Cases from cite.case.law:

BARONE, v. PALM BEACH HOTEL CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC., 262 So. 3d 767 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . Association, on appellant's retaliation claim under Florida's Private Sector Whistleblower Act, section 448.101 . . .

IN RE STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTIONS IN CIVIL CASES- REPORT NO., 230 So. 3d 815 (Fla. 2017)

. . . The definitions of retaliation and adverse employment action are derived from F.S. 448.101(5) and case . . .

DIEGO, v. VICTORY LAB, INC., 282 F. Supp. 3d 1275 (S.D. Fla. 2017)

. . . . § 448.101(2). Both parties in Scantland solely relied on these six factors. . . .

H. MOSER, v. FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,, 709 F. App'x 985 (11th Cir. 2017)

. . . . § 448.101, et seq., but Moser has abandoned any challenge that she could have raised to that adverse . . .

LAMBERT, v. WORLDWIDE MARKETING TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION, a, 708 F. App'x 559 (11th Cir. 2017)

. . . . § 448.101, et seq.-, that she had been discriminated against based on her religious beliefs and subjected . . .

DOE, v. JOHNS HOPKINS HEALTH SYSTEM CORPORATION, 274 F. Supp. 3d 355 (D. Md. 2017)

. . . . §§ 448.101, 448.102 (2013)). . . .

HALL, v. TEVA PHARMACEUTICAL USA, INC., 214 F. Supp. 3d 1281 (S.D. Fla. 2016)

. . . . § 448.101 et seq. (“FWA”) (Count III). . . .

USHER, v. NIPRO DIABETES SYSTEMS, INC., 184 So. 3d 1260 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . .” § 448.101(4), Fla. Stat. (2009). . . .

KUBIAK, v. S. W. COWBOY, INC. a d b a, 164 F. Supp. 3d 1344 (M.D. Fla. 2016)

. . . Stat. 448.101(4), a broad definition which presumably includes the FLSA. . . .

WIERSUM, v. U. S. BANK, N. A., 785 F.3d 483 (11th Cir. 2015)

. . . . § 448.101-.105. . . . Stat. §§ 448.102, 448.101(5). . . .

KEARNS, v. FARMER ACQUISITION COMPANY d b a, 157 So. 3d 458 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . Acquisition Company d/b/a Charlotte Honda (Charlotte Honda or the Employer), asserting a claim under sections 448.101 . . . state, or local statute or ordinance applicable to the employer and pertaining to the business.” § 448.101 . . .

SEJOUR, v. STEVEN DAVIS FARMS, LLC M., 28 F. Supp. 3d 1216 (N.D. Fla. 2014)

. . . . § 448.101 et seq., and the federal H-2A regulations, 20 C.F.R § 655.11 et seq. . . .

BONNAFANT, v. CHICO S FAS, INC., 17 F. Supp. 3d 1196 (M.D. Fla. 2014)

. . . . §§ 448.101-105. . . . Stat. 448.101(4). . . .

A. SILVERMAN, v. WELLS FARGO INSURANCE SERVICES USA, INC. a, 20 F. Supp. 3d 1357 (S.D. Fla. 2014)

. . . . § 448.101. . Count III also fails to allege an agreement among the Defendants. . . .

In CITIGROUP INC. SECURITIES LITIGATION. v. LLC, 987 F. Supp. 2d 377 (S.D.N.Y. 2013)

. . . . §§ 448.101 et seq. . . .

RAMIREZ, v. BAUSCH LOMB, INC., 546 F. App'x 829 (11th Cir. 2013)

. . . . § 448.101(4). . . . Ann. § 448.101(5). . . .

R. AERY, v. WALLACE LINCOLN- MERCURY, LLC d b a, 118 So. 3d 904 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2013)

. . . In July 2007, Aery filed his third amended complaint, in which he alleged one violation of section 448.101 . . .

