Florida Statutes

Fla. Stat. § 501.202 (2025)

Purposes; rules of construction.

✓ 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

501.202 Purposes; rules of construction.—The provisions of this part shall be construed liberally to promote the following policies:

(1) To simplify, clarify, and modernize the law governing consumer protection, unfair methods of competition, and unconscionable, deceptive, and unfair trade practices.

(2) To protect the consuming public and legitimate business enterprises from those who engage in unfair methods of competition, or unconscionable, deceptive, or unfair acts or practices in the conduct of any trade or commerce.

(3) To make state consumer protection and enforcement consistent with established policies of federal law relating to consumer protection.

History.—s. 1, ch. 73-124; s. 1, ch. 93-38.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 144 cases (34 in the last 5 years), 1976–2025 · leading case: Kelly v. Palmer, Reifler, & Assocs., P.A., 681 F. Supp. 2d 1356 (S.D. Fla. 2010).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Kelly v. Palmer, Reifler, & Assocs., P.A., 681 F. Supp. 2d 1356 (S.D. Fla. 2010). · cites it 10× “See Fla. Stat. § 501.202 (providing for a liberal construction of the provisions of FDUTPA in order to protect the consuming public from those who engage in unfair methods of competition, unconscionable, deceptive, or unfair acts or practices in the conduct of any trade or…”

State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Performance Orthopaedics & Neurosurgery, LLC, 278 F. Supp. 3d 1307 (S.D. Fla. 2017). · cites it 4× “” Fla. Stat. § 501.202 (2). Heeding these provisions of FDUTPA, accepting the facts alleged in the Amended Complaint as true, and construing all reasonable inferences therefrom' in the light most favorable to Plaintiff, the Court finds that the conduct alleged in the Amended…”

Stewart Agency, Inc., d/b/a Earl Stewart Toyota of North Palm Beach v. Arrigo Enter., Inc. d/b/a Arrigo Dodge Chrysler Jeep Ram, Etc., 266 So. 3d 207 (Fla. 4th DCA 2019). · cites it 3× “FDUTPA must be “construed liberally to promote” the policy of “protect[ing] the consuming public and legitimate business enterprises from those who engage in unfair methods of competition, or unconscionable, deceptive, or unfair acts or practices in the conduct of any trade or…”

MacK v. Bristol-Myers Squibb Co., 673 So. 2d 100 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996). · cites it 6× “" § 501.202, Fla.Stat. (1993). Under the Florida DTPA a "consumer" is defined to include "an individual," like Mack and her class members.”

Intercoastal Realty, Inc. v. Tracy, 706 F. Supp. 2d 1325 (S.D. Fla. 2010). · cites it 7× “” Fla. Stat. § 501.202 (2). Although the statute does not define “unfair and deceptive act or practice,” the provisions of the act are to be “construed liberally.”

Aceto Corp. v. TherapeuticsMD, Inc., 953 F. Supp. 2d 1269 (S.D. Fla. 2013). · cites it 5× “Fla. Stat. § 501.202 . Before 2001, the FDUTPA allowed “a consumer who has suffered a loss as a result of a violation” of the FDUTPA to bring a cause of action.”

Diamond Aircraft Indus., Inc. v. Horowitch, 107 So. 3d 362 (Fla. 2013). · cites it 2× “§ 501.202; see also § 501.203(7), Fla. Stat.”

Cluck-U Chicken, Inc. v. Cluck-U Corp., 358 F. Supp. 3d 1295 (M.D. Fla. 2017). · cites it 4× “But FDUTPA has a broader statutory purpose to "protect the consuming public and legitimate business enterprises from those who engage in unfair methods of competition, or unconscionable, deceptive, or unfair acts or practices in the conduct of any trade or commerce.”

Fitzpatrick v. Gen. Mills, Inc., 263 F.R.D. 687 (S.D. Fla. 2010). · cites it 4× “” Fla. Stat. § 501.202 ; see also Samuels v.”

Samuels v. King Motor Co. of Fort Lauderdale, 782 So. 2d 489 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001). · cites it 2× “211(1)-(2), Fla. Stat. (1997). While the Legislature does not define what "an unfair or deceptive act" is, it has mandated that FDUTPA is to be liberally construed.”

Williams v. Edelman, 408 F. Supp. 2d 1261 (S.D. Fla. 2005). · cites it 4× “” Fla. Stat. § 501.202 (2) (emphasis added).”

Millennium Commc'ns & Fulfillment, Inc. v. Off. of Atty. Gen., 761 So. 2d 1256 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000). · cites it 3× “See § 501.202, Fla. Stat. (1997); see also Macias v.”

Show all 144 citing cases →

— 501.202(1) — 1 case

Beacon Prop., Inc. v. Pnr, Inc., 785 So. 2d 564 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001).

— 501.202(2) — 39 cases

Stewart Agency, Inc., d/b/a Earl Stewart Toyota of North Palm Beach v. Arrigo Enter., Inc. d/b/a Arrigo Dodge Chrysler Jeep Ram, Etc., 266 So. 3d 207 (Fla. 4th DCA 2019). “FDUTPA must be “construed liberally to promote” the policy of “protect[ing] the consuming public and legitimate business enterprises from those who engage in unfair methods of competition, or unconscionable, deceptive, or unfair acts or practices in the conduct of any trade or…”

MacK v. Bristol-Myers Squibb Co., 673 So. 2d 100 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996). “" § 501.202, Fla.Stat. (1993). Under the Florida DTPA a "consumer" is defined to include "an individual," like Mack and her class members.”

KC Leisure, Inc. v. Haber, 972 So. 2d 1069 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008).

Rollins, Inc. v. Butland, 951 So. 2d 860 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006).

Powertel, Inc. v. Bexley, 743 So. 2d 570 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999).

— 501.202(3) — 4 cases

Porsche Cars North Am., Inc. v. Diamond, 140 So. 3d 1090 (Fla. 3d DCA 2014).

Coastal Physician Servs. of Broward Cnty., Inc. v. Ortiz, 764 So. 2d 7 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999).

Taubert v. State, Off. of the Attorney Gen., 79 So. 3d 77 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011).

Jones Superyacht Miami Inc. v. MY WAKU (S.D. Fla. 2020).

— 501.202(303) — 1 case

Hutson v. Rexall Sundown, Inc., 837 So. 2d 1090 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003).

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.