Florida Statutes

Fla. Stat. § 448.102 (2025)

Prohibitions.

✓ 2025 Florida Statutes — current through the 2025 Regular Session

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us JustiaFla. Statutes CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

448.102 Prohibitions.—An employer may not take any retaliatory personnel action against an employee because the employee has:

(1) Disclosed, or threatened to disclose, to any appropriate governmental agency, under oath, in writing, an activity, policy, or practice of the employer that is in violation of a law, rule, or regulation. However, this subsection does not apply unless the employee has, in writing, brought the activity, policy, or practice to the attention of a supervisor or the employer and has afforded the employer a reasonable opportunity to correct the activity, policy, or practice.

(2) Provided information to, or testified before, any appropriate governmental agency, person, or entity conducting an investigation, hearing, or inquiry into an alleged violation of a law, rule, or regulation by the employer.

(3) Objected to, or refused to participate in, any activity, policy, or practice of the employer which is in violation of a law, rule, or regulation.

History.—s. 5, ch. 91-285.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 181 cases (60 in the last 5 years), 1993–2026 · leading case: Golf Channel v. Jenkins, 752 So. 2d 561 (Fla. 2000).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Golf Channel v. Jenkins, 752 So. 2d 561 (Fla. 2000). · cites it 50× “[1] See § 448.102-.103. Section 448.102 prohibits employers from taking three types of retaliatory personnel action: An employer may not take any retaliatory personnel action against an employee because the employee has: (1) Disclosed, or threatened to disclose, to any…”

Marc Wiersum v. U.S. Bank, N.A., 785 F.3d 483 (11th Cir. 2015). · cites it 9× “Bank in the Southern District of Florida on diversity jurisdiction and alleged a violation of the FWA, Fla. Stat. § 448.102 (3). U.S. Bank moved to dismiss Wiersum’s complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) for federal preemption.”

Jenkins v. Golf Channel, 714 So. 2d 558 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998). · cites it 29× “[1] The notice requirement of section 448.102, when read apart from section 408.”

Baiton v. Carnival Cruise Lines, Inc., 661 So. 2d 313 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995). · cites it 18× “§§ 448.102-.103(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (1993) (emphasis added; footnote omitted).”

Branche v. Airtran Airways, Inc., 342 F.3d 1248 (11th Cir. 2003). · cites it 4× “(“Airtran”), pursuant to Florida’s Whistle-blower Act, Fla. Stat. § 448.102 , is expressly pre-empted by the federal Airline Deregulation Act (“ADA”), 49 U.”

Pinder v. Bahamasair Holdings Ltd., Inc., 661 F. Supp. 2d 1348 (S.D. Fla. 2009). · cites it 17× “” Fla. Stat. § 448.102 (3). The FWA was enacted “to protect private employees who report or refuse to assist employers who violate laws enacted to protect the public,” Golf Channel v.”

White v. Purdue Pharma, Inc., 369 F. Supp. 2d 1335 (M.D. Fla. 2005). · cites it 12× “Specifically, Plaintiff claims that Defendant terminated her employment as a direct and proximate result of Plaintiffs objection and/or refusal to participate in Defendant’s illegal activity, policy or practice(s) in direct violation of Fla. Stat. § 448.102 (3). By their…”

Allocco v. City of Coral Gables, 221 F. Supp. 2d 1317 (S.D. Fla. 2002). · cites it 7× “es”), Alex Silva (“Silva”), and John Allen (“Allen”), filed a fifth amended complaint against the defendants, alleging as follows: count I, negligent misrepresentation (against UM); count II, retaliation in violation of First Amendment rights (by Allocco and Fernandez against…”

Graddy v. Wal-Mart Stores East, LP, 237 F. Supp. 3d 1223 (M.D. Fla. 2017). · cites it 6× “” § 448.102(2), Fla. Stat. (emphasis added).”

Kubiak v. S.W. Cowboy, Inc., 164 F. Supp. 3d 1344 (M.D. Fla. 2016). · cites it 4× “Additionally, in Counts VII and VIII, Plaintiffs Growling and Keating each allege that Defendants retaliated against him based on his involvement in this lawsuit, in violation of the Florida Private Whistleblower Protection Act, Fla. Stat. § 448.102 (“FWA”), and the FLSA’s…”

Walsh v. Arrow Air, Inc., 629 So. 2d 144 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993). · cites it 17× “§ 448.102, Fla. Stat. (1991). [4] Without question sections 112.”

Tyson v. Viacom, Inc., 890 So. 2d 1205 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005). · cites it 3× “See § 448.102, Fla. Stat. Therefore, the facts and evidence necessary to maintain this claim are the existence of the injunction against Gilman, Gilman's acts in violation of the injunction, his disclosure of the violations to the federal court in Oregon, and his termination by…”

Show all 181 citing cases →

— 448.102(1) — 19 cases

Golf Channel v. Jenkins, 752 So. 2d 561 (Fla. 2000). “[1] See § 448.102-.103. Section 448.102 prohibits employers from taking three types of retaliatory personnel action: An employer may not take any retaliatory personnel action against an employee because the employee has: (1) Disclosed, or threatened to disclose, to any…”

Jenkins v. Golf Channel, 714 So. 2d 558 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998). “[1] The notice requirement of section 448.102, when read apart from section 408.”

Baiton v. Carnival Cruise Lines, Inc., 661 So. 2d 313 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995). “§§ 448.102-.103(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (1993) (emphasis added; footnote omitted).”

Potomac Sys. Eng'g v. Deering, 683 So. 2d 180 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996).

Alexander v. Tandem Staffing Solutions, 881 So. 2d 607 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004).

— 448.102(1)(3) — 1 case

New World Commc'n of Tampa, Inc. v. Akre, 866 So. 2d 1231 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003).

— 448.102(2) — 15 cases

Graddy v. Wal-Mart Stores East, LP, 237 F. Supp. 3d 1223 (M.D. Fla. 2017). “” § 448.102(2), Fla. Stat. (emphasis added).”

Tyson v. Viacom, Inc., 890 So. 2d 1205 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005). “See § 448.102, Fla. Stat. Therefore, the facts and evidence necessary to maintain this claim are the existence of the injunction against Gilman, Gilman's acts in violation of the injunction, his disclosure of the violations to the federal court in Oregon, and his termination by…”

Pohl v. Se. Airlines, Inc., 880 So. 2d 766 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004).

Snow v. Ruden, McClosky, Smith, Schuster, 896 So. 2d 787 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005).

— 448.102(3) — 59 cases

Graddy v. Wal-Mart Stores East, LP, 237 F. Supp. 3d 1223 (M.D. Fla. 2017). “” § 448.102(2), Fla. Stat. (emphasis added).”

Baiton v. Carnival Cruise Lines, Inc., 661 So. 2d 313 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995). “§§ 448.102-.103(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (1993) (emphasis added; footnote omitted).”

Kearns v. Farmer Acquisition Co., 157 So. 3d 458 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015).

Morin v. Florida Power & Light Co., 963 So. 2d 258 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007).

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.