BARNHART, v. LAMAR ADVERTISING COMPANY, LLC,, 523 F. App'x 635 (11th Cir. 2013)

. . . . §§ 448.101-.105. (Dkt. 1.) . . .

MORALES, v. FLORIDA REEMPLOYMENT ASSISTANCE APPEALS COMMISSION,, 106 So. 3d 81 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2013)

. . . . § 448.101, Fla. Stat. (2011). . . .

YARCHESKI, v. KEISER SCHOOL, INC. d. b. a., 508 F. App'x 916 (11th Cir. 2013)

. . . court properly dismissed Yarcheski’s claim under Florida’s Private Whistleblower Act (Florida Statute § 448.101 . . .

In STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTIONS IN CIVIL CASES- REPORT NO. UNLAWFUL RETALIATION, 95 So. 3d 106 (Fla. 2012)

. . . district courts in Florida has held that Florida’s private-sector whistle-blower provisions, sections 448.101 . . . of Damages to Present Value NOTE ON USE FOR 415 The instructions in this section are based upon F.S. 448.101 . . . July 28, 2008) (right to jury trial pursuant to the private-sector whistle-blower’s provisions, F.S. 448.101 . . . The definitions of retaliation and adverse employment action are derived from F.S. 448.101(5) and case . . .

SMITH, v. PSYCHIATRIC SOLUTIONS, INC., 864 F. Supp. 2d 1241 (N.D. Fla. 2012)

. . . . §§ 448.101, et seq. (see Doc. 150). . . .

TANAY v. ENCORE HEALTHCARE, LLC, 810 F. Supp. 2d 734 (E.D. Pa. 2011)

. . . . § 448.101 et seq., as implemented by 28 Pa.Code § 201.1 et seq. . . .

JUAREZ, v. NEW BRANCH CORP., 67 So. 3d 1159 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2011)

. . . . § 448.101(5), Fla. Stat. (2009). . . . .” § 448.101(4). . . .

ODUM, v. GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES INSURANCE COMPANY,, 405 F. App'x 396 (11th Cir. 2010)

. . . . §§ 448.101-448.105. . . .

A. GLEASON, v. ROCHE LABORATORIES, INC., 745 F. Supp. 2d 1262 (M.D. Fla. 2010)

. . . . §§ 448.101, et seq. (Count I), and the Florida Civil Rights Act (“FCRA”), Fla. . . .

BUSH, v. RAYTHEON COMPANY,, 373 F. App'x 936 (11th Cir. 2010)

. . . . § 448.101(4). . . . By the definition provided in section 448.101(4), the phrase ‘law, rule or regulation’ refers to enactments . . .

MYERS, v. CENTRAL FLORIDA INVESTMENTS, INC., 592 F.3d 1201 (11th Cir. 2010)

. . . . § 448.101-105, and negligent retention and supervision, a common law claim. . . .

NOVA SOUTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY, INC. a v. JACOBSON,, 25 So. 3d 82 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2009)

. . . and that her termination was retaliatory and thus violative of the Florida Whistleblower Act, section 448.101 . . .

ESCALA v. VICTORIA S SECRET STORES, LLC,, 727 F. Supp. 2d 1350 (S.D. Fla. 2009)

. . . . §§ 448.101-448.105. (D.E. 1 Exh. A). . . .

PINDER, v. BAHAMASAIR HOLDINGS LIMITED, INC. a, 661 F. Supp. 2d 1348 (S.D. Fla. 2009)

. . . . §§ 448.101-102 (emphasis added). . . .

BETTIS, v. TOYS R US, v. JP Co. v. v. D B, 646 F. Supp. 2d 1273 (S.D. Fla. 2009)

. . . . §§ 448.101, et seq. See D.E. 17. . . .

