The 2023 Florida Statutes (including Special Session C)

Title VII
EVIDENCE

Chapter 92
WITNESSES, RECORDS, AND DOCUMENTS

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 92.25

92.25 Records destroyed by fire; use of abstracts.—Whenever in the trial of any suit, or in any proceeding in any court of this state, it shall be made to appear that the original of any deed or other instrument of writing, or of any record of any court relating to any land, the title thereof or any interest therein being in controversy in such suit or proceeding, is lost or destroyed, or not within the power of the party to produce the same, and that the record thereof has been heretofore destroyed by fire, and that no certified copy of such record is in the possession or control of such party, it is lawful for such party, and the court shall receive as evidence, any abstract of title, or letter-press copy thereof made in the ordinary course of business prior to such loss or destruction; and it is also lawful for any such party to offer, and the court shall receive as evidence, any copy, extract or minutes from such destroyed records, or from the original thereof, which were at the date of such destruction in the possession of any person or persons then engaged in the business of making abstracts of titles for others for hire.

History.—s. 1, ch. 4951, 1901; GS 1529; RGS 2729; CGL 4401.

F.S. 92.25 on Google Scholar

F.S. 92.25 on Casetext

Amendments to 92.25

Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 92.25

Level: Degree
Misdemeanor/Felony: First/Second/Third

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 92.25.

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases from cite.case.law:

RESCO PRODUCTS, INC. v. BOSAI MINERALS GROUP CO. LTD. CMP Co., 158 F. Supp. 3d 406 (W.D. Pa. 2016)

. . . records of its bauxite purchases from late 1999 until mid-2012 show that plaintiff never paid less than $92.25 . . .

N. SCORAN, v. OVERSEAS SHIPHOLDING GROUP, INC., 703 F. Supp. 2d 437 (S.D.N.Y. 2010)

. . . . § 92.25-15 (a regulation for cargo and miscellaneous vessels, analogous to 46 C.F.R. § 32.02-15) by . . .

PERDUE, v. INDIVIDUAL MEMBERS OF INDIANA STATE BOARD OF LAW EXAMINERS,, 266 F.R.D. 215 (S.D. Ind. 2010)

. . . = 635 applicants, 95.25 affected; 2007 = 656 applicants, 98.4 affected; and 2008 = 615 applicants, 92.25 . . .

A. CARNEY v. UNITED STATES, 598 F. Supp. 2d 715 (D. Md. 2009)

. . . . § 92.25-15 was violated by Martucci’s failure to promptly replace or reinstall the protective guard . . . Carney’s injuries were within the type of injury against which § 92.25-15 was designed to protect, and . . . Given that the injury stemmed from a violation of 46 C.F.R. § 92.25-15, contributory negligence is not . . . Only four cases have addressed the issue of whether a violation of 46 C.F.R. § 92.25-15 in particular . . . , 2007 WL 3085436, *2 (finding that § 92.25-15 does not apply to ballast tanks); Falconer, 397 F.Supp . . .

ABRUSKA, v. NORTHLAND VESSEL LEASING CO. LLC LLC, 258 F. App'x 158 (9th Cir. 2007)

. . . . § 92.25-5 requires all vessels subject to subchapter I of the Coast Guard regulations, which pertains . . . The Baranof Trader, as a cargo vessel, is clearly subject to § 92.25-5. . . . Nor is the Coast Guard’s interpretation of § 92.25-5 in its Marine Safety Manual, wherein it exempts . . . Section 92.25-5 is unambiguous in its requirement that “[a]ll vessels” have three-course railings at . . . Not only is § 92.25-5 unambiguous, but the Coast Guard’s interpretation in the Marine Safety Manual is . . . . § 92.25-5. . . . The majority contends that this exception only serves to excuse the height requirement of section 92.25 . . . Under the text of the regulation, the only way for a vessel to simultaneously comply with section 92.25 . . . consistent with the Marine Safety Manual, which provides “[t]he rail and deck guard requirements of 46 CFR 92.25 . . .

JOHNSON, v. HORIZON LINES, LLC,, 520 F. Supp. 2d 524 (S.D.N.Y. 2007)

. . . . § 92.25-15 and 33 C.F.R. § 96.230. . . . I consider them in turn. 1. 46 C.F.R. § 92.25-15 46 C.F.R. § 92.25-15, captioned “Guards in dangerous . . . Standing alone, 46 C.F.R. § 92.25-15 is not a model of clarity. . . . that regulation keeps. § 92.25-15 is one of three mandatory regulations in Subpart 92.25, each of which . . . There are two other provisions in Subpart 92.25: §§ 92.25-1 and 92.25-90. . . .

ADVOCATES FOR HIGHWAY AND AUTO SAFETY, v. FEDERAL MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY ADMINISTRATION,, 429 F.3d 1136 (D.C. Cir. 2005)

. . . Curriculum prescribes a total of 320 hours of training, including 116 hours of on-street training and 92.25 . . .

FALCONER, v. PENN MARITIME, INC., 397 F. Supp. 2d 68 (D. Me. 2005)

. . . on the basis of negligence per se arising from the defendant’s violation of 29 CFR 1915.73, 46 CFR 92.25 . . . policy judgment, has spoken unequivocally, and it is this Court's duty to enforce the statute. . 46 CFR 92.25 . . .

SHIVA, v. STATE, 899 So. 2d 1150 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005)

. . . sentencing guidelines, attaching a proposed scoresheet which showed a sentencing range of 55.35 to 92.25 . . .

KING v. JCS ENTERPRISES, INC. JCS Co., 325 F. Supp. 2d 162 (E.D.N.Y. 2004)

. . . 29/97-2/4/98 150.75 $ 75.00 11.306.25 Feder 6/2/97-6/17/97 9 $ 75.00 $ 675.00 Bubble 5/27/98-8/10/98 92.25 . . .

A. TOSON, Sr. v. STATE, 864 So. 2d 552 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004)

. . . as a prison releasee reoffender, on count II to five years in prison, and on counts III, IV and V to 92.25 . . .

In AUTO INTERNATIONAL REFRIGERATION, H. v., 275 B.R. 789 (Bankr. N.D. Tex. 2002)

. . . 87.75 0.00 1/12/99 CO 379.44 $185,119.42 0.05% 92.56 10,000.00 1/13/99 C/3 626.76 $184,492.66 0.05% 92.25 . . .

In D. HEADRICK, J. D. J. v., 285 B.R. 540 (Bankr. S.D. Ga. 2001)

. . . Bederman requests legal fees for 92.25 hours at $250.00 per hour for a total of $23,062.50. Mr. . . . Thus, the number of allowed billable hours are reduced from 92.25 hours to 63.13 hours, which at $250 . . .

In KREIDLE, D. KREIDLE, v. DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY, INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE,, 145 B.R. 1007 (Bankr. D. Colo. 1992)

. . . . § 2412(d)(2)(B). 9) The increase in the cost of living justifies a minimum rate of $92.25 per hour . . . litigation required uncommon levels of expertise in both tax and bankruptcy law not available at the $92.25 . . . Thus, fees of attorneys Sterling, Hahn, Temple and attorney TMH are reduced to the statutory rate of $92.25 . . . The court awards compensation at the statutory rate of $92.25 to attorneys with no expertise in tax law . . . The court finds 143.6 hours are compensa-ble and at the statutory rate of $92.25/hour for a total of . . .

LEVERNIER CONSTRUCTION, INC. v. UNITED STATES,, 21 Cl. Ct. 683 (Ct. Cl. 1990)

. . . analysis 37.50 hrs $37.50/hr 1.312.50 hrs 0 -Input 105.25 hrs $22.50/hr 2,368.13 hrs 0 -Processing 92.25 . . .

NORWOOD, v. CHARLOTTE MEMORIAL HOSPITAL AND MEDICAL CENTER,, 720 F. Supp. 543 (W.D.N.C. 1989)

. . . $ 264.24 Costs and Expenses from 2/24/83 through 12/31/84: Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 92.25 . . .

MAJOR, v. C. TREEN,, 700 F. Supp. 1422 (E.D. La. 1988)

. . . LG) in December, 1981 $ 626.00 Travel to D.C. to review Justice Department files (LG) in June, 1982 92.25 . . . The $92.25 expense in connection with travel to Washington, D.C. to review Justice Department files in . . . Orleans — December, 1981 $ 514.29 Travel to Washington to review Justice Department files — June, 1982 92.25 . . .

MINTER, v. SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES,, 677 F. Supp. 889 (N.D. Tex. 1987)

. . . [Available on WESTLAW, 1987 WL 43607] (awarding counsel $92.25 per hour on basis that congressional intent . . .

A. MORRISON, v. GENUINE PARTS COMPANY,, 828 F.2d 708 (11th Cir. 1987)

. . . namely $3,566.62, although the district court later found that Morrison’s actual damages were only $92.25 . . . district court awarded plaintiff $3,566.62, pursuant to the stipulation on the promotion claim, plus $92.25 . . .

v., 11 Ct. Int'l Trade 489 (Ct. Int'l Trade 1987)

. . . Attorney time (at $75 per hour) thus aggregates 92.25 hours. . . .

BONANZA TRUCKING CORPORATION, v. UNITED STATES, 669 F. Supp. 430 (Ct. Int'l Trade 1987)

. . . Attorney time (at $75 per hour) thus aggregates 92.25 hours. . . .

J. EIVINS, v. ADVENTIST HEALTH SYSTEM EASTERN MIDDLE AMERICA, INC. a k a, 660 F. Supp. 1255 (D. Kan. 1987)

. . . Wolff, Federal Jury Practice and Instructions § 92.25 (Supp.1986). . . .

