Florida Statute 545.03 | Lawyer Caselaw & Research

The 2024 Florida Statutes (including 2025 Special Session C)

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

Chapter 545
COMBINATIONS RESTRICTING FINANCING OF MOTOR VEHICLES

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 545.03

545.03 Threats by manufacturer or wholesaler as prima facie evidence of intent to violate law.—Any threat, expressed or implied, made directly or indirectly to any motor vehicle dealer, by any manufacturer, or wholesale distributor on authority or with the knowledge of any such manufacturer, or wholesale distributor, that such person will discontinue to sell, or will terminate a contract to sell motor vehicles to such dealer unless such dealer finances the purchase or sale of motor vehicles only with or through a designated finance company or sells and assigns the conditional sales contracts, chattel mortgages, or other paper arising from her or his retail sales of motor vehicles only to a designated finance company, shall be prima facie evidence of the fact that such manufacturer or wholesale distributor has sold or intends to sell motor vehicles, on the condition or with the agreement or understanding prohibited in s. 545.02.

History.—s. 2, ch. 18031, 1937; CGL 1940 Supp. 4151(461); s. 759, ch. 97-103.

F.S. 545.03 on Google Scholar

F.S. 545.03 on Casetext

Amendments to 545.03

Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 545.03

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

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 545.03.

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases Citing Statute 545.03

Total Results: 11

In Re: Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases – Report No. 2013-06

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 2014-11-26

Snippet: related to the mortgage lending process. See § 817.545(3), Fla. Stat. This instruction was adopted

In Re STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTIONS IN CRIMINAL CASES— REPORT NO. 2013-06

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 2014-08-28

Citation: 148 So. 3d 1204, 2014 WL 4636358

Snippet: related to the mortgage lending process. See § 817.545(3), Fla. Stat. This instruction was adopted in

Whiley v. Scott

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 2011-08-16

Citation: 79 So. 3d 702, 36 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 451, 2011 Fla. LEXIS 1900, 2011 WL 3568804

Snippet: the proposed rule, the agency must respond. § 120.545(3), Fla. Stat. (2010). And if the agency does not

Kennedy v. Byas

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2004-03-04

Citation: 867 So. 2d 1195, 2004 WL 393239

Snippet: Treatment of Pets, 2001 WL 1042542, 91 A.L.R. 5th 545, §§3 and 4. We find ourselves in agreement, however

In Re Amendments to Florida Rules

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 1992-10-22

Citation: 609 So. 2d 516, 1992 WL 323929

Snippet: on the Sstate Aattorney and Aattorney Ggeneral. *545 (3) Withdrawal of Defense Counsel after Judgment and

Grove Press, Inc. v. State Ex Rel. Gerstein

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1963-09-17

Citation: 156 So. 2d 537

Snippet: Tropic of Cancer, 1963, 20 Wis.2d 134, 121 N.W.2d 545. [3] Roth v. United States, (1957), 354 U.S. 476,

Cushman Baking Co. v. Hoberman

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 1954-07-20

Citation: 74 So. 2d 69, 1954 Fla. LEXIS 1086

Snippet: York v. Sloss-Sheffield Steel & Iron Co., 241 Ala. 545, 3 So.2d 306. Because of our pronouncement in Fidelity

Brinson v. Southeastern Utilities Service Co.

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 1954-03-12

Citation: 72 So. 2d 37, 1954 Fla. LEXIS 1381

Snippet: York v. Sloss-Sheffield Steel & Iron Co., 241 Ala. 545, 3 So.2d 306. Because of our pronouncement in Fidelity

Smith v. Smith

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 1925-12-16

Citation: 90 Fla. 824

Snippet: propositions. See also P. & I. R. Co. v. State, 23 Fla., 545, 3 So. 158, and Mugge v. Jackson, 50 Fla. 235, 39

Smith v. Smith

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 1925-12-16

Citation: 107 So. 257, 90 Fla. 825

Snippet: propositions. See also P. I. R. Co. v. State,23 Fla., 545, 3 So. 158, and Mugge v. Jackson, 50 Fla. 235,39 So

Henderson v. Chaires

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 1895-01-15

Citation: 35 Fla. 423

Snippet: one-half of the said sum of $1,090.05, which is $545.03, ;and to one-third of the said sum of $5,010.05