O. DIAZ, v. IMPEX OF DORAL, INC., 7 So. 3d 591 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2009)

. . . See § 448.101(3), Fla. Stat. (2002). . . . action is for damages because the defendants took “retaliatory personnel action,” as defined in section 448.101 . . . Section 448.101(4) defines “law, rule or regulation” as, “including] any statute or ordinance or any . . .

LATRECE LOCKETT, v. CHOICE HOTELS INTERNATIONAL, INC. d. b. a. U. S. LLC,, 315 F. App'x 862 (11th Cir. 2009)

. . . . § 448.101 et seq. After careful consideration of the entire record, we AFFIRM. I. . . .

JACKSON, v. GEO GROUP, INC., 312 F. App'x 229 (11th Cir. 2009)

. . . . § 448.101. . . .

LUNA, v. WALGREEN COMPANY d b a, 575 F. Supp. 2d 1326 (S.D. Fla. 2008)

. . . . § 448.101, et seq. In Count I, Ms. . . .

DIAZ, v. KAPLAN UNIVERSITY a k a a k a Co., 567 F. Supp. 2d 1394 (S.D. Fla. 2008)

. . . . §§ 448.101-448.105; and (9) Independent Tort of Conspiracy. . . . .

WALTERS, v. AMERICAN COACH LINES OF MIAMI, INC. a, 569 F. Supp. 2d 1270 (S.D. Fla. 2008)

. . . on Plaintiffs’ claims that they were terminated in violation of Florida’s Whistle-Blower’s Act, §§ 448.101 . . .

RUTLEDGE, a. k. a. v. SUNTRUST BANK,, 262 F. App'x 956 (11th Cir. 2008)

. . . . §§ 448.101-448-105. . . .

HOSPICECARE OF SOUTHEAST FLORIDA, INC. v. MAJOR, M. D., 968 So. 2d 117 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

. . . clear that the appellant’s claim against his former employer under the Whistle Blower Act, sections 448.101 . . .

D. MORIN, v. FLORIDA POWER LIGHT COMPANY,, 963 So. 2d 258 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

. . . of action under Florida’s Private Sector Whistleblower Act (“Whistleblower Act” or “Act”), section 448.101 . . . Section 448.101(2) of the Whistleblower Act defines “employee” as “a person who performs services for . . . The Fourth District Court of Appeal held that because the definition of “employer” in section 448.101 . . .

UNITED STATES, VARGAS, v. LACKMANN FOOD SERVICE, INC., 510 F. Supp. 2d 957 (M.D. Fla. 2007)

. . . Count VI — Whistleblower Retaliation in Violation of Florida Whis-tleblower Act, Florida Statutes § 448.101 . . . Section 448.101 et seq. (Doc. No. 16, ¶¶ 47-52). . . . Stat. § 448.101(5). . . .

ARCHDIOCESE OF MIAMI, INC. v. G. MI AGORRI,, 954 So. 2d 640 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

. . . See §§ 448.101-.105, Fla. Stat. (2006) (Florida’s Private Sector Whistleblower Act). . . .

RUIZ v. AEROREP GROUP CORP. d b a, 941 So. 2d 505 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006)

. . . which included a count alleging a cause of action under Florida’s Private Sector Whistleblower’s Act, § 448.101 . . .

CANALS, v. CENTRO MATER, INC., 200 F. App'x 881 (11th Cir. 2006)

. . . . §§ 448.101 et seq. We affirm. . . .

SMITH, Jr. v. HCA, INC. a d. b. a. a d. b. a., 183 F. App'x 854 (11th Cir. 2006)

. . . Smith also challenges the court’s jury instructions on his claim under the Florida Whistleblower Act, § 448.101 . . .

RIVERA, v. TORFINO ENTERPRISES, INC., 914 So. 2d 1087 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005)

. . . Florida Statute section 448.101 et. seq. is Florida’s private sector Whistleblower’s Act. . . .

LANE v. CAPITAL ACQUISITIONS,, 242 F.R.D. 667 (S.D. Fla. 2005)

. . . . § 448.101 (the "Whistle Blower Act”). . . .