NORWOOD, v. CHARLOTTE MEMORIAL HOSPITAL AND MEDICAL CENTER,, 653 F. Supp. 1350 (W.D.N.C. 1987)

. . . 264.24 Costs and Expenses from 2/24/83 through 12/31/84: Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ...... 92.25 . . .

BUTLER COUNTY MEMORIAL HOSPITAL, a v. M. HECKLER, UNITED STATES, 780 F.2d 352 (3d Cir. 1985)

. . . to 1 MCU 2.17 to 1 Routine 4.83 to 1 The costs per patient day were: ICU $271.67 MCU 153.09 Routine 92.25 . . .

J. RYBICKI, v. STATE BOARD OF ELECTIONS OF STATE OF ILLINOIS, v. STATE BOARD OF ELECTIONS OF STATE OF ILLINOIS, CROSBY, v. STATE BOARD OF ELECTIONS OF STATE OF ILLINOIS,, 584 F. Supp. 849 (N.D. Ill. 1984)

. . . The 92.25 hours billed by summer associates Jonathan K. Baum and Elizabeth V. . . .

LEWIS, v. UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH, 725 F.2d 910 (3d Cir. 1983)

. . . The majority’s reliance on Devitt & Blackmar, Federal Jury Practice and Instructions § 92.25 (Supp.1982 . . . See Devitt & Blackmar, Federal Jury Practice and Instructions § 92.25 (Supp.1982) (proposing model instructions . . .

KANSAS- NEBRASKA NATURAL GAS COMPANY, INC. v. MARATHON OIL COMPANY M, 109 F.R.D. 12 (D. Neb. 1983)

. . . Parker (geologist) 92.25 65.00 5,996.25 C — Craig W. . . .

R. VAN GEMERT v. BOEING COMPANY, 516 F. Supp. 412 (S.D.N.Y. 1981)

. . . . 110 28.820.00 Harwood .5 110 55.00 Sucharow 61.5 100 6.150.00 Rosengarten 4.75 100 ■ 475.00 Avery 92.25 . . .

SWEENEY, v. AMERICAN STEAMSHIP COMPANY,, 491 F.2d 1085 (6th Cir. 1974)

. . . The trial court found appellant liable because it violated Coast Guard Regulation 92.25-5 (a) which states . . . that “All vessels shall have sufficient guard rails . . . . ” C.F.R. 92.25-5(a). . . .

UNITED STATES v. JAMES, 301 F. Supp. 107 (W.D. Tex. 1969)

. . . Thurmond claims compensation for 92.25 hours of time spent in preparation out of Court, at $10.00 per . . .

R. WILLIAMS v. KAISER ALUMINUM AND CHEMICAL CORPORATION, 287 F. Supp. 359 (E.D. La. 1968)

. . . with the defendant, plaintiff was entitled to a total overtime payment of $3,493.20, LESS the sum of $92.25 . . .

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, v. PAYNE,, 374 F.2d 261 (D.C. Cir. 1966)

. . . In addition, the Executor paid to Cedar Hill Cemetery the sum of $92.25 for a grave marker placed on . . . So the District argues that, as no such direction was contained in the will, the sum of $92.25 should . . .

GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY v. UNITED STATES, 299 F.2d 942 (Ct. Cl. 1962)

. . . New York Stock Exchange, ranging in price from a low in 1942 of $21.50' a share to a high in 1953 of $92.25 . . .

GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY v. THE UNITED STATES, 156 Ct. Cl. 617 (Ct. Cl. 1962)

. . . New York Stock Exchange, ranging in price from a low in 1942 of $21.50 a share to a high in 1953 of $92.25 . . . 39.875 32 1948_ 43 31.75 1949_ 42.375 34 1950_ 50. 5 41.125 1951_ 63.875 49.5 1952_ 72.75 54.375 1953___ 92.25 . . .

SPUR BOTTLING CO. v. CANADA DRY GINGER ALE,, 98 F. Supp. 972 (W.D. Ark. 1951)

. . . plaintiff for the profit that it would have made on the sale of the 369 cases at 25$i per case, or $92.25 . . . to recover on its counterclaim of $165.64, less the damage suffered by the plaintiff in the sum of $92.25 . . .

GRAND TRUNK WESTERN R. CO. v. BROWN,, 32 F. Supp. 784 (E.D. Mich. 1940)

. . . that other property throughout Michigan was assessed on a basis varying from 86.53 percent in 1937 to 92.25 . . .

In ROSENSTEEL, 27 F.2d 1009 (W.D. Pa. 1928)

. . . of January, 1918, leased to Ethel Rosensteel six items of household furniture at a listed value of $92.25 . . .

JOHN C. McINTYRE AND JOHN H. HOWARD v. THE UNITED STATES, 40 Ct. Cl. 366 (Ct. Cl. 1905)

. . . , at $4.581 55.00 Stone & Stansell: 284]^ team days, at $4____ 1,187.20 61A days’ labor, at $1.50.. 92.25 . . .