Syfert Injury Law Firm

Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation

Call Now: 904-383-7448
Florida Statute 485 | Lawyer Caselaw & Research
Link to State of Florida Official Statute
Statute is currently reporting as:
F.S. 485 Case Law from Google Scholar Google Search for Amendments to 485

The 2024 Florida Statutes

Title XXXII
REGULATION OF PROFESSIONS AND OCCUPATIONS
Chapter 485
HYPNOSIS
View Entire Chapter
CHAPTER 485
CHAPTER 485
HYPNOSIS
485.001 Short title.
485.002 Legislative intent.
485.003 Definitions.
485.004 When practice of hypnosis prohibited.
485.005 Penalties.
485.001 Short title.—This chapter shall be known as the “Hypnosis Law.”
History.—s. 2, ch. 61-506; s. 201, ch. 2000-160.
Note.—Former s. 456.30.
485.002 Legislative intent.—
(1) It is recognized that hypnosis has attained a significant place as another technique in the treatment of human injury, disease, and illness, both mental and physical; that the utilization of hypnotic techniques for therapeutic purposes should be restricted to certain practitioners of the healing arts who are qualified by professional training to fulfill the necessary criteria required for diagnosis and treatment of human illness, disease, or injury within the scope of their own particular field of competence; or that such hypnotic techniques should be employed by qualified individuals who work under the direction, supervision, or prescription of such practitioners.
(2) It is the intent of the Legislature to provide for certain practitioners of the healing arts, such as a trained and qualified dentist, to use hypnosis for hypnoanesthesia or for the allaying of anxiety in relation to dental work; however, under no circumstances shall it be legal or proper for the dentist or the individual to whom the dentist may refer the patient, to use hypnosis for the treatment of the neurotic difficulties of a patient. The same applies to the optometrist, podiatric physician, chiropractic physician, osteopathic physician, or physician of medicine.
(3) It is, therefore, the intent and purpose of this chapter to regulate the practice of hypnosis for therapeutic purposes by providing that such hypnotic techniques shall be used only by certain practitioners of the healing arts within the limits and framework of their own particular field of competence; or by qualified persons to whom a patient may be referred, in which event the referring practitioner of the healing arts shall be responsible, severally or jointly, for any injury or damages resulting to the patient because of either his or her own incompetence, or the incompetence of the person to whom the patient was referred.
History.—s. 1, ch. 61-506; s. 2, ch. 65-170; s. 194, ch. 97-103; s. 48, ch. 97-264; ss. 195, 267, ch. 98-166; s. 201, ch. 2000-160.
Note.—Former s. 456.31.
485.003 Definitions.—In construing this chapter, the words, phrases, or terms, unless the context otherwise indicates, shall have the following meanings:
(1) “Hypnosis” shall mean hypnosis, hypnotism, mesmerism, posthypnotic suggestion, or any similar act or process which produces or is intended to produce in any person any form of induced sleep or trance in which the susceptibility of the person’s mind to suggestion or direction is increased or is intended to be increased, where such a condition is used or intended to be used in the treatment of any human ill, disease, injury, or for any other therapeutic purpose.
(2) “Healing arts” shall mean the practice of medicine, surgery, psychiatry, dentistry, osteopathic medicine, chiropractic medicine, naturopathy, podiatric medicine, chiropody, psychology, clinical social work, marriage and family therapy, mental health counseling, and optometry.
(3) “Practitioner of the healing arts” shall mean a person licensed under the laws of the state to practice medicine, surgery, psychiatry, dentistry, osteopathic medicine, chiropractic medicine, naturopathy, podiatric medicine, chiropody, psychology, clinical social work, marriage and family therapy, mental health counseling, or optometry within the scope of his or her professional training and competence and within the purview of the statutes applicable to his or her respective profession, and who may refer a patient for treatment by a qualified person, who shall employ hypnotic techniques under the supervision, direction, prescription, and responsibility of such referring practitioner.
(4) “Qualified person” shall mean a person deemed by the referring practitioner to be qualified by both professional training and experience to be competent to employ hypnotic technique for therapeutic purposes, under supervision, direction, or prescription.
History.—s. 3, ch. 61-506; s. 2, ch. 65-170; s. 1, ch. 95-279; s. 195, ch. 97-103; s. 1, ch. 97-198; s. 193, ch. 97-264; ss. 196, 268, ch. 98-166; s. 201, ch. 2000-160.
Note.—Former s. 456.32.
485.004 When practice of hypnosis prohibited.—It shall be unlawful for any person to engage in the practice of hypnosis for therapeutic purposes unless such person is a practitioner of one of the healing arts, as herein defined, or acts under the supervision, direction, prescription, and responsibility of such a person.
History.—s. 4, ch. 61-506; s. 201, ch. 2000-160.
Note.—Former s. 456.33.
485.005 Penalties.—
(1) MISDEMEANOR.—Any person who shall violate the provisions of this chapter shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.
(2) REVOCATION OF LICENSE.—A violation of any of the provisions of this chapter by any person licensed to practice any branch of the healing arts in this state shall constitute grounds for revocation of license, and action may be taken by the respective boards in accordance with the applicable statutes.
(3) CIVIL LIABILITY.—Any person who shall be damaged or injured by any practitioner of the healing arts, or by any person to whom such a practitioner may refer a patient for treatment, may bring suit against the practitioner either severally, or jointly, with the person to whom the referral was made.
(4) CONSTRUCTION IN RELATION TO OTHER LAWS.—No civil or criminal remedy for any wrongful action shall be excluded or impaired by the provisions of this chapter.
History.—s. 5, ch. 61-506; s. 387, ch. 71-136; s. 201, ch. 2000-160.
Note.—Former s. 456.34.

