Florida Statute 668.002 | Lawyer Caselaw & Research

The 2024 Florida Statutes

Title XXXIX
COMMERCIAL RELATIONS

Chapter 668
ELECTRONIC COMMERCE

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 668.002

668.002 Legislative intent.—It is the intent of the Legislature that this act:

(1) Facilitate economic development and efficient delivery of government services by means of reliable electronic messages.

(2) Enhance public confidence in the use of electronic signatures.

(3) Minimize the incidence of forged electronic signatures and fraud in electronic commerce.

(4) Foster the development of electronic commerce through the use of electronic signatures to lend authenticity and integrity to writings in any electronic medium.

(5) Assure that proper management oversight and accountability are maintained for agency-conducted electronic commerce.

History.—s. 2, ch. 96-224.

Note.—Former s. 282.71.

F.S. 668.002 on Google Scholar

F.S. 668.002 on Casetext

Amendments to 668.002

Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 668.002

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

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 668.002.

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases Citing Statute 668.002

Total Results: 10

Emmanuel Okwor v. State of Florida

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2024-12-11

Snippet: pronouncement was unnecessary. 668 2 So. 2d at 592. The court

PATIENT DEPOT, LLC v. ACADIA ENTERPRISES, INC., RYAN O'CONNOR and LORI ANN O'CONNOR

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2023-04-26

Snippet: qualifies as a trade secret covered by FUTSA. See § 668.002, Fla. Stat. (2020); RX Sols., Inc. v. Express Pharmacy

ALDO GABRIEL AMENTA POZANCO v. FJB 6501, INC.

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2022-06-01

Snippet: to be determined by it.” Moore, 475 So. 2d at 668. 2 As the previous summary judgment standard (applicable

Ridge Gabriel v. State

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2018-05-28

Citation: 248 So. 3d 265

Snippet: officer. 214 So. 3d at 662–63, 668. 2 The parties agree that,

McDaniel v. McDaniel

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2003-02-03

Citation: 835 So. 2d 1265, 2003 WL 215044

Snippet: statutory guidelines, which the parties agreed was $668.02. It appears to this court that the trial court

Ago

Court: Florida Attorney General Reports | Date Filed: 1986-07-31

Snippet: , 1985); and Oliver v. Mercaldi,103 So.2d 665, 668 (2 D.C.A.Fla., 1958). And see, s. 2.01, F.S., expressly

In re Transition Rules 2, 3, 4, 5, & 6

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 1972-11-29

Citation: 269 So. 2d 665, 1972 Fla. LEXIS 3232

Snippet: the circuit court of the appropriate circuit. *668(2) The clerks of the several trial courts of Florida

Hartquist v. Tamiami Trail Tours, Inc.

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 1939-07-18

Citation: 190 So. 533, 139 Fla. 328

Snippet: doctrine of respondeat superior applies. See 39 C. J. 668, 2 Thompson Neg. 1040; 1 Labott's Master Servant

Boyle v. Howe

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 1935-12-27

Citation: 171 So. 667, 126 Fla. 662, 1935 Fla. LEXIS 1798

Snippet: plumbing work was necessary on the property. *Page 668 "2. I find as a matter of fact that complainant, Sarah

Daughtrey v. State

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 1903-06-15

Citation: 46 Fla. 109

Snippet: the verdict of the jury. 1 Bish. Crim. Law, sec. 668; 2 Bish. New Crim. Proc., sec. 12; 1 Whart. Crim.