Florida Statutes
Fla. Stat. § 542.235 (2025)
Limitations of actions and penalties against local governments and their officials and employees.
✓ 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
542.235 Limitations of actions and penalties against local governments and their officials and employees.—
(1) No criminal action shall be brought pursuant to s. 542.21(2) against any local government.
(2) No civil penalties, damages, interest on damages, costs, or attorneys’ fees shall be recovered under s. 542.21(1) or s. 542.22 from any local government.
(3) No injunctive or other equitable relief pursuant to s. 542.23 shall be granted against a local government or its officials or employees acting within the scope of their lawful authority, if the official conduct which forms the basis of the suit bears a reasonable relationship to the health, safety, or welfare of the citizens of the local government, unless the court finds that the actual or potential anticompetitive effects outweigh the public benefits of the challenged action.
1(4) No criminal action shall be maintained pursuant to s. 542.21(2), and no civil penalties, damages, interest on damages, costs, or attorney fees shall be recovered pursuant to s. 542.21(1) or s. 542.22, against any local government official or employee for official conduct within the scope of her or his lawful authority, unless the official or employee has violated the provisions of this part for the purpose of deriving personal financial or professional gain or for the professional or financial gain of her or his immediate family or of any principal by whom the official is retained.
(5) Subsections (2) and (4) shall not apply to cases commenced before June 19, 1985, unless the defendant establishes, and the court determines, in light of all the circumstances, including the stage of litigation and the availability of alternative relief, that it would be inequitable not to apply these subsections to a pending case. In consideration of this subsection, the existence of a jury verdict or district court judgment or any stage of litigation subsequent thereto shall be deemed to be prima facie evidence that subsections (2) and (4) shall not apply.
1Note.—Amended by s. 9, ch. 2025-213, effective July 1, 2025, per s. 22, ch. 2025-213. Chapter 2025-213 became law without the Governor’s signature on July 3, 2025, per s. 8(a), Art. III of the State Constitution. In Re Advisory Opinion to the Governor Request of June 29, 1979, 374 So. 2d 959 (Fla. 1979), specifies the constitutional effective date in s. 9, Art. III of the State Constitution in this situation. The constitutional effective date is August 15, 2025, for ch. 2025-213.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3
cases, 1987–2004 · leading case: Duck Tours Seafari, Inc. v. City of Key West, 875 So. 2d 650 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004).
Duck Tours Seafari, Inc. v. City of Key West, 875 So. 2d 650 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004). “For this proposition, the court relied on section 542.235, Florida Statutes (1995), which precludes damage awards and certain other relief in antitrust cases against municipalities.”
Heder v. City of Two Rivers, 149 F. Supp. 2d 677 (E.D. Wis. 2001). “Fla. Stat. Ann. §§ 542.235 (l)(b)(5), (l)(c) (West 1997).”
Sebring Utils. Com'n v. Home Sav. Ass'n, 508 So. 2d 26 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987). “Florida recently enacted section 542.235, Florida Statutes (1985), expressly immunizing municipalities from antitrust damages.”
— 542.235(2) — 1 case
Duck Tours Seafari, Inc. v. City of Key West, 875 So. 2d 650 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004). “For this proposition, the court relied on section 542.235, Florida Statutes (1995), which precludes damage awards and certain other relief in antitrust cases against municipalities.”
— 542.235(5) — 1 case
Sebring Utils. Com'n v. Home Sav. Ass'n, 508 So. 2d 26 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987). “Florida recently enacted section 542.235, Florida Statutes (1985), expressly immunizing municipalities from antitrust damages.”
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.