F.S. 485 on Google Scholar

F.S. 485 on Casetext

Amendments to 485


Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 485
Level: Degree
Misdemeanor/Felony: First/Second/Third

S206.485 2 - TAX REVENUE - FAIL REPORT TRACKING OF PETRO PRODUCT - F: T
S485.004 - HEALTH-SAFETY - UNLAWFUL PRACTICE OF HYPNOSIS - M: S

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases Citing Statute 485

Total Results: 20

Universal Property and Casualty Insurance Company v. All American Builders and Debris Removal, Inc

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 2024-11-13T00:00:00-08:00

Snippet: heard.” Richard v. Bank of Am., N.A., 258 So. 3d 485, 488 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018). In this case, while

Leo L. Boatman v. State of Florida

Court: Fla. | Date Filed: 2024-10-17T00:00:00-07:00

Snippet: 695, 730 (Fla. 2021); Pham v. State, 70 So. 3d 485, 496 (Fla. 2011). “We decline to revisit” this issue

Storm Royal Thayer v. State of Florida

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 2024-09-25T00:00:00-07:00

Snippet: Mar. 26, 2021), and Parrish v. State, 349 So. 3d 485 (Fla. 1st DCA 2022), rev. granted, No. SC-2022-1457

Natalia Zayon v. Bianca Valme

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 2024-09-18T00:00:00-07:00

Snippet: stalking violence entered pursuant to section 784.0485, Florida Statutes. “Trial courts have broad discretion

PATTERSON AND WALTER v. CLARKE

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 2024-09-13T00:00:00-07:00

Snippet: DCA 1989); and then citing Wemett v. Duval County, 485 7 So. 2d

In Re: Amendments to Florida Probate Rules - 2024 Legislation

Court: Fla. | Date Filed: 2024-09-05T00:00:00-07:00

Snippet: Professional Collection Services, Inc. v. Pope, 485 U.S. 478, 108 S. Ct. 1340, 99 L. Ed. 2d 565. This

FERNANDEZ v. KIVIMAKI

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 2024-08-21T00:00:00-07:00

Snippet: relief. See, e.g., Wolf v. Wolf, 296 So. 3d 479, 485 (Fla. 2d DCA 2020) (discussing the

Hughes v. State of Florida

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 2024-08-21T00:00:00-07:00

Snippet: DISMISSED. See Parrish v. State, 349 So. 3d 485 (Fla. 1st DCA 2022), rev. granted, No. SC22-1457,

FERNANDEZ v. KIVIMAKI

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 2024-08-21T00:00:00-07:00

Snippet: relief. See, e.g., Wolf v. Wolf, 296 So. 3d 479, 485 (Fla. 2d DCA 2020) (discussing the

Hughes v. State of Florida

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 2024-08-21T00:00:00-07:00

Snippet: DISMISSED. See Parrish v. State, 349 So. 3d 485 (Fla. 1st DCA 2022), rev. granted, No. SC22-1457,

FERNANDEZ v. KIVIMAKI

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 2024-08-21T00:00:00-07:00

Snippet: relief. See, e.g., Wolf v. Wolf, 296 So. 3d 479, 485 (Fla. 2d DCA 2020) (discussing the

Hughes v. State of Florida

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 2024-08-21T00:00:00-07:00

Snippet: DISMISSED. See Parrish v. State, 349 So. 3d 485 (Fla. 1st DCA 2022), rev. granted, No. SC22-1457,

FERNANDEZ v. KIVIMAKI

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 2024-08-21T00:00:00-07:00

Snippet: relief. See, e.g., Wolf v. Wolf, 296 So. 3d 479, 485 (Fla. 2d DCA 2020) (discussing the

Hughes v. State of Florida

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 2024-08-21T00:00:00-07:00

Snippet: DISMISSED. See Parrish v. State, 349 So. 3d 485 (Fla. 1st DCA 2022), rev. granted, No. SC22-1457,

Hoover v. Peak, C.

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 2024-08-07T00:00:00-07:00

Snippet: 2 Section 784.0485(1), Florida Statutes, creates a civil cause of action… relief as the court deems proper . . . .” § 784.0485(6)(a), Fla. Stat. (emphasis supplied). Stalking

Kandyce McPherson v. Killyah Samuel

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 2024-07-24T00:00:00-07:00

Snippet: ). The permanent injunction statute, section 784.0485(5)(a)–(c), Florida Statutes (2023) 2, requires a…fifteen days without an extension under section 784.0485(5)(c), McPherson was given only eight days’ notice…injunction would have remained in place. See § 784.0485(5)(c), Fla. Stat. (2023) (“The court may grant a

Christopher Pretzer v. Rick Swearingen, individually and in his official capacity, and Florida Department of Law Enforcement

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 2024-07-19T00:00:00-07:00

Snippet: departments”); Stern v. Marshall, 564 U.S. 462, 485 (2011) (noting how the Court has contrasted cases

LIGHTSEY CATTLE COMPANY v. FLORIDA FISH AND WILDLIFE CONSERVATIVE COMMISSION

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 2024-07-12T00:00:00-07:00

Snippet: Griffith v. Florida Parole and Probation Comm’n, 485 So. 2d 818 (Fla. 1986)). In making that holding,

Mykel Anthony Nelson v. State of Florida

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 2024-06-28T00:00:00-07:00

Snippet: inter-district conflict. See Parrish v. State, 349 So. 3d 485 (Fla. 1st DCA 2022), rev. granted, No. SC2022-1457

Lucas Connor Whalen v. Estefania Llona Choquehuanca

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 2024-06-26T00:00:00-07:00

Snippet: evidentiary hearing as required by section 784.0485(6)(f), Florida Statutes). This ruling does not