BELL, v. GEORGIA- PACIFIC CORPORATION,, 390 F. Supp. 2d 1182 (M.D. Fla. 2005)

. . . .” § 448.101(5), Fla. Stat. (2004). . Gupta v. Fla. . . .

WALLACE, v. PUBLIC HEALTH TRUST OF DADE COUNTY, d b a, 370 F. Supp. 2d 1247 (S.D. Fla. 2005)

. . . The Plaintiff also brings suit for violation of the Florida Whistle-blower’s Act, Florida Statute §§ 448.101 . . .

TRACEY- MEDDOFF, v. J. ALTMAN HAIR BEAUTY CENTRE, INC., 899 So. 2d 1167 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005)

. . . the Altmans and the Hair & Beauty Centre under Florida’s private sector whistleblower act, sections 448.101 . . . Section 448.101(3) defines “Employer” as any private individual, firm, partnership, institution, corporation . . . The act imposes statutory liability only on an “employer” as defined in section 448.101(3), which includes . . . Section 448.101(3)’s definition of an “employer” is more precisely and narrowly drawn than the section . . .

CARMEN DeSOCIO, v. SONIC AUTOMOTIVE- U. S. HWY N d b a, 894 So. 2d 1064 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005)

. . . arbitrator denied any relief to DeSocio and concluded that Sonic was the prevailing party under section 448.101 . . . NORTHCUTT and SALCINES, JJ., Concur. , § 448.101-.105, Fla. Stat. (2001). . . .

WHITE, v. PURDUE PHARMA, INC., 369 F. Supp. 2d 1335 (M.D. Fla. 2005)

. . . . §§ 448.101 et seq. . . .

E. SNOW, v. RUDEN, McCLOSKY, SMITH, SCHUSTER RUSSELL, P. A., 896 So. 2d 787 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005)

. . . Snow’s suit alleged a violation of section 448.101(2) — (3), Florida Statutes (1999), part of what is . . . As defined by section 448.101(4), the term includes “any statute or ordinance or any rule or regulation . . . STRINGER and WALLACE, JJ., Concur. . §§ 448.101-.105, Fla. Stat. (1999). . . . .

UNDERWOOD, v. RHONE- POULENC RORER PHARMACEUTICALS, INC., 890 So. 2d 429 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004)

. . . These acts are sections 448.101-.105, Florida Statutes (1997), and sections 760.01-.il, Florida Statutes . . .

SELIM, v. PAN AMERICAN AIRWAYS CORP., 889 So. 2d 149 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004)

. . . Count III set forth a claim of violation of the Florida Whistleblower Act, Florida Statutes section 448.101 . . .

G. DELAURIER, v. AMERICAN WELDING SOCIETY, INC., 881 So. 2d 613 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004)

. . . clear that the appellant’s claim against his former employer under the Whistle Blower Act, sections 448.101 . . .

M. ALEXANDER, v. TANDEM STAFFING SOLUTIONS, INC. a L. L. C. a a, 881 So. 2d 607 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004)

. . . The Florida Whistleblower Act is found at sections 448.101-.105, Florida Statutes (2003). . . .

P. ROLAND, v. FLORIDA EAST COAST RAILWAY, LLC f k a a, 873 So. 2d 1271 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004)

. . . See § 448.101-448.105, Fla. Stat. (2000). . . .

DAHL, v. ECKERD FAMILY YOUTH ALTERNATIVES, INC. a d b a, 843 So. 2d 956 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2003)

. . . court’s supplemental jurisdiction, violations of Florida’s private-sector whistleblower act, sections 448.101 . . . individual, firm, partnership, institution, corporation, or association that employs ten or more persons.” § 448.101 . . . She was an employee — as that term is defined in section 448.101(2) — of Eckerd Family Youth Alternatives . . . complaint also suffice to state a good cause of action under the private sector whistle-blower’s act, §§ 448.101 . . .

