Florida Statute 589.101 | Lawyer Caselaw & Research

The 2024 Florida Statutes

Title XXXV
AGRICULTURE, HORTICULTURE, AND ANIMAL INDUSTRY

Chapter 589
FORESTRY

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 589.101

589.101 Blackwater River State Forest; lease of board’s interest in gas, oil, and other minerals.—Notwithstanding the provisions of ss. 253.51-253.61, the Florida Forest Service is hereby expressly granted the authority to lease its 25-percent interest in oil, gas, and other minerals within the boundaries of the Blackwater River State Forest; provided, however, that grants shall be made only to the lessee or lessees holding the 75-percent interest in said minerals retained by the United States in its conveyance to this state. The concurrence of the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund required by s. 589.10 shall not be necessary under the provisions of this section.

History.—s. 1, ch. 59-184; s. 2, ch. 61-119; ss. 14, 27, 35, ch. 69-106; s. 75, ch. 2000-154; s. 34, ch. 2012-7.

F.S. 589.101 on Google Scholar

F.S. 589.101 on Casetext

Amendments to 589.101

Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 589.101

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

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 589.101.

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases Citing Statute 589.101

Total Results: 3

Northcutt v. ORLANDO UTILITIES COM'N

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1993-02-19

Citation: 614 So. 2d 612, 1993 WL 40356

Snippet: Town of Hamden v. City of New Haven, 91 Conn. 589, 101 A. 11 (1917), the Town of Hamden sued to recover

Boyd v. State

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1991-01-08

Citation: 578 So. 2d 718, 1991 WL 1496

Snippet: target organized crime, Turkette, 452 U.S. at 589, 101 S.Ct. at 2532 (quoting the statement of findings

Morgan v. Williams

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 1922-02-23

Citation: 85 Fla. 219, 95 So. 611, 28 A.L.R. 1020, 1922 Fla. LEXIS 344

Snippet: appeal.” In the case of Ruzika v. Hotovy, 72 Neb. 589, 101 N. W. Rep. 328, 9 Ann. Cas. 1058, the court held: