The 2023 Florida Statutes (including Special Session C)

Title XIV
TAXATION AND FINANCE

Chapter 210
TAX ON TOBACCO PRODUCTS

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 210.10

210.10 General powers of the Division of Alcoholic Beverages and Tobacco.—The Division of Alcoholic Beverages and Tobacco has authority to adopt rules pursuant to ss. 120.536(1) and 120.54 to implement the provisions of this part. All cigarette permits issued hereunder shall have printed thereon a notice to the effect that such permit is issued subject to the provisions of this part and such rules. The division shall provide upon request without charge to any applicant for a permit a copy of this part and the rules prescribed by it pursuant hereto.

History.—s. 7, ch. 21946, 1943; s. 8, ch. 22645, 1945; s. 1, ch. 26320, 1949; s. 7, ch. 29615, 1955; ss. 16, 35, ch. 69-106; s. 6, ch. 77-421; s. 7, ch. 87-86; s. 18, ch. 98-200; s. 1, ch. 2000-323; s. 2, ch. 2000-340.

F.S. 210.10 on Google Scholar

F.S. 210.10 on Casetext

Amendments to 210.10

Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 210.10

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

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 210.10.

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases from cite.case.law:

AMARIN PHARMA, INC. v. INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION, DSM NV, DSM S. A. C. DSM LLC, DSM LLC, In, 923 F.3d 959 (Fed. Cir. 2019)

. . . Rule 210.10 provides that "[t]he Commission shall determine whether the complaint is properly filed and . . . whether an investigation should be instituted on the basis of the complaint." 19 C.F.R. § 210.10(a)( . . . institute an investigation on the basis of the complaint, the complaint shall be dismissed." 19 C.F.R. § 210.10 . . . . § 210.10(c) (2018) ("If the [ITC] determines not to institute an investigation on the basis of the . . .

LAERDAL MEDICAL CORP. v. INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION,, 910 F.3d 1207 (Fed. Cir. 2018)

. . . . § 210.10(c) ("If the Commission determines not to institute an investigation on the basis of the complaint . . . insufficient, it should have requested additional information or denied institution under Rules 210.9 and 210.10 . . .

UNITED STATES EX REL. HENDRICKSON v. BANK OF AMERICA, N. A., 343 F. Supp. 3d 610 (N.D. Tex. 2018)

. . . . § 210.10(a), "An RDFI shall be liable to the Federal Government for the total amount of all benefit . . . instructing the appropriate Federal Reserve Bank to debit the account utilized by the RDFI. 31 C.F.R. § 210.10 . . . See 31 C.F.R. § 210.10(a) ("An RDFI shall be liable to the Federal Government for the total amount of . . .

UNITED COOK INLET DRIFT ASSOCIATION s v. NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE W. NMFS, 837 F.3d 1055 (9th Cir. 2016)

. . . . § 210.10 (repealed). . . .

IN RE LEAPFROG ENTERPRISE, INC. SECURITIES LITIGATION, To, 200 F. Supp. 3d 987 (N.D. Cal. 2016)

. . . . § 210.10-01(a). . . .

SUAREZ, v. W. COLVIN,, 102 F. Supp. 3d 552 (S.D.N.Y. 2015)

. . . physicians documents that,, at the most, [Suarez] can perform sedentary work, he is disabled under Rule 210.10 . . . Therefore, [he] would meet GRID rule 210.10, which states that a claimant between the ages of 50 and . . .

ANILAO, v. J. SPOTA, III,, 774 F. Supp. 2d 457 (E.D.N.Y. 2011)

. . . arrested pursuant to a warrant, the Sentosa defendants point to New York Criminal Procedure Law Section 210.10 . . . C.P.L. § 210.10(3). . . .

UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION, v. JAFFE,, 433 B.R. 538 (E.D. Va. 2010)

. . . . § 210.10(b), and the initial determinations of ALJs, which may be reviewed by the six-member Commission . . . original complaint... .”); id. § 210.9 (detailing actions required on receipt of complaint). . 19 C.F.R. § 210.10 . . .

SIGNATURE PHARMACY, INC. v. P. SOARES, B. s, 717 F. Supp. 2d 1276 (M.D. Fla. 2010)

. . . CPL § 210.10 on a prior, superseded indictment. . . .

