Home
Menu
Call attorney Graham Syfert at 904-383-7448
Personal Injury Lawyer
Florida Statute 92.39 | Lawyer Caselaw & Research
F.S. 92.39 Case Law from Google Scholar
Statute is currently reporting as:
Link to State of Florida Official Statute Google Search for Amendments to 92.39

The 2023 Florida Statutes (including Special Session C)

Title VII
EVIDENCE
Chapter 92
WITNESSES, RECORDS, AND DOCUMENTS
View Entire Chapter
F.S. 92.39
92.39 Evidence of individual’s claim against the state in suits between them.In suits between the state and individuals, no claim for a credit shall be allowed upon trial, but such as shall appear to have been presented to the Chief Financial Officer for his or her examination, and by him or her disallowed in whole or in part, unless it shall be proved to the satisfaction of the court that the defendant is, at the time of the trial, in possession of vouchers not before in the defendant’s power to procure, and that the defendant was prevented from exhibiting a claim for such credit at the Chief Financial Officer’s office by unavoidable accident.
History.s. 4, Feb. 10, 1837; RS 1122; GS 1540; RGS 2740; CGL 4412; s. 517, ch. 95-147; s. 108, ch. 2003-261.
Note.Former s. 90.22.

F.S. 92.39 on Google Scholar

F.S. 92.39 on Casetext

Amendments to 92.39


Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 92.39
Level: Degree
Misdemeanor/Felony: First/Second/Third

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 92.39.



Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases from cite.case.law:

SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY, v. STAIR,, 801 F. Supp. 37 (W.D. Tenn. 1992)

. . . Conclusions of Law entered by the court, plaintiffs are entitled to have their assessments reduced from 92.39% . . .

FLORIDA EXPORT TOBACCO CO. INC. v. DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, 510 So. 2d 936 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1987)

. . . See section 92.39, Florida Statutes (1979); Florida Livestock Board v. . . . Section 92.39, Florida Statutes (1979), remains on the statute hooks and still requires evidence of the . . .

In FINE PAPER ANTITRUST LITIGATION, 98 F.R.D. 48 (E.D. Pa. 1983)

. . . . $92.39 in travel expenses incurred by Skirnick for travel to and attendance at the Discovery Committee . . .

CALIFORNIA v. ARIZONA, 452 U.S. 431 (U.S. 1981)

. . . S 68o05'09" W 92.39 feet; 713. S 49°57'27" W 34.37 feet; 714. S 68°45'32" W 110.52 feet; 715. . . .