Florida Statute 565.095 | Lawyer Caselaw & Research

The 2024 Florida Statutes

Title XXXIV
ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES AND TOBACCO

Chapter 565
LIQUOR

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 565.095

565.095 Licensure as primary American source of supply.—

(1) DEFINITION.—“Primary American source of supply” means the manufacturer, rectifier, or bottler, or their legally authorized exclusive agent, who, if the product cannot be secured directly from the manufacturer by an American distributor, is the source closest to the manufacturer in the channel of commerce from whom the product can be secured by an American distributor, or who, if the product can be secured directly from the manufacturer by an American distributor, is the manufacturer. It shall also include any applicant who directly purchases spirituous liquors from a manufacturer, rectifier, or bottler who represents that there is no primary American source of supply for the brand, and such applicant must petition the division for approval of licensure.

(2) TAX CONTROL LICENSURE REQUIRED.—For purposes of tax revenue control, no person, firm, corporation, or other entity which is the primary American source of supply as defined herein may sell, offer for sale, accept orders for sale, ship, or cause to be shipped into this state any spirituous liquors to any distributor or importer within the state without having first obtained licensure as a primary American source of supply on forms provided by, and in such manner as prescribed by, the division. Applicants for licensure as a primary American source of supply shall be exempt from the requirements and qualification standards set forth in ss. 561.15 and 561.17.

(3) LICENSE FEES.—Licensure as a primary American source of supply authorizes the shipment of distilled spirits manufactured within and without the state to licensed distributors, importers, manufacturers, bonded warehouses, and registered exporters within the state. The annual license fee for a primary American source of supply is $30 for each brand that requires a federal label approval and is scheduled for shipment to a licensed distributor or importer within this state for the purpose of being sold within the state. The annual license fee shall be submitted with the application for initial licensure. This license shall be renewed each year, and the renewal fee shall be $30 for each brand shipped into the state during the preceding year.

(4) CERTAIN INTERSTATE AND FOREIGN SHIPMENTS PROHIBITED.—No holder of a distributor’s license or importer’s license as classified by s. 561.14(2) may ship or cause to be shipped into this state, or accept delivery of from another state or a foreign country, any spirituous liquors except directly from a primary American source of supply.

(5) PRIVATE LABELS.—Nothing herein shall prohibit the ownership by vendors of brand names of distilled spirits and vinous beverages commonly known as private labels; provided, that such ownership and use thereof does not otherwise violate the Beverage Law.

(6) RULEMAKING AUTHORITY.—The division shall promulgate rules as necessary to carry out the purpose of this section.

History.—ss. 2, 3, ch. 78-135; s. 2, ch. 85-58; s. 11, ch. 96-419.

F.S. 565.095 on Google Scholar

F.S. 565.095 on Casetext

Amendments to 565.095

Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 565.095

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

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 565.095.

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases Citing Statute 565.095

Total Results: 20

Florida Carry, Inc. v. University of North Florida

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 2013-12-10T00:00:00-08:00

Citation: 133 So. 3d 966, 2013 WL 6480789, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 19600

Snippet: of content neutrality); Goss v. Lopez, 419 U.S. 565, 95 S.Ct. 729, 42 L.Ed.2d 725 (1975) (temporary suspension

DK v. Dist. Sch. Bd. Indian River County

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 2008-05-21T00:53:00-07:00

Citation: 981 So. 2d 667

Snippet: ten days or less. See Goss v. Lopez, 419 U.S. 565, 95 S.Ct. 729, 42 L.Ed.2d 725 (1975). 4D08

GTECH v. State Dept. of Lottery

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 1999-07-22T00:53:00-07:00

Citation: 737 So. 2d 615

Snippet: opportunity to be heard, see Goss v. Lopez, 419 U.S. 565, 95 S.Ct. 729, 42 L.Ed.2d 725 (1975), as well as a

Student Alpha Id No. Guja v. SCH. BD. OF VOLUSIA CTY.

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 1993-02-25T23:53:00-08:00

Citation: 616 So. 2d 1011

Snippet: expulsion case must begin with Goss v. Lopez, 419 U.S. 565, 95 S.Ct. 729, 42 L.Ed.2d 725 (1985) where the Supreme… Fourteenth Amendment. Goss v. Lopez, 419 U.S. 565, 95 S.Ct. 729, 42 L.Ed.2d 725 (1975). In C.J. v. School

Jennings v. Dade County

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 1991-12-17T00:00:00-08:00

Citation: 589 So. 2d 1337

Snippet: hearing is entitled. See Goss v. Lopez, 419 U.S. 565, 95 S.Ct. 729, 42 L.Ed.2d 725 (1975); Hadley v. Department

Jennings v. Dade County

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 1991-08-06T00:00:00-07:00

Citation: 589 So. 2d 1345

Snippet: hearing is entitled. See Goss v. Lopez, 419 U.S. 565, 95 S.Ct. 729, 42 L.Ed.2d 725 (1975); Hadley v. Department

Fla. Bev. Corp. v. Div. of Alcoholic Bev.