SLAYTON, M. v. AMERICAN EXPRESS COMPANY, R. M., 604 F.3d 758 (2d Cir. 2010)

. . . . § 210.10-01. . . .

CITILINE HOLDINGS, INC. v. ISTAR FINANCIAL INC., 701 F. Supp. 2d 506 (S.D.N.Y. 2010)

. . . . § 210.10-01(a)(5). . . .

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, v. C. CONAWAY, T. Jr., 698 F. Supp. 2d 771 (E.D. Mich. 2010)

. . . . § 210.10-01(d)” that regulation did not turn Deloitte’s total silence regarding these quarterly reviews . . .

AMIDA CAPITAL MANAGEMENT II, LLC, v. CERBERUS CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, L. P. LLC, L. P. L. L. C. F. A., 669 F. Supp. 2d 430 (S.D.N.Y. 2009)

. . . . § 210.10-01(d). . . .

SIEGEL v. WARNER BROS. ENTERTAINMENT INC. DC, 690 F. Supp. 2d 1048 (C.D. Cal. 2009)

. . . [I]t cannot be disputed that on its face section 210.10(e)(1) makes exceptions for ‘harmless errors,’ . . . No doubt utilization of a formulation based on the specific categories of information set forth in 210.10 . . .

SIEGEL v. WARNER BROS. ENTERTAINMENT INC. DC, 658 F. Supp. 2d 1036 (C.D. Cal. 2009)

. . . In reaching this conclusion, the Second Circuit did not discuss section 210.10(a)(l)’s harmless error . . .

FLORIDA CLEAN WATER NETWORK, INC. v. L. GROSSKRUGER,, 587 F. Supp. 2d 1236 (M.D. Fla. 2008)

. . . . § 210.10(a)(3). . . .

UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, v. E. SNYDER, Jr., 292 F. App'x 391 (5th Cir. 2008)

. . . . § 210.10-01(b)(8) (emphasis added). . . .

WALKER, v. POOLE,, 547 F. Supp. 2d 238 (W.D.N.Y. 2008)

. . . . § 210.10 — which is exactly what he now contends that trial counsel failed to do. . . .

DIXON, v. P. McGINNIS,, 492 F. Supp. 2d 343 (S.D.N.Y. 2007)

. . . . § 210.10, to dismiss the indictment on the grounds that Dixon had not been afforded the right to testify . . .

LATTANZIO, C. G. R. M. F. v. DELOITTE TOUCHE LLP, S. P., 476 F.3d 147 (2d Cir. 2007)

. . . . § 210.10-01(d), and plaintiffs allege that Deloitte did. . . . This argument rests on 17 C.F.R. § 210.10 — 01(d): Prior to filing, interim financial statements included . . . True, § 210.10-01{d) is a federal regulation promulgated by the SEC. . . . Alternatively, plaintiffs argue that § 210.10-01 (d) imposes on accountants an actionable duty under . . . If § 210.10-01(d) and the public’s knowledge of what § 210.10-01(d) requires were sufficient to support . . .

R. LUCIUS, v. H. FILION,, 431 F. Supp. 2d 343 (W.D.N.Y. 2006)

. . . Commencement adversely frustrated the procedures set forth in [New York Criminal Procedure Law] §§ 100.05 and 210.10 . . .

SHEKHEM EL- BEY, v. CITY OF NEW YORK W. DOC DOC R. Jr. DOC W. DOC ALJ OATH L. ALJ OATH, 419 F. Supp. 2d 546 (S.D.N.Y. 2006)

. . . ”) found plaintiff guilty of, among other violations, the crime of perjury under Penal Law sections 210.10 . . .

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, v. C. GUENTHNER, M., 395 F. Supp. 2d 835 (D. Neb. 2005)

. . . . § 210.10-01(a)(l); California Pub. Employees’ Ret. Sys. v. . . .

CALIFORNIA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT SYSTEM, N. v. CHUBB CORPORATION R. O B. B. J. H. V., 394 F.3d 126 (3d Cir. 2004)

. . . . § 210.10-01(a). . • Plaintiffs rely on a “former marketing vice president" for the observation that . . .

