Florida Statute 501.015 | Lawyer Caselaw & Research

The 2024 Florida Statutes

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

Chapter 501
CONSUMER PROTECTION

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 501.015

501.015 Health studios; registration requirements and fees.—Each health studio shall:

(1) Register each of its business locations with the department in a form and manner as required by the department.

(2) Remit an annual registration fee of $300 to the department at the time of registration for each of the health studio’s business locations.

(a) The department shall waive the initial registration fee for an honorably discharged veteran of the United States Armed Forces, the spouse or surviving spouse of such a veteran, a current member of the United States Armed Forces who has served on active duty, the spouse of such a member, the surviving spouse of a member of the United States Armed Forces if the member died while serving on active duty, or a business entity that has a majority ownership held by such a veteran or spouse or surviving spouse if the department receives an application, in a format prescribed by the department. The application format must include the applicant’s signature, under penalty of perjury, and supporting documentation. To qualify for the waiver:

1. A veteran must provide to the department a copy of his or her DD Form 214, as issued by the United States Department of Defense, or another acceptable form of identification as specified by the Department of Veterans’ Affairs;

2. The spouse or surviving spouse of a veteran must provide to the department a copy of the veteran’s DD Form 214, as issued by the United States Department of Defense, or another acceptable form of identification as specified by the Department of Veterans’ Affairs, and a copy of a valid marriage license or certificate verifying that he or she was lawfully married to the veteran at the time of discharge; or

3. A business entity must provide to the department proof that a veteran or the spouse or surviving spouse of a veteran holds a majority ownership in the business, a copy of the veteran’s DD Form 214, as issued by the United States Department of Defense, or another acceptable form of identification as specified by the Department of Veterans’ Affairs, and, if applicable, a copy of a valid marriage license or certificate verifying that the spouse or surviving spouse of the veteran was lawfully married to the veteran at the time of discharge.

(b) The department shall waive the registration renewal fee for a registrant who:

1. Is an active duty member of the United States Armed Forces or the spouse of such member;

2. Is or was a member of the United States Armed Forces and served on active duty within the 2 years preceding the renewal date. To qualify for the fee waiver, a registrant who is a former member of the United States Armed Forces who served on active duty within the 2 years preceding the expiration date of the registration must have received an honorable discharge upon separation or discharge from the United States Armed Forces; or

3. Is the surviving spouse of a member of the United States Armed Forces if the member was serving on active duty at the time of death and died within the 2 years preceding the date of renewal.

A registrant seeking such waiver must apply in a format prescribed by the department, including the applicant’s signature, under penalty of perjury, and supporting documentation.

(3) File a security as required by s. 501.016 at the time of registration.

(4) Post at the registration desk or front desk, whichever is more prominent, at each business location the proof of registration certificate provided by the department at the time of registration or renewal.

(5) Include the registration number issued by the department in all printed advertisements, contracts, and publications utilized by the health studio for a business location.

(6) Be considered a new health studio and shall be subject to the requirements of s. 501.016 each time the health studio changes ownership or, in the case of corporate ownership, each time the stock ownership is changed so as to effectively put the health studio under new management or control, notwithstanding the provisions of s. 501.016(8). A change of ownership does not occur within the meaning of this subsection if:

(a) Substantially the same stockholders form a new corporate entity;

(b) In the opinion of the department, the change does not effectively place the health studio under new management and control; and

(7) A person applying for or renewing a local business tax receipt to engage in business as a health studio must exhibit an active registration certificate from the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services before the local business tax receipt may be issued or reissued.

(8) All moneys collected pursuant to this section shall be deposited into the General Inspection Trust Fund.

History.—s. 5, ch. 90-312; s. 14, ch. 91-201; s. 4, ch. 91-429; s. 56, ch. 92-291; s. 1, ch. 93-116; s. 7, ch. 97-250; s. 18, ch. 2012-67; s. 22, ch. 2014-147; s. 12, ch. 2016-166; s. 31, ch. 2018-7.

F.S. 501.015 on Google Scholar

F.S. 501.015 on Casetext

Amendments to 501.015

Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 501.015

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

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 501.015.

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases Citing Statute 501.015

Total Results: 20

Analyte Diagnostics, Inc. v. D'ANGELO

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2001-09-05

Citation: 792 So. 2d 1271, 2001 WL 1007933

Snippet: below. See Hollywood, Inc. v. Clark, 153 Fla. 501, 15 So.2d 175 (1943). Furthermore, the denial of the

Beal Bank, SSB v. Almand and Associates

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 2001-03-01

Citation: 780 So. 2d 45, 26 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 106, 2001 Fla. LEXIS 408, 2001 WL 197031

Snippet: 1997, at 24, 27-29, and Parker, supra note 13, at 501. [15] In Sitomer, Judge Gross cites Wiggins v. Parson

G.W.B. v. J.S.W.

