Florida Statute 161.25 | Lawyer Caselaw & Research

The 2024 Florida Statutes

Title XI
COUNTY ORGANIZATION AND INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS

Chapter 161
BEACH AND SHORE PRESERVATION

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 161.25

161.25 County beach and shore preservation authority; board of county commissioners.—To carry out the beach and shore preservation program, the board of county commissioners of any county and its successors in office, as an ex officio duty, are hereby severally constituted as the beach and shore preservation authority for their county. In this capacity, any such board of county commissioners may at its own initiative take all necessary steps as soon as practicable and desirable to implement the provisions of this chapter.

History.—s. 1, ch. 65-408.

F.S. 161.25 on Google Scholar

F.S. 161.25 on Casetext

Amendments to 161.25

Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 161.25

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

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 161.25.

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases Citing Statute 161.25

Total Results: 6

Ago

Court: Florida Attorney General Reports | Date Filed: 2000-06-27

Snippet: governing body of water and sewer district); and s. 161.25, Fla. Stat. (county commissioners exofficio beach

Faust v. Faust

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1987-04-10

Citation: 505 So. 2d 606, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 1005

Snippet: retirement plan which one expert valued at $141,645 to $161,025. The wife petitioned for dissolution requesting

Cross Key Waterways v. Askew

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1977-08-10

Citation: 351 So. 2d 1062, 8 Envtl. L. Rep. (Envtl. Law Inst.) 20

Snippet: 210, .215; 163.360; 163.567; 163.611; 163.622; 161.25; 161.35; 125.01(g)-(j); 177.071; 166.021, Florida

City of Hialeah v. Willey

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1969-11-04

Citation: 227 So. 2d 725, 1969 Fla. App. LEXIS 5171

Snippet: amount of the back pay for such period would be $18,161.25. The trial court held that Willey was entitled

Grubstein v. Urban Renewal Agency of City of Tampa

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 1959-11-18

Citation: 115 So. 2d 745

Snippet: L.R. 280, 312 and 429; 12 F.L.R. 45; 10 M.L.Q. 161; 25 Ch.L. 313; 101 U. of Pa.L.R. 411; 39 Va.L.R. 236;

Fed. Land Bk. of Columbia v. Godwin

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 1931-08-07

Citation: 136 So. 513, 107 Fla. 537

Snippet: Savings Bank vs. Bierstadt, 168 Ill. 618, 48 N.E. 161, 25 R. C. L. 1339-40. In representing that there were