Florida Statute 132.39 | Lawyer Caselaw & Research

The 2024 Florida Statutes

Title XI
COUNTY ORGANIZATION AND INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS

Chapter 132
GENERAL REFUNDING LAW

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 132.39

132.39 Certification of debt service savings.—No general obligation refunding bonds shall be issued pursuant to s. 132.35 unless the chief financial officer of the unit, or such other official as may be designated by the governing body, shall have first filed with the governing body of the unit a certificate, which shall be final and conclusive upon all parties:

(1) Setting forth the present value of the total debt service savings which will result from the issuance of the general obligation refunding bonds computed in accordance with the provisions of s. 132.35; and

(2) Demonstrating mathematically that the general obligation refunding bonds are issued at a lower net average interest cost rate than the net average interest cost rate borne by the general obligation bonds to be refunded.

History.—s. 1, ch. 86-181.

F.S. 132.39 on Google Scholar

F.S. 132.39 on Casetext

Amendments to 132.39

Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 132.39

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

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 132.39.

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases Citing Statute 132.39

Total Results: 6

Underwater Engineering Services v. Utility Board of the City of Key West

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2016-05-11

Citation: 194 So. 3d 437, 2016 WL 2731438, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 7142

Snippet: doctrine (U.S. v. Spearin, 248 U.S. 132, 39 S.Ct. 59, 63 L.Ed. 166 (1918)), known in Florida

Kasischke v. State

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 2008-07-10

Citation: 991 So. 2d 803, 2008 WL 2678449

Snippet: cord"); Muscarello v. United States, 524 U.S. 125, 132-39, 118 S.Ct. 1911, 141 L.Ed.2d 111 (1998) (relying

Lippman v. State

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 1994-03-17

Citation: 633 So. 2d 1061, 1994 WL 81822

Snippet: impermissible increase in the penalty imposed. See id. at 132-39, 101 S.Ct. at 434-38, 66 L.Ed.2d at 342-47; see

Phillips & Jordan v. State, Dept. of Transp.

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1992-06-23

Citation: 602 So. 2d 1310, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 6960, 1992 WL 138087

Snippet: NOTES [1] United States v. Spearin, 248 U.S. 132, 39 S.Ct. 59, 63 L.Ed. 166 (1918). [2] Furthermore

Lippman v. State

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1992-02-25

Citation: 595 So. 2d 190, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 1746, 1992 WL 32799

Snippet: impermissible increase in the penalty imposed. See id. at 132-39, 101 S.Ct. at 434-38, 66 L.Ed.2d at 342-47; see

Miami-Dade Water & Sewer Auth. v. Inman, Inc.

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1981-08-11

Citation: 402 So. 2d 1277, 1981 Fla. App. LEXIS 20723

Snippet: argues that United States v. Spearin, 248 U.S. 132, 39 S.Ct. 59, 63 L.Ed. 166 (1918), and United States