Syfert Injury Law Firm

Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation

Call Now: 904-383-7448
Florida Statute 466.019 | Lawyer Caselaw & Research
Link to State of Florida Official Statute
Statute is currently reporting as:
F.S. 466.019 Case Law from Google Scholar Google Search for Amendments to 466.019

The 2024 Florida Statutes

Title XXXII
REGULATION OF PROFESSIONS AND OCCUPATIONS
Chapter 466
DENTISTRY, DENTAL HYGIENE, AND DENTAL LABORATORIES
View Entire Chapter
F.S. 466.019
466.019 Advertising by dentists.
(1) As used in this section, the term “advertisement” means a representation disseminated in any manner or by any means to solicit patients, including, but not limited to, business cards, circulars, pamphlets, newspapers, websites, and social media.
(2) The purpose of this section is to ensure that the public has access to information which provides a sufficient basis upon which to make an informed selection of dentists while also ensuring that the public is protected from false or misleading advertisements which would detract from a fair and rational selection process. The board shall adopt rules to carry out the intent of this section, the purpose of which shall be to regulate the manner of such advertising in keeping with the provisions hereof.
(3) An advertisement by a licensed dentist may not contain any false, fraudulent, misleading, or deceptive statement or claim or any statement or claim which:
(a) Contains misrepresentations of fact;
(b) Is likely to mislead or deceive because in context it makes only a partial disclosure of relevant facts;
(c) Contains laudatory statements about the dentist or group of dentists;
(d) Is intended or is likely to create false, unjustified expectations of favorable results;
(e) Relates to the quality of dental services provided as compared to other available dental services;
(f) Is intended or is likely to appeal primarily to a layperson’s fears;
(g) Contains fee information without a disclaimer that such is a minimum fee only; or
(h) Contains other representations or implications that in reasonable probability will cause an ordinary, prudent person to misunderstand or to be deceived.
(4) An advertisement of dental services provided through telehealth as defined in s. 456.47(1) must include a disclaimer that reads, in a clearly legible font and size, “An in-person examination with a dentist licensed under chapter 466, Florida Statutes, is recommended before beginning telehealth treatment in order to prevent injury or harm” for each of the following services, if advertised:
(a) The taking of an impression or the digital scanning of the human tooth, teeth, or jaws, directly or indirectly and by any means or method.
(b) Furnishing, supplying, constructing, reproducing, or repairing any prosthetic denture, bridge, or appliance or any other structure designed to be worn in the human mouth.
(c) Placing an appliance or a structure in the human mouth or adjusting or attempting to adjust the appliance or structure.
(d) Correcting or attempting to correct malformations of teeth or jaws.
(5) For purposes of this section, D.D.S. or D.M.D. are synonymous and may be used interchangeably by licensed dentists who have graduated from an accredited American dental school with a D.D.S. or D.M.D. degree, when advertising dental services.
History.ss. 1, 3, ch. 79-330; ss. 2, 3, ch. 81-318; ss. 12, 23, 24, ch. 86-291; ss. 14, 60, ch. 91-137; s. 7, ch. 91-156; s. 4, ch. 91-429; s. 3, ch. 2024-214.

F.S. 466.019 on Google Scholar

F.S. 466.019 on Casetext

Amendments to 466.019


Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 466.019
Level: Degree
Misdemeanor/Felony: First/Second/Third

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 466.019.



Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases Citing Statute 466.019

Total Results: 5

Curtis v. Queen

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1987-06-25

Citation: 508 So. 2d 790, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 9024

Snippet: (Fla.1967), cert. denied, 389 U.S. 970, 88 S.Ct. 466, 19 L.Ed.2d 461 (1967). UPCHURCH, C.J., and DAUKSCH

Newby v. Newby

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1981-09-08

Citation: 403 So. 2d 562, 1981 Fla. App. LEXIS 21032

Snippet: 171 (Fla.), cert. denied, 389 U.S. 970, 88 S.Ct. 466, 19 L.Ed.2d 461 (1967). This identical issue is currently

Miranda v. Miranda

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1979-08-14

Citation: 374 So. 2d 599, 1979 Fla. App. LEXIS 21213

Snippet: (Fla.1967), cert. denied, 389 U.S. 970, 88 S.Ct. 466, 19 L.Ed.2d 461 (1967). AFFIRMED.

Mims v. Mims

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1974-10-31

Citation: 305 So. 2d 787

Snippet: 200 So.2d 171 cert. den., 389 U.S. 970, 88 S.Ct. 466, 19 L.Ed.2d 461 (1968); Corren v. Corren, Fla. 1950

Kluger v. White

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 1973-07-11

Citation: 281 So. 2d 1

Snippet: 171 (Fla.), cert. denied, 389 U.S. 970, 88 S.Ct. 466, 19 L.Ed.2d (1967); Shiver v. Sessions, 80 So.2d 905