Florida Statute 500.13 | Lawyer Caselaw & Research

The 2024 Florida Statutes

Title XXXIII
REGULATION OF TRADE, COMMERCE, INVESTMENTS, AND SOLICITATIONS

Chapter 500
FOOD PRODUCTS

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 500.13

500.13 Addition of poisonous or deleterious substance to food.—

(1) Any added poisonous or deleterious substance, any food additive, any pesticide chemical in or on a raw agricultural commodity, or any color additive, shall, with respect to any particular use or intended use, be deemed unsafe for the purpose of application of s. 500.10(1)(b) with respect to any food, unless there is in effect a regulation pursuant to subsection (2) limiting the quantity of such substance, and the use or intended use of such substance conform to the terms prescribed by such regulation. While such regulation relating to such substance is in effect, a food shall not, by reason of bearing or containing such substance in accordance with the regulation, be considered adulterated within the meaning of s. 500.10(1)(a).

(2) The department, whenever public interest in the state so requires, is authorized to adopt, amend, or repeal regulations whether or not in accordance with regulations promulgated under the federal act, prescribing therein tolerances for any added poisonous or deleterious substances, for food additives, for pesticide chemicals in or on raw agricultural commodities or for color additives, including, but not limited to, zero tolerances, and exemptions from tolerances in the case of pesticide chemicals in or on raw agricultural commodities, and prescribing the conditions under which a food additive or color additive may be safely used and exemptions where such food additive or color additive is to be used solely for investigational or experimental purposes, upon his or her own motion or upon the petition of any interested party requesting that such a regulation be established, and it shall be incumbent upon such petitioner to establish by data submitted to the department that a necessity exists for such regulation, and that its effect will not be detrimental to the public health. If the data furnished by the petitioner is not sufficient to allow the department to determine whether such regulation should be promulgated, the department may require additional data to be submitted and a failure to comply with the request shall be sufficient grounds to deny the request. In adopting, amending or repealing regulations relating to such substances the department shall consider among other relevant factors, the following which the petitioner, if any, shall furnish:

(a) The name and all pertinent information concerning such substance including where available, its chemical identity and composition, a statement of the conditions of the proposed use, including directions, recommendations and suggestions and including specimens of proposed labeling, all relevant data bearing on the physical or other technical effect and the quantity required to produce such effect.

(b) The probable composition of, or other relevant exposure from the article and of any substance formed in or on a food, resulting from the use of such substance.

(c) The probable consumption of such substance in the diet of humans and animals taking into account any chemically or pharmacologically related substance in such diet.

(d) Safety factors which, in the opinion of experts qualified by scientific training and experience to evaluate the safety of such substances for the use or uses for which they are proposed to be used, are generally recognized as appropriate for the use of animal experimentation data.

(e) The availability of any needed practicable methods of analysis for determining the identity and quantity of such substance in or on an article, any substance formed in or on such article because of the use of such substance, and the pure substance and all intermediates and impurities.

(f) Facts supporting a contention that the proposed use of such substance will serve a useful purpose.

History.—s. 13, ch. 19656, 1939; CGL 1940 Supp. 4151(676); s. 3, ch. 63-259; ss. 14, 35, ch. 69-106; s. 605, ch. 97-103.

F.S. 500.13 on Google Scholar

F.S. 500.13 on Casetext

Amendments to 500.13

Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 500.13

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

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 500.13.

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases Citing Statute 500.13

Total Results: 12

Peetluk v. Huffstetler

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 2003-04-04T00:00:00-08:00

Citation: 840 So. 2d 1175, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 4498, 2003 WL 1785812

Snippet: 4,765 $ 3,217 $12,871 -e* Income After Taxes $27,500 $13,129 $408,807 $ 25,761 $ 1,646 The return for 2001

Johnson v. PLANTATION GENERAL HOSP.

Court: Fla. | Date Filed: 1994-06-16T00:53:00-07:00

Citation: 641 So. 2d 58

Snippet: The total bills for each patient ranged from $1,500 to $13,000, although the complaint did not allege the

PLANTATION GENERAL HOSP. v. Johnson

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 1993-07-14T00:53:00-07:00

Citation: 621 So. 2d 551

Snippet: amounts of each plaintiff's bill ranged from $1,500 to $13,000. They did not state the amount of the overcharge

Polizzi v. Polizzi

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 1992-05-29T00:00:00-07:00

Citation: 600 So. 2d 490

Snippet: residence to the husband, which was worth between $6,500 and $13,000. The husband also retained the marital personal

Martinez v. Florida Department of Commerce

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 1978-05-02T00:00:00-07:00

Citation: 358 So. 2d 115

Snippet: employer reported that claimant was paid $1,500 for thirteen weeks work during the second quarter of 1973

In Re Apportionment Law, Senate Joint Res. No. 1305

Court: Fla. | Date Filed: 1972-05-12T00:00:00-07:00

Citation: 263 So. 2d 797

Snippet: or representation." 379 U.S. 436, 85 S.Ct. 500, 13 L.Ed.2d 404. "If the weight of the vote of

Utica Mutual Insurance Company v. Clonts

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 1971-05-19T00:53:00-07:00

Citation: 248 So. 2d 511

Snippet: comments in Beta Eta (Fla.App. 1970), 230 So.2d 495, 500. [13] See both Shingleton and Beta Eta, notes 1 and

Padgett v. Central & Southern Fla. Flood Con. Dist.

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 1965-10-07T00:53:00-07:00

Citation: 178 So. 2d 900

Snippet: 1918E, 718, on rehearing, 1918, 75 Fla. 56, 78 So. 500. [13] 34 Fla.Jur., Water and Watercourses, § 171;

Rosenhouse v. Kimbrig

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 1962-07-27T00:00:00-07:00

Citation: 147 So. 2d 354

Snippet: facts, as in effect stipulated, the loan was $12,500 with 13'% interest ($1600) being charged therefor

Adams v. Lott

Court: Fla. | Date Filed: 1933-10-28T00:00:00-08:00

Citation: 150 So. 596, 112 Fla. 489

Snippet: Engineering Services 500 13 Reserved for Contingencies

State ex rel. Kittel v. Jennings

Court: Fla. | Date Filed: 1904-01-15T00:00:00-08:00

Citation: 47 Fla. 307

Snippet: Finley, 30 Fla. 302, text 310, 11 South. Rep. 500; 13 Ency. Pl. & Pr., 698. The demurrer in this

Overby v. State

Court: Fla. | Date Filed: 1881-01-15T00:00:02-07:52:58

Citation: 18 Fla. 178

Snippet: *180ture of 1839, (see Thompson’s Digest, page 500, §13,) which provides that “ if any person, by himself