, INC., 83 B.R. 805 (M.D. Fla. 1988)

. . . ineffective because the lessor failed to comply with the three-day notice provisions of Florida Statute § 83.20 . . . The Bankruptcy Court based its decision on Florida Statute § 83.20 which provides as follows: 83.20. . . . requiring the payment of the rent or the possession of the premises as required by Florida Statute § 83.20 . . . The three day notice to pay rent or vacate requirement set forth in Florida Statute § 83.20(2) deals . . .

In STUDEBAKER S OF FT. LAUDERDALE LTD., 73 B.R. 217 (Bankr. N.D. Fla. 1987)

. . . served the three-day notice to pay or to vacate the premises as provided for under Florida Statutes § 83.20 . . .

A. v. T. Y. v., 87 T.C. 698 (T.C. 1986)

. . . fee percentage, and its marketing fee percentage) was 78.95 percent for the bacon board dispenser, 83.20 . . .

R. CLARK W. v. R. HIETT,, 495 So. 2d 773 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1986)

. . . Clarks because the Hietts had not served on the Clarks the three-day written notice required by section 83.20 . . . Section 83.20(2) authorizes the removal: (2) Where such person holds over without permission as aforesaid . . . excepting the failure to pay rent constituted a waiver of the requirement to give notice under section 83.20 . . . There is authority for the proposition that the three-day notice provided in section 83.20(2) can be . . . The three-day notice under section 83.20(2) was a condition precedent to relief. . . .

C. HERRELL, Jr. C. Jr. P. A. v. SEYFARTH, SHAW, FAIRWEATHER GERALDSON, A, 491 So. 2d 1173 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1986)

. . . under the following conditions: (1) if the landlord has instituted action for possession under Section 83.20 . . . the landlord’s right to obtain possession — unless he files an action for possession under section 83.20 . . . in which the tenant remains on the premises after having been given the notice provided in section 83.20 . . .

In CONDOMINIUM ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES, INC. s, 55 B.R. 792 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1985)

. . . This notice, sent purportedly pursuant to § 83.20(2) of Fla.Stat., is a statutory prerequisite for filing . . . demanded a payment within three days or possession of the premises and was given pursuant to Fla.Stat. 83.20 . . . As noted earlier, the three day notice was given pursuant to § 83.20(2) Fla.Stat. which-provides as follows . . . : 83.20 Causes for removal of tenants Any tenant or lessee at will or sufferance, or for part of the . . .

In STREET MEDICAL CORPORATION,, 47 B.R. 869 (Bankr. S.D. Fla. 1985)

. . . Default for Non-Payment of Rent in accordance with Section 11.1 of the Lease and Florida Statutes § 83.20 . . .

In BAHIA RESORTS, INC., 46 B.R. 44 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1985)

. . . premature and ineffective because the Landlord did not strictly comply with Florida Statutes §§ 83.05 and 83.20 . . .

In E. M. R. CORP. E. M. R. CORP. v. FLYNN,, 40 B.R. 479 (Bankr. S.D. Fla. 1984)

. . . . § 83.20. . . .

SUN CLEANERS v. DENNIS,, 4 Fla. Supp. 2d 95 (Fla. Cir. Ct. 1983)

. . . Section 83.20(1) and F.S. Section 83.20(2), respectively. . . .

EDEN POINT NORTH CONDOMINIUM ASSN. v. SOCKOLOF, 2 Fla. Supp. 2d 179 (Fla. Cir. Ct. 1983)

. . . careful examination of the record reveals that the Landlord fully complied with Florida Statute Section 83.20 . . .

In FOXFIRE INN OF STUART FLORIDA, INC. HARBOUR BAY PLAZA ASSOCIATES LTD. v. FOXFIRE INN OF STUART FLORIDA, INC., 30 B.R. 30 (Bankr. S.D. Fla. 1983)

. . . not only in accordance with the terms of the lease but also in compliance with the requirements of § 83.20 . . .

In GUARDIAN EQUIPMENT CORPORATION, f k a GUARDIAN EQUIPMENT CORPORATION, v. L. WHITESIDE, Jr., 18 B.R. 864 (Bankr. S.D. Fla. 1982)

. . . that the debtor filed its Petition for Bankruptcy, a Three Day Notice, pursuant to Florida Statutes 83.20 . . .