MEDIA GENERAL, INC. A v. R. TOMLIN, Jr., 387 F.3d 865 (D.C. Cir. 2004)

. . . . §§ 240.13a-ll; 210.10-01(a)(5) (2004). . . .

DRUSKIN, v. ANSWERTHINK, INC., 299 F. Supp. 2d 1307 (S.D. Fla. 2004)

. . . . §§ 210.10-01(5), 210.4-08(k). . . .

In WORLDCOM, INC. SECURITIES LITIGATION, 219 F.R.D. 267 (S.D.N.Y. 2003)

. . . . § 210.10-01. . . . . § 210.10 — 01 (a.)(5). . . . .

R. ROMINE, v. ACXIOM CORPORATION,, 296 F.3d 701 (8th Cir. 2002)

. . . . §§ 210.10-01(5), 229.303(b). . . .

In RENT- WAY SECURITIES LITIGATION, 209 F. Supp. 2d 493 (W.D. Pa. 2002)

. . . . § 210.10-01(d), effective March 15, 2000 and applicable to Rent-Way’s quarterly financial statements . . . report of the accountant on the review must be filed with the interim-financial statements. 17 C.F.R. § 210.10 . . .

JERELDS, H. v. THE CITY OF ORLANDO, a, 194 F. Supp. 2d 1305 (M.D. Fla. 2002)

. . . .) $28,305.50 (210.10 hours) in fees defending against plaintiffs’ class action efforts and $1,223.50 . . .

UNITED STATES v. K. HANDAKAS,, 286 F.3d 92 (2d Cir. 2002)

. . . Penal Law § 210.10 (McKinney 1999) (defining perjury in the second degree as a “class E felony”). . . .

In SEGUE SOFTWARE, INC. SECURITIES LITIGATION, 106 F. Supp. 2d 161 (D. Mass. 2000)

. . . . § 210.10-01(a)) requires, with limited exceptions, that interim financial statements follow a prescribed . . .

R. RUSHING v. KANSAS CITY SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY,, 185 F.3d 496 (5th Cir. 1999)

. . . . § 210.10, the district court held that the FRSA preempted the Rushings’ excessive whistling complaint . . .

UNITED STATES v. SERAFINI, 167 F.3d 812 (3d Cir. 1999)

. . . N.Y.Penal Law § 210.10. . . .

TRANSACTIVE CORPORATION, v. UNITED STATES E., 91 F.3d 232 (D.C. Cir. 1996)

. . . . § 210.10. . . .

PEOPLE MAULA, v. FRECKLETON,, 782 F. Supp. 889 (S.D.N.Y. 1992)

. . . See CPL § 210.10. Justice Warner denied this motion. . . .

COKER, v. R. BOWEN, M. D., 715 F. Supp. 383 (D.D.C. 1989)

. . . . § 210.10. . . .

QUINCE ORCHARD VALLEY CITIZENS ASSOCIATION, INC. v. P. HODEL, U. S. H. IV, U. S. A. R. III, U. S., 872 F.2d 75 (4th Cir. 1989)

. . . . § 210.10(a). . . .

WILSON, v. GREAT AMERICAN INDUSTRIES, INC. a a I. E. M. Co- L., 855 F.2d 987 (2d Cir. 1988)

. . . . § 210.10-01(a)(l). . . .

WILSON, v. GREAT AMERICAN INDUSTRIES, INC. a a I. E. M. Co- L., 661 F. Supp. 1555 (N.D.N.Y. 1987)

. . . . § 210.10-01(a)(l) provides: § 210.10-01 Interim financial statements. (a) Condensed statements. . . .

SEMINOLE TRIBE OF FLORIDA, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS REGULATION,, 20 Fla. Supp. 2d 208 (Fla. Div. Admin. Hearings 1985)

. . . The proposed rule cites as specific authority for its promulgation Sections 210.09, 210.10(1), and 210.11 . . . Section 210.10(1) provides: The Division of Alcoholic Beverages and Tobacco is authorized to prescribe . . . The proposed rule cites Section 210.09, 210.10, and 210.11 as authority for the proposed rule although . . .

BREAULT, v. M. HECKLER, T., 591 F. Supp. 308 (D. Conn. 1984)

. . . Samperi, 190 Conn. 412, 461 A.2d 681 (1983). . 31 C.F.R. 210.10(a). . . . . § 210.10(e); Treasury Form RO-133 and Treasury’s "Green Book” provide similar instructions. . 31 C.F.R . . . . § 210.10(a). . . .

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION v. DIVERSIFIED GROWTH CORP., 595 F. Supp. 1159 (D.D.C. 1984)

. . . First, the financial statements do not contain quarterly comparisons as is required by 17 CFR § 210.10 . . .

DOCKSTADER, v. G. MILLER, S., 719 F.2d 327 (10th Cir. 1983)

. . . . § 210.10(a), Form RO-133, and section 4 of the Treasury Department’s Green Book apparently do direct . . . In 31 C.F.R. § 210.10(a), Treasury instructs banks to collect the amount owed to the government by returning . . . appropriate Federal Reserve Bank to debit the bank’s account with the Federal Reserve Bank. 31 C.F.R. § 210.10 . . . date of death ..., and a list of credit payments ... which have not been returned .... ” 31 C.F.R. § 210.10 . . .

BEAUCHESNE v. P. NIMMO, T. a, 562 F. Supp. 250 (D. Conn. 1983)

. . . . § 210.10, entitled “Collection Procedures”, which provides, in pertinent part: “(a) For each type of . . . Society argues that it cannot be held liable for following the collection procedures contained in § 210.10 . . . See 31 C.F.R. § 210.10(a)-(b) The federal defendants’ reliance on the more restrictive term “recipient . . . Section 210.10(a) is the regulation that provides specific instructions for collection procedures and . . . The Green Book provides additional support for the Court’s conclusion that 38 C.F.R. § 210.10(a) directed . . .

T S SERVICE ASSOCIATES, INC. L. v. CRENSON, 505 F. Supp. 938 (D.R.I. 1981)

. . . . § 210.10. Minimum amounts of particular food components are delineated therein. Id. . . . .

BURROUGHS, v. METRO- GOLDWYN- MAYER, INC., 491 F. Supp. 1320 (S.D.N.Y. 1980)

. . . . § 210.10(b)(2). . . .

LONGVIEW REFINING COMPANY v. W. R. SHORE, d b a, 554 F.2d 1006 (Temp. Emer. Ct. App. 1977)

. . . months of January and February, 1974, which are involved in this lawsuit, the regulation stated: § 210.10 . . .

YEE- LITT v. L. RICHARDSON, 353 F. Supp. 996 (N.D. Cal. 1973)

. . . . § 210.10 (a)5, which allows the State to implement this fact-policy system of distinguishing among . . .

A. FISCHER v. T. WEAVER,, 55 F.R.D. 454 (N.D. Ill. 1972)

. . . . § 210.10(a). . . .

U. HILL, v. STATE, 238 So. 2d 608 (Fla. 1970)

. . . . § 210.10, F.S.A. . Fla.Stat. §§ 561.07, 562.031 and 562.41, F.S.A. See City of Jacksonville v. . . .

VALLEY EXPRESS, INC. v. UNITED STATES, 264 F. Supp. 1006 (W.D. Wis. 1966)

. . . .-10(a): “210.10 Interstate operations by motor common carriers within a single State under State authority . . .

v., 46 T.C. 641 (T.C. 1966)

. . . SO, 1954 Date Amount Jan. 5_ $1, 000.00 Noy. 17-5, 771.51 Nov. 19-210.10 Fiscal Yeah Ended Nov. 30, 1955 . . .

CENTRAL MARYLAND LINES, INC. v. UNITED STATES, 240 F. Supp. 254 (D. Md. 1965)

. . . On October 16, 1962, in purported compliance with 49 C.F.R. 210.10, the ICC’s published procedure for . . . proposed operations and comply with other regulations regarding issuance and tariff filing, 49 C.F.R. 210.10 . . .

HART v. INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION v. MIDWEST MOTOR EXPRESS, INC. a a E. O. a M R, 226 F. Supp. 635 (D. Minn. 1964)

. . . their inception,” it must have held that Trucking never reached second proviso status. . 49 C.F.R. 210.10 . . .

A. v., 12 B.T.A. 681 (B.T.A. 1928)

. . . From the sum of these figures he reached an average of $210.10, which he proceded to reduce to $200 because . . .