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 1987-02-22T23:53:00-08:00

Citation: 503 So. 2d 396

Snippet: with the above authorities, held that Section 565.095(5) (Chapter 565's liquor counterpart to the…Law and its counterpart in Chapter 565 (Section 565.095(5)) were repealed effective May 31, 1985, two weeks…source of supply, as defined in s. 564.045 or s. 565.095, may be filed in the courts of this state. Chapter

Standard Distributing Co. v. Florida Department of Business Regulation, Division of Alcoholic Beverages

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 1985-05-16T00:00:00-07:00

Citation: 473 So. 2d 216, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 13967

Snippet: have notified the court that §§ 564.045(5) and 565.095(5) have been repealed effective May 31, 1985, by…DCA 1983), this court specifically held that § 565.095(5) is a statute which becomes a part of any contract…our opinion in this cause, we determined that §§ 565.095(5) and 564.045(5) applied to the parties and their…. We hold that the repeal of §§ 564.045(5) and 565.095(5) has no effect upon our original opinion or upon

Somerset Importers, Ltd. v. Department of Business Regulation, Division of Alcoholic Beverages & Tobacco

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 1983-01-14T00:00:00-08:00

Citation: 428 So. 2d 679, 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 18484

Snippet: petitioned appellee for a declaratory statement that § 565.-095(5) was inapplicable in this situation, where the…statute did apply, and this appeal followed. Section 565.095(5) provides in part that: No brand or label registered…unconstitutional depends upon its contention that § 565.095(5) interferes with its constitutional rights to…which the statute might impair. On the contrary, § 565.095(5) is an existing *681law which becomes a part

Florida Beverage Corp. v. Division of Alcoholic Beverages & Tobacco

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 1982-12-20T00:00:00-08:00

Citation: 424 So. 2d 890, 1982 Fla. App. LEXIS 21963

Snippet: statement wherein the agency, construing Section 565.095(5), Florida Statutes, pertaining to withdrawal …formally withdraw Felipe Segundo pursuant to Section 565.095(5), Florida Statutes. The Divi*891sion further …Hartley and Parker will reduce its profits. Section 565.095(5), Florida Statutes, was not intended to stifle

Paddington Corp. v. Southern Wine & Spirits, Inc.

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 1981-04-14T00:00:00-08:00

Citation: 397 So. 2d 958, 1981 Fla. App. LEXIS 19212

Snippet: no proceedings had been had pursuant to Section 565.095(5), Florida Statutes (1979) to withdraw this registered

Park Benziger & Co. v. SOUTHERN WINE, ETC.

Court: Fla. | Date Filed: 1980-12-10T23:53:00-08:00

Citation: 391 So. 2d 681

Snippet: judge passed upon the constitutionality of section 565.095, Florida Statutes, which deals with the distribution…going through the procedure prescribed by section 565.095(5),[1] and (3) whether such a manufacturer may …distributor in accordance with the provisions of section 565.095. We hold that the statute cannot be applied to …Southern. Southern objected and claimed that section 565.095(5) precludes the supplier from doing either of …with Park Benziger's contention that section 565.095(5) cannot be applied to the instant contract. If

State v. Cain

Court: Fla. | Date Filed: 1980-03-26T23:53:00-08:00

Citation: 381 So. 2d 1361

Snippet: of 18 years. [2] See Goss v. Lopez, 419 U.S. 565, 95 S.Ct. 729, 42 L.Ed.2d 725 (1975); Wolff v. McDonnell

General Wholesale Co. v. Division of Alcoholic Beverages & Tobacco

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 1979-08-21T00:00:00-07:00

Citation: 375 So. 2d 581, 1979 Fla. App. LEXIS 15406

Snippet: answer a question as to the application of Section 565.095(5), Florida Statutes (1978 Supp.), which was predicated…Division’s opinion, the following language in Section 565.095(5) prevents manufacturer appointment of successor…act. . Considering the entire context of Section 565.095(5), we agree with the Division. Its declaratory

Ago

Court: Fla. Att'y Gen. | Date Filed: 1978-12-11T23:53:00-08:00

Snippet: Laws of Florida, Codified as ss. 564.045(5) and 565.095(5), F. S. [1978 Supp.]) reads as follows:

S.H.B. v. State

Court: Fla. | Date Filed: 1977-11-30T00:00:00-08:00

Citation: 355 So. 2d 1176, 1977 Fla. LEXIS 4078

Snippet: school authorities. . Goss v. Lopez, 419 U.S. 565, 95 S.Ct. 729, 42 L.Ed. 725 (1975). No. 50612

SHB v. State

Court: Fla. | Date Filed: 1977-11-29T23:53:00-08:00

Citation: 355 So. 2d 1176

Snippet: school authorities. [7] Goss v. Lopez, 419 U.S. 565, 95 S.Ct. 729, 42 L.Ed. 725 (1975). 50612

State v. Smith

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 1963-04-17T23:53:00-08:00

Citation: 151 So. 2d 889

Snippet: v. Board of Supervisors, 341 U.S. 56, 71 S.Ct. 565, 95 L.Ed. 745." Having concluded that the indictment

Cohen v. State

Court: Fla. | Date Filed: 1960-11-29T23:53:00-08:00

Citation: 125 So. 2d 560

Snippet: v. Board of Supervisors, 341 U.S. 56, 71 S.Ct. 565, 95 L.Ed. 745. For the reasons expressed in the Cramp

Cramp v. Board of Public Instruction of Orange Cty.

Court: Fla. | Date Filed: 1960-11-15T23:53:00-08:00

Citation: 125 So. 2d 554

Snippet: v. Board of Supervisors, 341 U.S. 56, 71 S.Ct. 565, 95 L.Ed. 745. We are not disturbed by appellant'