In FONTAINE JANITORIAL SUPPLY SERVICE, INC. N. FONTAINE T. v. FONTAINE JANITORIAL SUPPLY SERVICE, INC., 17 B.R. 322 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1982)

. . . . § 83.20(2) (Supp.1981); that they made a tender to purchase by offering to exercise the offer prior . . . The three day notice requirement mentioned earlier, is set forth in Fla.Stat. § 83.20(2) (Supp.1981) . . .

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

. . . Section 83.20, Florida Statutes, then provides that any “tenant at sufferance” may be removed from the . . . As noted in § 83.20, the lessor’s right to evict a tenant who has become a tenant at sufferance after . . . This proviso in § 83.20 is an anti-forfeiture provision whereby the tenant who has been rendered one . . . In the instant case, the plaintiff lessor complied with the prescribed procedure mandated by § 83.20, . . .

In CHRISTOPHER MICHAELS RISTORANTE, INC. a, 9 B.R. 149 (Bankr. S.D. Fla. 1981)

. . . .” § 83.20, Florida Statutes. . . . It is clear that the landlord did not comply with the requirements of § 83.20. . . .

KUGEARES, v. CASINO, INC., 372 So. 2d 1132 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1979)

. . . grounds for regaining leased property over which the county court is given jurisdiction under Sections 83.20 . . .

GILBERT, v. WOODS MARKETING, INC. a a M. C. N. L. W. R. R. I. Jr. B. D. H. A. E., 454 F. Supp. 745 (D. Minn. 1978)

. . . . § 83.20, et seq.; and common law fraud and breach of contract. . . .

PALM CORPORATION, v. STREET THEATRE CORPORATION,, 344 So. 2d 252 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1977)

. . . lease agreement between the parties allegedly waived the three day notice requirement under Section 83.20 . . .

GENTRY N. R. v. R. SMITH,, 487 F.2d 571 (5th Cir. 1973)

. . . such as a suit for ejectment, or trespass to try title, or removal of tenant proceedings under Sec. 83.20 . . .

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

. . . City Council, and that the Ordinance conflicted with state law, specifically Sections 83.03, 83.04 and 83.20 . . . that this rent control ordinance does conflict with Florida Statutes Sections 83.03, 83.04, 83.06 and 83.20 . . . F.S. 83.20, F.S.A. provides that a tenant at will or sufferance may be removed from the premises, evicted . . .

INDUSTRIAL LIFE INSURANCE CO. v. UNITED STATES, 344 F. Supp. 870 (D.S.C. 1972)

. . . had annual income from weekly premium, Industrial Life policies on members of the Scyphers family of $83.20 . . .

S. RICHARDS, v. C. FINLAY, M., 259 So. 2d 167 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1972)

. . . Sections 83.20 et seq., F.S.A.) whereas the facts appear to more appropriately support a statutory proceeding . . .

MOSKOS, v. B. HAND V., 247 So. 2d 795 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1971)

. . . The tenant’s plaint that he did not receive the three days notice provided in Section 83.20(2), F.S.1969 . . .

STATE, ROBERTS, v. SNOWDEN,, 35 Fla. Supp. 45 (Dade Cty. Cir. Ct. 1970)

. . . S. 83.20(2) demanded the amount of $665 or possession of the premises within three days of service; and . . .

AVVENIRE COLLEGE FOR WOMEN INC. d b a v. G. B. D. INC. d b a, 240 So. 2d 191 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1970)

. . . The suit was filed under the provisions of Section 83.20, F.S.1969, F.S.A. . . . counterclaim within the jurisdiction of the court is authorized in a statutory proceeding under Section 83.20 . . .

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

. . . third issue, portions of the ordinance conflict with state law, particularly §§83.03, 83.04, 83.06 and 83.20 . . .

PENUEL, v. CENTRAL CRANE SERVICE,, 232 So. 2d 739 (Fla. 1970)

. . . F.S.A. in determining the average weekly wage and held that the average weekly wage was the sum of $83.20 . . .

BRAMLETT, v. J. S. PETERSON, C. S. O. H. E. J. II, O. S. W., 307 F. Supp. 1311 (M.D. Fla. 1969)

. . . Plaintiff Hollestelle alleged that after criminal proceedings under Florida Statutes, section 83.20 ( . . .

M. FLORO, v. N. PARKER E., 205 So. 2d 363 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1967)

. . . such as a suit for ejectment, or trespass to try title, or removal of tennant proceedings under Sec. 83.20 . . .

STATE ATTIAS, v. R. BLANTON, B. F. Jr. H., 195 So. 2d 870 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1967)

. . . The latter is outlined and provided for in Chapter 83, Fla.Stat., F.S.A., §§ 83.20-83.27. . . .

UNITED STATES, v. LARRY W. ANDREWS, U. S., 15 C.M.A. 514 (C.M.A. 1965)

. . . This reflected the accused’s basic pay as $83.20 per month. . . . Since the evidence showed' the accused's basic pay was $83.20, the court-martial could, by simple arithmetical . . .

C. WARWICK M. v. UNITED STATES, 236 F. Supp. 761 (E.D. Va. 1964)

. . . 70.29 New York to London, England and return 858.20 London, England to Hamburg, Germany and return 83.20 . . .

LEXINGTON ARMS, INC. a v. P. HENRICH M., 153 So. 2d 31 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1963)

. . . an action against the appellees-defendants-lessees seeking removal of the defendants, under section 83.20 . . . Section 83.20, F.S.A. authorizes proceedings for the removal of a tenant who (1) holds over after the . . .

In T. JOHNSON B., 211 F. Supp. 337 (D.N.J. 1962)

. . . respondents in the sum of $2,080.97, together with interest from September 10, 1957 in the amount of $83.20 . . .

H. C. YOUNGBERG, v. CHATLOS, 117 So. 2d 861 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1960)

. . . General Laws of 1927 have now been incorporated into our present Florida Statutes as Sections 83.05, 83.20 . . .

J. WAGNER C. v. L. RICE,, 97 So. 2d 267 (Fla. 1957)

. . . Section 83.20, Florida Statutes, F.S.A. . . .

DAVID F. SAMPLES, ET AL. v. THE UNITED STATES In W. L. J. J. v. ROY A. ANDERSON, ET. AL. v. THE UNITED STATES In O v. HERBERT BEEBE, ET. AL. v. THE UNITED STATES In B. v., 135 Ct. Cl. 548 (Ct. Cl. 1956)

. . . Total compensation (I+J+K)-$83.20 M. Total compensation paid_$75.00 N. . . .

v., 35 Cust. Ct. 439 (Cust. Ct. 1955)

. . . shipment to the United States, was for each depth-sounding device $2,027.65 less nondutiable charges of $83.20 . . . the value of the merchandise in issue, and that said value is $2,027.65, less nondutiable charges of $83.20 . . .

HYMAN v. COHEN, 73 So. 2d 393 (Fla. 1954)

. . . undersigned within three days from the date whereupon this notice is given, in accordance with Section 83.20 . . .

PONDER, In, 67 Ohio Law Abs. 407 (N.D. Ohio 1954)

. . . the period he was paid $50.40 on Nov. 13, 1953, $67.20 on Nov. 20, 1953, $113.93 on Nov. 27, 1953, $83.20 . . .

NEVINS DRUG CO. v. BUNCH, 63 So. 2d 329 (Fla. 1953)

. . . The eviction proceedings were brought under Chapter 83 F.S.A., and particularly, Section 83.20(2), which . . .

DEAUVILLE CORPORATION v. GARDEN SUBURBS GOLF COUNTRY CLUB,, 164 F.2d 430 (5th Cir. 1947)

. . . contends that this is a statutory proceeding to evict, authorized by Florida Statutes of 1941, Sec. 83.20 . . .

PEDERSON v. JOHN D. SPRECKLES BROS. CO., 87 F. 938 (9th Cir. 1898)

. . . It baa a gross tonnage, 87.55; net tonnage, 83.20; net length, 91.9; breadth, 27.7; depth, 6.8 feet,- . . .