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1994-11-30

Citation: 647 So. 2d 918, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 11522

Snippet: de novo. See Hollywood Inc. v. Clark, 153 Fla. 501, 15 So.2d 175, 180 (1943). We think it may be improvident

Baby Eaw v. Jsw

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1994-11-30

Citation: 647 So. 2d 918

Snippet: de novo. See Hollywood Inc. v. Clark, 153 Fla. 501, 15 So.2d 175, 180 (1943). We think it may be improvident

Walker v. State

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1984-10-18

Citation: 457 So. 2d 1136, 9 Fla. L. Weekly 2220, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 15403

Snippet: appeal. See, e.g., Hollywood v. Clark, 153 Fla. 501, 15 So.2d 175 (1943). Because the court gains jurisdiction

Jennings v. Jennings

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1980-12-31

Citation: 392 So. 2d 962

Snippet: Hollywood, Inc. v. Clark (S.Ct. 1943), 153 Fla. 501, 15 So.2d 175; Mills v. Beims (Fla.App. 1961), 132

Amazon v. Davidson

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1980-10-22

Citation: 390 So. 2d 383

Snippet: However, in Hollywood, Inc. v. Clark, 153 Fla. 501, 15 So.2d 175 (1943), such a contention was rejected

Herskowitz v. Herskowitz

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1979-12-28

Citation: 379 So. 2d 135, 1979 Fla. App. LEXIS 16320

Snippet: under review. Hollywood, Inc. v. Clark, 153 Fla. 501, 15 So.2d 175 (1943); Herman A. Thomas, Inc. v. Sharpe

Pacetti v. Pacetti

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1979-06-05

Citation: 371 So. 2d 701, 1979 Fla. App. LEXIS 15253

Snippet: too late. See Hollywood, Inc. v. Clark, 153 Fla. 501, 15 So.2d 175, 182 (1943). Affirmed. . See the prior

FLA. FARM BUREAU INS. CO. v. Austin Carpet Serv., Inc.

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1979-01-16

Citation: 382 So. 2d 305

Snippet: the judgment. Hollywood, Inc. v. Clark, 153 Fla. 501, 15 So.2d 175 (1943); Blount v. Hansen, 116 So.2d 250

Henry Hartwell Hester Architect A. I. A. v. Van Heusden

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1977-09-12

Citation: 349 So. 2d 810

Snippet: 730 (1944) and Hollywood Inc. v. Clark, 153 Fla. 501, 15 So.2d 175 (1943), that portion of appellant’s appeal

Donaldson Engineering, Inc. v. City of Plantation

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1976-02-06

Citation: 326 So. 2d 209, 1976 Fla. App. LEXIS 14282

Snippet: (Fla. 1952); Hollywood, Inc. v. Clark, 153 Fla. 501, 15 So.2d 175 (1943). The judgment of November 17,

Herman A. Thomas, Inc. v. Sharpe

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1975-03-25

Citation: 309 So. 2d 592, 1975 Fla. App. LEXIS 14430

Snippet: excessive. Cf. Hollywood, Inc. v. Clark, 153 Fla. 501, 15 So.2d 175 (1943). Affirmed.

Small v. Small

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 1975-02-26

Citation: 313 So. 2d 749

Snippet: those rights.' [Hollywood, Inc. v. Clark, 153 Fla. 501, 15 So.2d 175, 182 (1943)]" Turning to the facts sub

In the Interest of Q. J.

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1974-10-25

Citation: 302 So. 2d 161, 1974 Fla. App. LEXIS 8395

Snippet: So.2d 518; Hollywood, Inc. v. Clark, 153 Fla. 501, 15 So.2d 175; 2 Fla.Jur., Appeals, §§ 291-292, pp

Homer v. Hialeah Race Course, Inc.

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1970-06-23

Citation: 249 So. 2d 491, 1970 Fla. App. LEXIS 6568

Snippet: also Hollywood, Inc. v. Clark, 1943, 153 Fla. 501, 15 So.2d 175. In case 69-876, the taxing authorities

Diversified Enterprises of Florida, Inc. v. Holt

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1966-07-15

Citation: 188 So. 2d 693, 1966 Fla. App. LEXIS 5123

Snippet: decree. See Hollywood, Inc. v. Clark, 153 Fla. 501, 15 So.2d 175. In attacking the deficiency decree the

Burton v. Sanders

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1965-01-20

Citation: 170 So. 2d 591

Snippet: opinion in Hollywood, Inc. v. Clark, 1943, 153 Fla. 501, 15 So.2d 175, held that an .order on rehearing modifying

Colburn v. Highland Realty Co.

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1963-04-17

Citation: 153 So. 2d 731

Snippet: See Hollywood, Inc. v. Clark, 1943, 153 Fla. 501, 15 So.2d 175; Ramagli Realty Co. v. Craver, Fla. 1960

Oxford v. Polk Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1962-11-30

Citation: 147 So. 2d 603

Snippet: 481; Hollywood, Inc. v. Clark, 1943, 153 Fla. 501, 15 So.2d 175; Klemenko v. Klemenko, Fla.1957, 97 So