Florida Statute 580.081 | Lawyer Caselaw & Research

The 2024 Florida Statutes

Title XXXV
AGRICULTURE, HORTICULTURE, AND ANIMAL INDUSTRY

Chapter 580
COMMERCIAL FEED AND FEEDSTUFF

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 580.081

580.081 Misbranding.—No person shall distribute misbranded commercial feed or feedstuff. A commercial feed or feedstuff shall be deemed to be misbranded:

(1) If its labeling is false or misleading in any particular.

(2) If it is distributed under the name of another commercial feed or feedstuff.

(3) If it is not labeled as required by this chapter or the rules promulgated hereunder.

(4) If it does not conform to the definition of identity and standard of quality as prescribed by rule.

(5) If any word, statement, or other information required by this chapter to appear on the label or labeling is not prominently and conspicuously placed thereon in such terms as to render it likely to be read and understood by the ordinary individual under customary conditions of purchase and use.

(6) If it is not appropriate for its intended or purported use.

(7) If a nutrient test, conducted by a laboratory certified in nutrient testing, on a sample of commercial feed or feedstuff from a given registrant shows the presence of any ingredient not listed on the label or the absence of any ingredient shown on the label. In such case, the department may impose a penalty in accordance with s. 580.121(1).

History.—s. 8, ch. 29755, 1955; s. 7, ch. 61-440; s. 3, ch. 79-66; s. 6, ch. 86-112; s. 1, ch. 88-210; s. 33, ch. 92-143; ss. 6, 7, ch. 93-90; ss. 7, 16, ch. 94-282.

F.S. 580.081 on Google Scholar

F.S. 580.081 on Casetext

Amendments to 580.081

Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 580.081

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

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 580.081.

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases Citing Statute 580.081

Total Results: 20

ROBERT D. GARNER v. STATE OF FLORIDA

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2023-09-15

Snippet: Union Carbide Agric. Prods. Co., 473 U.S. 568, 580-81 (1985)); see also Trump v. New York, 141 S. Ct

JAMES T. NADELL v. APACHULA B. HURSEY

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2023-06-21

Snippet: jurisdiction. Mintz Truppman, 346 So. 3d at 580-81 (citations omitted) (footnote omitted).

JUAN FRANCISCO VEGA v. THE STATE OF FLORIDA

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2022-11-02

Snippet: See In re Commitment of May, 975 So. 2d 579, 580-81 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008). Further, because Vega’s “petition

Geico Gen. Ins. Co. v. Steinger, Iscoe & Greene-II, P.A.

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2019-06-26

Citation: 275 So. 3d 775

Snippet: to Brown v. Vt. Mut. Ins. Co., 614 So. 2d 574, 580-81 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993) (holding that if a party has

Geico Gen. Ins. Co. v. Steinger, Iscoe & Greene-II, P.A.

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2019-06-26

Citation: 275 So. 3d 775

Snippet: to Brown v. Vt. Mut. Ins. Co., 614 So. 2d 574, 580-81 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993) (holding that if a party has

NATHAN LEON GOFF v. HEATHER FRANCES GOFF

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2019-06-26

Snippet: discretion. See Young v. Achenbauch, 136 So. 3d 575, 580–81 (Fla. 2014); see also Kaplan v. Divosta Homes

DeFrances v. Furst

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2019-03-27

Citation: 267 So. 3d 525

Snippet: already assessed is void. See Korash, 263 So.2d at 580-81. In Korash, the property in question was an oceanfront

DeFrances v. Furst

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2019-03-27

Citation: 267 So. 3d 525

Snippet: already assessed is void. See Korash, 263 So.2d at 580-81. In Korash, the property in question was an oceanfront

SUSAN K. DEFRANCES v. BILL FURST, PROPERTY APPRAISER

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2019-03-27

Snippet: already assessed is void. See Korash, 263 So. 2d at 580-81. In Korash, the property in question

Rodney Tyrone Lowe v. State of Florida

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 2018-10-19

Citation: 259 So. 3d 23

Snippet: 54 ; see also McMillian v. State , 94 So.3d 572, 580-81, 581 n.16 (Fla. 2012) (finding the medical examiner's

TRANSPARENCY FOR FLORIDA, INC. v. CITY OF PORT ST. LUCIE

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2018-04-18

Citation: 240 So. 3d 780

Snippet: circumvent the public meeting requirements. Id. at 580-81. 6 In this

MICHAEL DASKALOPOULOS v. CITIZENS PROPERTY INSURANCE CORPORATION

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2018-03-09

Citation: 241 So. 3d 237

Snippet: Enters. v. Local Contractors, Inc., 785 So. 2d 578, 580-81 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001) (holding that evidence of "pattern

Tavares David Calloway v. State of Florida

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 2017-01-26

Citation: 210 So. 3d 1160, 42 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 45, 2017 WL 372058, 2017 Fla. LEXIS 192

Snippet: details of the codefendant’s confession. Id. at 580-81 (citing Pacheco v. State, 698 So.2d 593, 595-96

State v. Herrera

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2016-09-28

Citation: 201 So. 3d 192, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 14451

Snippet: facts. See Reza v. State, 163 So.3d 572, 580-81 (Fla. 3d DCA 2015) (reversing order suppressing

Jackson v. State

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2015-11-13

Citation: 179 So. 3d 443, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 17003, 2015 WL 7017520

Snippet: 1978)); accord Harvey v. State, 448 So.2d 578, 580-81 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984) ("Unfortunately, trial attorneys

Steinberg v. Robyn & Robert Marlin

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2015-10-14

Citation: 201 So. 3d 129, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 15184

Snippet: Young v. Achenbauch, 136 So.3d 575, 580-81 (Fla.2014). “An order involving the disqualification

Ulloa v. CMI, Inc.

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 2013-11-07

Citation: 133 So. 3d 914, 38 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 804, 2013 WL 5942299, 2013 Fla. LEXIS 2420

Snippet: witness. Wyman v. State, 125 Nev. 592, 217 P.3d 572, 580-81 (2009) (footnote omitted). The Georgia Supreme

Petruschke v. State

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2013-03-06

Citation: 125 So. 3d 274, 2013 WL 811616, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 3540

Snippet: Frye test. See Hadden v. State, 690 So.2d 573, 580-81 (Fla.1997) (a psychologist’s opinion that a child

Coleman v. Attorney General of Florida

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2013-02-12

Citation: 106 So. 3d 529, 2013 WL 510961, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 2113

Snippet: v. Nat’l Health Investors, Inc., 876 So.2d 580, 580-81 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004) (dismissing the appeal because

Bondi v. Tucker

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2012-07-24

Citation: 93 So. 3d 1106, 2012 WL 3000644, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 11875

Snippet: v. Nat’l Health Investors, Inc., 876 So.2d 580, 580-81 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004) (“This appeal is hereby dismissed