NEW WORLD COMMUNICATIONS OF TAMPA, INC. d b a WTVT- TV, v. AKRE,, 866 So. 2d 1231 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2003)

. . . .” § 448.101(4), Fla. Stat. (1997). . . . that the whistle-blower’s statute specifically limits the definition of “rule” to an “adopted” rule. § 448.101 . . .

SMITH, v. UNEMPLOYMENT APPEALS COMMISSION U. S., 831 So. 2d 249 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

. . . substantial, competent evidence that Smith was guilty of misconduct connected with work pursuant to section 448.101 . . .

A. MCMILLAN, v. REGENERATION TECHNOLOGIES, INC. A D,, 243 F. Supp. 2d 1324 (M.D. Fla. 2002)

. . . . § 448.101 et seq. . . . .

ALLOCCO, v. CITY OF CORAL GABLES, A A, 221 F. Supp. 2d 1317 (S.D. Fla. 2002)

. . . . § 448.101 et seq.) and public-sector (Fla.Stat. § 112.3187) whistleblower statutes are similar in that . . .

R. TERRELL, v. AMSOUTH INVESTMENT SERVICES, INC., 217 F. Supp. 2d 1233 (M.D. Fla. 2002)

. . . Terrell filed a complaint in state court pursuant to Florida’s private Whistle-Blower Act, sections 448.101 . . .

L. PADRON, v. BELLSOUTH TELECOMMUNICATIONS, INC. a, 196 F. Supp. 2d 1250 (S.D. Fla. 2002)

. . . . § 448.101(5) [emphasis added]. . . .

PRUDENTIAL SECURITIES, INC. v. KATZ,, 807 So. 2d 173 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

. . . Thereafter, Katz sought statutory relief under the Florida Whistle Blower Act, sections 448.101 through . . .

ALLEGHENY GENERAL HOSPITAL d b a St. d b a s s- St. s v. PHILIP MORRIS, INC. R. J. B. A. T. PLC c o USA, d b a St. d b a s s- St. s d b a St. d b a s s- St. s, 228 F.3d 429 (3d Cir. 2000)

. . . . §§ 448.101-448.904b, and are required by Pennsylvania law to provide health care to Medicaid, medically . . .

M. TYSON, v. VIACOM, INC. a, 760 So. 2d 276 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

. . . Section 448.101(4) states that the statutory term law, rule, or regulation: “includes any statute or . . . enforcement of laws, rules, or regulations governing an activity, policy, or practice of an. employer.” § 448.101 . . .

GILLYARD, v. DELTA HEALTH GROUP, INC. d b a, 757 So. 2d 601 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

. . . order requiring evacuation of Flagler County is not a law, rule or regulation as is defined in Section 448.101 . . . Sections 448.101-448.105, F.S. is the Florida private sector Whistleblower’s Act. . . . Section 448.101(4) F.S. defines that phrase: Law, rule or regulation includes any statute or ordinance . . . requiring mandatory evacuation of Flagler County is a law, rule or regulation as defined in Section 448.101 . . .

GOLF CHANNEL, v. JENKINS,, 752 So. 2d 561 (Fla. 2000)

. . . Sections 448.101-.105, Florida Statutes (1995), commonly known as the Whistle-Blower Act, are remedial . . . employment action taken by an employer against an employee in the terms and conditions of employment.” § 448.101 . . .

McEOWEN, v. JONES CHEMICAL, INC., 745 So. 2d 991 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)

. . . Inc., on his counter-claim for wrongful termination under Florida’s whistle-blower statute, sections 448.101 . . .

ST. HILAIRE v. THE PEP BOYS- MANNY, MOE AND JACK, a, 73 F. Supp. 2d 1350 (S.D. Fla. 1999)

. . . . § 448.101 et seq.) . . .

