Florida Statute 618.17 | Lawyer Caselaw & Research

The 2024 Florida Statutes

Title XXXVI
BUSINESS ORGANIZATIONS

Chapter 618
AGRICULTURAL COOPERATIVE MARKETING ASSOCIATIONS

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 618.17

618.17 Marketing contracts.—The association and its members may make and execute marketing contracts requiring the members to sell, for any period of time, all or any specified part of their agricultural products or specified commodities exclusively to or through the association or any agencies designated by the association. The contracts may provide that the association may sell or resell the products of its members with or without taking title thereto; and pay to its members the resale price, after deducting all necessary selling, overhead and other costs and expenses, including interest or dividends on stock, not exceeding 8 percent per annum, and reserves for retiring the stock, if any; and other proper reserves; and any other proper deductions.

History.—s. 17, ch. 9300, 1923; CGL 6482(1); s. 17, ch. 14675, 1931.

F.S. 618.17 on Google Scholar

F.S. 618.17 on Casetext

Amendments to 618.17

Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 618.17

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

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 618.17.

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases Citing Statute 618.17

Total Results: 17

Brown v. State

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 1971-02-17

Citation: 245 So. 2d 68

Snippet: unsound. See Armstrong v. State, 30 Fla. 170, 11 So. 618, 17 L.R.A. 484 (1892); Blocker v. State, 92 Fla. 878

Norman v. State

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1963-09-10

Citation: 156 So. 2d 186

Snippet: sanity. Cf. Armstrong v. State, 30 Fla. 170, 11 So. 618, 17 L.R.A. 484. There can be no question but that the

Warner v. State

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 1955-06-15

Citation: 84 So. 2d 314

Snippet: 291; and Armstrong v. State, 30 Fla. 170, 11 So. 618, 17 L.R.A. 484, in support of his contention that if

McVeigh v. State

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 1954-06-25

Citation: 73 So. 2d 694, 1954 Fla. LEXIS 1563

Snippet: relies on Armstrong v. State, 30 Fla. 170, 11 So. 618, 17 L.R.A. 484; Porter v. State, 135 Ala. 51, 33 So

Hillsborough Investment Company v. City of Tampa

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 1941-12-12

Citation: 5 So. 2d 256, 149 Fla. 7, 1941 Fla. LEXIS 1021

Snippet: of the mortgage. See Vincent v. Moore, 51 Mich. 618, 17 N.W. 81; Young v. Brand, 15 Neb. 601, 19 N.W.

Davis v. State

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 1939-06-30

Citation: 190 So. 259, 138 Fla. 798, 1939 Fla. LEXIS 1501

Snippet: So. 514; Armstrong v. State, 30 Fla. 170,11 So. 618, 17 L.R.A. 484; Howell v. State, 102 Fla. 612,136 So

Mitchell v. Tucker

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 1939-05-02

Citation: 188 So. 573, 137 Fla. 720, 1939 Fla. LEXIS 1899

Snippet: See also Armstrong v. State, 30 Fla. 170,11 So. 618, 17 L.R.A. 484; Howell v. State, 102 Fla. 612, 136

Tip Top Grocery Co. v. Wellner, Et Vir.

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 1938-11-14

Citation: 186 So. 219, 135 Fla. 518, 1938 Fla. LEXIS 1590

Snippet: See also Armstrong v. State, 30 Fla. 170, 11 So. 618; 17 L.R.A. 484; Howell v. State, 102 Fla. 612, 136

City of Hollywood v. Bair

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 1938-10-31

Citation: 186 So. 818, 136 Fla. 100, 1938 Fla. LEXIS 1345

Snippet: See also Armstrong v. State, 30 Fla. 170, 11 So. 618, 17 L.R.A. 484; Howell v. State, 102 Fla. 612, 136

Jones v. State

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 1938-10-15

Citation: 183 So. 732, 134 Fla. 358, 1938 Fla. LEXIS 1115

Snippet: Armstrong v. State, 30 Fla. 170, text 207-8,11 So. 618, 17 L.R.A. 484, it was said: "Judge Westcott said:

Mathis v. State

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 1938-10-15

Citation: 184 So. 89, 134 Fla. 352, 1938 Fla. LEXIS 1113

Snippet: See also Armstrong v. State,30 Fla. 170, 11 So. 618, 17 L.R.A. 484; Howell v. State, 102 Fla. 612, 136

Ivey v. State

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 1938-04-07

Citation: 180 So. 368, 132 Fla. 36, 1938 Fla. LEXIS 1719

Snippet: 514; Armstrong v. State, 30 Fla. 170, 11 So.2d 618, 17 L.R.A. 484; Howell v. State, 102 Fla. 612, 136

Ramsey v. State

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 1934-05-14

Citation: 154 So. 855, 114 Fla. 766, 1934 Fla. LEXIS 1932

Snippet: Armstrong v. State, 30 Fla. 170, 11 Sou. Rep. 618, 17 L. R. A. 484, and especially Holton v. State, 87

Callaway v. State

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 1933-11-10

Citation: 152 So. 429, 112 Fla. 599, 1933 Fla. LEXIS 2320

Snippet: Armstrong v. State,30 Fla. 170, 11 Sou. Rep. 618, 17 L.R.A. 484. Reversed on rehearing and remanded

Howell v. State

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 1931-07-28

Citation: 136 So. 456, 102 Fla. 612

Snippet: 528; Armstrong v. State, 30 Fla. 170, 11 So. 618, 17 L. R. A. 484. Therefore the judgment of affirmance

Scott v. State

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 1912-06-15

Citation: 64 Fla. 490

Snippet: Armstrong v. State, 30 Fla. 170, 11 South. Rep. 618, 17 L. R. A. 484, this court held that: “Non-expert

Johnson v. State

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 1909-01-15

Citation: 57 Fla. 18

Snippet: Armstrong v. State, 30 Fla. 170, 11 South. Rep. 618, 17 L. R. A. 484. In such cases the verdict should