C. GLENN, v. UNEMPLOYMENT APPEALS COMMISSION,, 731 So. 2d 868 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)

. . . .’ § 448.101(l)(a), Fla. Stat. (1995).” . . .

J. MOLENDA, v. HOECHST CELANESE CORPORATION,, 60 F. Supp. 2d 1294 (S.D. Fla. 1999)

. . . . § 448.101(5). . . . Fla.Stat. § 448.101(4). . . .

D. GRAY, v. WEBCO GENERAL PARTNERSHIP, a, 36 F. Supp. 2d 1331 (M.D. Fla. 1999)

. . . Plaintiff may not pursue a cause of action in Count III under Florida’s Whistleblower Act, sections 448.101 . . .

WALLACE, v. SCHOOL BOARD OF ORANGE COUNTY, FLORIDA,, 41 F. Supp. 2d 1321 (M.D. Fla. 1998)

. . . . § 448.101(3). The plaintiff does not dispute that the School Board is a governmental entity. . . .

JENKINS, v. GOLF CHANNEL a k a, TGC,, 714 So. 2d 558 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998)

. . . TGC, Inc., for failure to state a cause of action under Florida’s Whistle Blower Protection Act, §§ 448.101 . . .

C. CROSBY, v. UNEMPLOYMENT APPEALS COMMISSION,, 711 So. 2d 260 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998)

. . . See § 448.101, Fla. Stat. (Supp.1996). Dev-ereaux appealed that decision. . . .

GOLDEN, v. DODGE- MARKHAM CO. INC., 1 F. Supp. 2d 1360 (M.D. Fla. 1998)

. . . . §§ 448.101-448.105. (Docket No. 2, ¶ 1.) . . .

ROBINSON, v. JEWISH CENTER TOWERS, INC., 993 F. Supp. 1475 (M.D. Fla. 1998)

. . . Section 3730(h), and the Florida Whistleblower’s Act, Section 448.101, et seq., pursuant to Federal Rule . . .

EDWARD WATERS COLLEGE, INC. v. JOHNSON,, 707 So. 2d 801 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998)

. . . terminated from her position at the college in violation of Florida’s Whistle-Blower’s Act, sections 448.101 . . .

FROMM- VANE, v. LAWNWOOD MEDICAL CENTER, INC. d b a HCA, 995 F. Supp. 1471 (S.D. Fla. 1997)

. . . . § 448.101 et seq., the Court determines that the whistle-blower’s claim is not so related to the ADA . . .

CRAY, v. NATIONSBANK OF NORTH CAROLINA, N. A., 982 F. Supp. 850 (M.D. Fla. 1997)

. . . by the filing of a Complaint seeking damages for violation of the Florida Whistleblower Act, Section 448.101 . . .

J. SCHULTZ, Jr. v. TAMPA ELECTRIC COMPANY,, 704 So. 2d 605 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1997)

. . . . §§ 448.101-105, Fla.Stat. (1995). We affirm. . . .

REHMAN, v. ECC INTERNATIONAL CORP., 698 So. 2d 921 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1997)

. . . s fees were awarded to ECC as the “prevailing party” under Florida’s Whistle-blower’s Act, sections 448.101 . . .

UNC ARDCO, INC. v. LUCKNER,, 685 So. 2d 29 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)

. . . Luekner, the plaintiff below, sued Unc and Unc Ardco under Florida’s Whistle-blower’s Act, sections 448.101 . . .

POTOMAC SYSTEMS ENGINEERING, INC. a v. A. DEERING,, 683 So. 2d 180 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)

. . . . §§ 448.101-.105, Fla.Stat. (1991). . . .

A. PARK, v. FIRST UNION BROKERAGE SERVICES, INC., 926 F. Supp. 1085 (M.D. Fla. 1996)

. . . . §§ 448.101-105 (1993), erred by not requiring that Park give notice to FUBS in writing, rather than . . .

BAITON, v. CARNIVAL CRUISE LINES, INC., 661 So. 2d 313 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)

. . . discharge under federal maritime law and under Florida’s private sector whistle-blower statute, section 448.101 . . . Baiton also asserted a claim under the Florida whistle-blower statute, sections 448.101-.105, Florida . . . Id. §§ 448.101(5), 448.103; see also Forrester v. John H. . . .

ZOMBORI, v. DIGITAL EQUIPMENT CORP., 878 F. Supp. 207 (N.D. Fla. 1995)

. . . In Count I of her complaint, Zombori states a claim under Fla.Stat. ch. 448.101-.105, Florida’s “Whistle-blower . . .

ARROW AIR, INC. v. WALSH,, 645 So. 2d 422 (Fla. 1994)

. . . Ch. 91-285, §§ 4-8, Laws of Fla., codified at §§ 448.101-.105, Fla.Stat. (1993). . . . . Section 448.101(5), Florida Statutes (1993), defines "retaliatory personnel action” as "the discharge . . .

G. HUTCHISON, v. PRUDENTIAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, INC., 645 So. 2d 1047 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)

. . . complaint also suffice to state a good cause of action under the private sector whistle-blower’s act, §§ 448.101 . . . that on remand plaintiff be given an opportunity to amend to plead an alternative claim under sections 448.101 . . .

PATTERSON, v. DOWNTOWN MEDICAL AND DIAGNOSTIC CENTER, INC., 866 F. Supp. 1379 (M.D. Fla. 1994)

. . . . § 12101 et seq. of the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA); 2) violation of sections 448.101-105, . . . illegal actions regarding her Baker Act proceedings, in violation of the Florida Whistle-blower’s Act § 448.101 . . . illegal actions regarding her Baker Act proceedings, in violation of the Florida Whistle-blower’s Act § 448.101 . . .

FORRESTER, v. JOHN H. PHIPPS, INC. d b a WCTV-, 643 So. 2d 1109 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)

. . . The lower court viewed section 448.101-105 to be a type of “whistle-blower” act concerning violations . . . On appeal, appellant argues that sections 448.101-105, Florida Statutes (1991), modify the “at-will” . . . Crowley Maritime Corp., 825 F.Supp. 1007 (S.D.Fla.1993), the federal court determined that section 448.101 . . . Section 448.101, "Definitions," subsection (4) reads as follows: (4) “Law, rule, or regulation" includes . . . Given the placement of commas in section 448.101(4), we view the phrase "pertaining to the business" . . .

SCHROEDER, v. CROWLEY MARITIME CORPORATION,, 825 F. Supp. 1007 (S.D. Fla. 1993)

. . . . § 448.101 et seq., -which prohibits an employer from taking retaliatory personnel action against an . . . Maritime has filed this motion to dismiss, or alternatively for summary judgment, arguing that Fla.Stat. § 448.101 . . . The Florida Whistleblower Statute, Fla.Stat. § 448.101 et seq., prohibits an employer from taking retaliatory . . .

WALSH, v. ARROW AIR, INC., 629 So. 2d 144 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)

. . . In defining terms used in the chapter, section 448.101(4), provides that any law, rule, or regulation . . .

CHALFIN, v. BEVERLY ENTERPRISES, INC., 745 F. Supp. 1117 (E.D. Pa. 1990)

. . . . §§ 448.101-448.904 (Purdon Supp.1989), the Pennsylvania Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection . . .

KRUEGER, v. FLORIDA UNEMPLOYMENT APPEALS COMMISSION,, 555 So. 2d 1225 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1989)

. . . .” § 448.101(1)(a), Fla.Stat. (1987). This statutory disqualification requires a twofold analysis. . . .

CHALFIN, v. BEVERLY ENTERPRISES, INC., 741 F. Supp. 1162 (E.D. Pa. 1989)

. . . . §§ 448.101-448.904 (Purdon Supp.1989), the Pennsylvania Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection . . .