Home
Jacksonville Location Phone Call/Texting Policy How do Fees Work?
Criminal Defense DUI Defense Foreclosure Defense Copyright Workers Compensation Attorney Jacksonville Personal Injury Lawyer
Florida Statutes Georgia Code Jacksonville Accident Attorney Real Estate Attorney Jacksonville Florida Criminal Lawyer Jacksonville Notary Public
Menu
904-383-7448
Florida Statute 668.50 | Lawyer Caselaw & Research
F.S. 668.50 Case Law from Google Scholar
Statute is currently reporting as:
Link to State of Florida Official Statute Google Search for Amendments to 668.50

The 2022 Florida Statutes (including 2022 Special Session A and 2023 Special Session B)
Title XXXIX
COMMERCIAL RELATIONS
Chapter 668
ELECTRONIC COMMERCE
View Entire Chapter
F.S. 668.50
668.50 Uniform Electronic Transaction Act.—
(1) SHORT TITLE.—This section may be cited as the “Uniform Electronic Transaction Act.”
(2) DEFINITIONS.—As used in this section:
(a) “Agreement” means the bargain of the parties in fact, as found in their language or inferred from other circumstances and from rules, regulations, and procedures given the effect of agreements under provisions of law otherwise applicable to a particular transaction.
(b) “Automated transaction” means a transaction conducted or performed, in whole or in part, by electronic means or electronic records, in which the acts or records of one or both parties are not reviewed by an individual in the ordinary course in forming a contract, performing under an existing contract, or fulfilling an obligation required by the transaction.
(c) “Computer program” means a set of statements or instructions to be used directly or indirectly in an information processing system in order to bring about a certain result.
(d) “Contract” means the total legal obligation resulting from the parties’ agreement as affected by this act and other applicable provisions of law.
(e) “Electronic” means relating to technology having electrical, digital, magnetic, wireless, optical, electromagnetic, or similar capabilities.
(f) “Electronic agent” means a computer program or an electronic or other automated means used independently to initiate an action or respond to electronic records or performances in whole or in part, without review or action by an individual.
(g) “Electronic record” means a record created, generated, sent, communicated, received, or stored by electronic means.
(h) “Electronic signature” means an electronic sound, symbol, or process attached to or logically associated with a record and executed or adopted by a person with the intent to sign the record.
(i) “Governmental agency” means an executive, legislative, or judicial agency, department, board, commission, authority, institution, or instrumentality of this state, including a county, municipality, or other political subdivision of this state and any other public or private agency, person, partnership, corporation, or business entity acting on behalf of any public agency.
(j) “Information” means data, text, images, sounds, codes, computer programs, software, databases, or other similar representations of knowledge.
(k) “Information processing system” means an electronic system for creating, generating, sending, receiving, storing, displaying, or processing information.
(l) “Person” means an individual, corporation, business trust, estate, trust, partnership, limited liability company, association, joint venture, governmental agency, public corporation, or any other legal or commercial entity.
(m) “Record” means information that is inscribed on a tangible medium or that is stored in an electronic or other medium and is retrievable in perceivable form, including public records as defined in s. 119.011.
(n) “Security procedure” means a procedure employed for the purpose of verifying that an electronic signature, record, or performance is that of a specific person or for detecting changes or errors in the information in an electronic record. The term includes a procedure that requires the use of algorithms or other codes, identifying words or numbers, encryption, or callback or other acknowledgment procedures.
(o) “State” means a state of the United States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the United States Virgin Islands, or any territory or insular possession subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. The term includes an Indian tribe or band, or Alaskan native village, which is recognized by federal law or formally acknowledged by a state.
(p) “Transaction” means an action or set of actions occurring between two or more persons relating to the conduct of business, commercial, insurance, or governmental affairs.
(3) SCOPE.—
(a) Except as otherwise provided in paragraph (b), this section applies to electronic records and electronic signatures relating to a transaction.
(b) This section does not apply to a transaction to the extent the transaction is governed by:
1. A provision of law governing the creation and execution of wills, codicils, or testamentary trusts;
2. The Uniform Commercial Code other than s. 671.107 and chapters 672 and 680; or
3. The Uniform Computer Information Transactions Act.
(c) Except with respect to subsections (2), (9), and (11), this section does not apply to a transaction to the extent the transaction is governed by rules relating to judicial procedure.
(d) This section applies to an electronic record or electronic signature otherwise excluded under paragraph (b) to the extent such record or signature is governed by a provision of law other than those specified in paragraph (b).
(e) A transaction subject to this section is also subject to other applicable provisions of substantive law.
(4) PROSPECTIVE APPLICATION.—This section applies to any electronic record or electronic signature created, generated, sent, communicated, received, or stored on or after July 1, 2000.
(5) USE OF ELECTRONIC RECORDS AND ELECTRONIC SIGNATURES; VARIATION BY AGREEMENT.—
(a) This section does not require a record or signature to be created, generated, sent, communicated, received, stored, or otherwise processed or used by electronic means or in electronic form.
(b) This section applies only to transactions between parties each of which has agreed to conduct transactions by electronic means. Whether the parties agree to conduct a transaction by electronic means is determined from the context and surrounding circumstances, including the parties’ conduct.
(c) A party that agrees to conduct a transaction by electronic means may refuse to conduct other transactions by electronic means. The right granted by this paragraph may not be waived by agreement.
(d) Except as otherwise provided in this section, the effect of any provision of this section may be varied by agreement. The presence in certain provisions of this section of the words “unless otherwise agreed,” or words of similar import, does not imply that the effect of other provisions may not be varied by agreement.
(e) Whether an electronic record or electronic signature has legal consequences is determined by this section and other applicable provisions of law.
(6) CONSTRUCTION AND APPLICATION.—This section shall be construed and applied to:
(a) Facilitate electronic transactions consistent with other applicable provisions of law.
(b) Be consistent with reasonable practices concerning electronic transactions and with the continued expansion of those practices.
(c) Effectuate its general purpose to make uniform the law with respect to the subject of this section among states enacting similar legislation.
(7) LEGAL RECOGNITION OF ELECTRONIC RECORDS, ELECTRONIC SIGNATURES, AND ELECTRONIC CONTRACTS.—
(a) A record or signature may not be denied legal effect or enforceability solely because the record or signature is in electronic form.
(b) A contract may not be denied legal effect or enforceability solely because an electronic record was used in the formation of the contract.
(c) If a provision of law requires a record to be in writing, an electronic record satisfies such provision.
(d) If a provision of law requires a signature, an electronic signature satisfies such provision.
(8) PROVISION OF INFORMATION IN WRITING; PRESENTATION OF RECORDS.—
(a) If parties have agreed to conduct a transaction by electronic means and a provision of law requires a person to provide, send, or deliver information in writing to another person, the requirement is satisfied if the information is provided, sent, or delivered, as the case may be, in an electronic record capable of retention by the recipient at the time of receipt. An electronic record is not capable of retention by the recipient if the sender or the sender’s information processing system inhibits the ability of the recipient to print or store the electronic record.
(b) If a provision of law other than this section requires a record to be posted or displayed in a certain manner; to be sent, communicated, or transmitted by a specified method; or to contain information that is formatted in a certain manner, the following rules apply:
1. The record must be posted or displayed in the manner specified in the other provision of law.
2. Except as otherwise provided in subparagraph (d)2., the record must be sent, communicated, or transmitted by the method specified in the other provision of law.
3. The record must contain the information formatted in the manner specified in the other provision of law.
(c) If a sender inhibits the ability of a recipient to store or print an electronic record, the electronic record is not enforceable against the recipient.
(d) The requirements of this section may not be varied by agreement, provided:
1. To the extent a provision of law other than this section requires information to be provided, sent, or delivered in writing but permits that requirement to be varied by agreement, the requirement under paragraph (a) that the information be in the form of an electronic record capable of retention may also be varied by agreement.
2. A requirement under a law other than this section to send, communicate, or transmit a record by first-class mail, postage prepaid, or other regular United States mail, may be varied by agreement to the extent permitted by the other provision of law.
(9) ATTRIBUTION AND EFFECT OF ELECTRONIC RECORD AND ELECTRONIC SIGNATURE.—
(a) An electronic record or electronic signature is attributable to a person if the record or signature was the act of the person. The act of the person may be shown in any manner, including a showing of the efficacy of any security procedure applied to determine the person to which the electronic record or electronic signature was attributable.
(b) The effect of an electronic record or electronic signature attributed to a person under paragraph (a) is determined from the context and surrounding circumstances at the time of its creation, execution, or adoption, including the parties’ agreement, if any, and otherwise as provided by law.
(10) EFFECT OF CHANGE OR ERROR.—If a change or error in an electronic record occurs in a transmission between parties to a transaction, the following rules apply:
(a) If the parties have agreed to use a security procedure to detect changes or errors and one party has conformed to the procedure, but the other party has not, and the nonconforming party would have detected the change or error had that party also conformed, the conforming party may avoid the effect of the changed or erroneous electronic record.
(b) In an automated transaction involving an individual, the individual may avoid the effect of an electronic record that resulted from an error made by the individual in dealing with the electronic agent of another person if the electronic agent did not provide an opportunity for the prevention or correction of the error and, at the time the individual learns of the error, the individual:
1. Promptly notifies the other person of the error and that the individual did not intend to be bound by the electronic record received by the other person.
2. Takes reasonable steps, including steps that conform to the other person’s reasonable instructions, to return to the other person or, if instructed by the other person, to destroy the consideration received, if any, as a result of the erroneous electronic record.
3. Has not used or received any benefit or value from the consideration, if any, received from the other person.
(c) If paragraphs (a) and (b) do not apply, the change or error has the effect provided by the other provision of law, including the law of mistake, and the parties’ contract, if any.
(d) Paragraphs (b) and (c) may not be varied by agreement.
(11) NOTARIZATION AND ACKNOWLEDGMENT.—
(a) If a law requires a signature or record to be notarized, acknowledged, verified, or made under oath, the requirement is satisfied if the electronic signature of the person authorized by applicable law to perform those acts, together with all other information required to be included by other applicable law, is attached to or logically associated with the signature or record. Neither a rubber stamp nor an impression type seal is required for an electronic notarization.
(b) A first-time applicant for a notary commission must submit proof that the applicant has, within 1 year prior to the application, completed at least 3 hours of interactive or classroom instruction, including electronic notarization, and covering the duties of the notary public. Courses satisfying this section may be offered by any public or private sector person or entity registered with the Executive Office of the Governor and must include a core curriculum approved by that office.
(12) RETENTION OF ELECTRONIC RECORDS; ORIGINALS.—
(a) If a law requires that a record be retained, the requirement is satisfied by retaining an electronic record of the information in the record which:
1. Accurately reflects the information set forth in the record after the record was first generated in final form as an electronic record or otherwise.
2. Remains accessible for later reference.
(b) A requirement to retain a record in accordance with paragraph (a) does not apply to any information the sole purpose of which is to enable the record to be sent, communicated, or received.
(c) A person may satisfy paragraph (a) by using the services of another person if the requirements of paragraph (a) are satisfied.
(d) If a provision of law requires a record to be presented or retained in its original form, or provides consequences if the record is not presented or retained in its original form, that law is satisfied by an electronic record retained in accordance with paragraph (a).
(e) If a provision of law requires retention of a check, that requirement is satisfied by retention of an electronic record of the information on the front and back of the check in accordance with paragraph (a).
(f) A record retained as an electronic record in accordance with paragraph (a) satisfies a provision of law requiring a person to retain a record for evidentiary, audit, or similar purposes, unless a provision of law enacted after July 1, 2000, specifically prohibits the use of an electronic record for the specified purpose.
(g) This section does not preclude a governmental agency of this state from specifying additional requirements for the retention of a record subject to the agency’s jurisdiction.
(13) ADMISSIBILITY IN EVIDENCE.—In a proceeding, evidence of a record or signature may not be excluded solely because the record or signature is in electronic form.
(14) AUTOMATED TRANSACTIONS.—In an automated transaction, the following rules apply:
(a) A contract may be formed by the interaction of electronic agents of the parties, even if no individual was aware of or reviewed the electronic agents’ actions or the resulting terms and agreements.
(b) A contract may be formed by the interaction of an electronic agent and an individual, acting on the individual’s own behalf or for another person, including by an interaction in which the individual performs actions that the individual is free to refuse to perform and which the individual knows or has reason to know will cause the electronic agent to complete the transaction or performance.
(c) The terms of the contract are determined by the substantive law applicable to the contract.
(15) TIME AND PLACE OF SENDING AND RECEIVING.—
(a) Unless otherwise agreed between the sender and the recipient, an electronic record is sent when the record:
1. Is addressed properly or otherwise directed properly to an information processing system that the recipient has designated or uses for the purpose of receiving electronic records or information of the type sent and from which the recipient is able to retrieve the electronic record.
2. Is in a form capable of being processed by that system.
3. Enters an information processing system outside the control of the sender or of a person that sent the electronic record on behalf of the sender or enters a region of the information processing system designated or used by the recipient which is under the control of the recipient.
(b) Unless otherwise agreed between a sender and the recipient, an electronic record is received when the record enters an information processing system that the recipient has designated or uses for the purpose of receiving electronic records or information of the type sent and from which the recipient is able to retrieve the electronic record; and is in a form capable of being processed by that system.
(c) Paragraph (b) applies even if the place the information processing system is located is different from the place the electronic record is deemed to be received under paragraph (d).
(d) Unless otherwise expressly provided in the electronic record or agreed between the sender and the recipient, an electronic record is deemed to be sent from the sender’s place of business and to be received at the recipient’s place of business. For purposes of this paragraph, the following rules apply:
1. If the sender or recipient has more than one place of business, the place of business of that person is the place having the closest relationship to the underlying transaction.
2. If the sender or the recipient does not have a place of business, the place of business is the sender’s or recipient’s residence, as the case may be.
(e) An electronic record is received under paragraph (b) even if no individual is aware of its receipt.
(f) Receipt of an electronic acknowledgment from an information processing system described in paragraph (b) establishes that a record was received but, by itself, does not establish that the content sent corresponds to the content received.
(g) If a person is aware that an electronic record purportedly sent under paragraph (a), or purportedly received under paragraph (b), was not actually sent or received, the legal effect of the sending or receipt is determined by other applicable provisions of law. Except to the extent permitted by the other provisions of law, the requirements of this paragraph may not be varied by agreement.
(h) An automated transaction does not establish the acceptability of an electronic record for recording purposes.
(16) TRANSFERABLE RECORDS.—
(a) For purposes of this paragraph, “transferable record” means an electronic record that:
1. Would be a note under chapter 673, or a document under chapter 677, if the electronic record were in writing.
2. The issuer of the electronic record expressly has agreed is a transferable record.
(b) A person has control of a transferable record if a system employed for evidencing the transfer of interests in the transferable record reliably establishes that person as the person to which the transferable record was issued or transferred.
(c) A system satisfies paragraph (b), and a person is deemed to have control of a transferable record, if the transferable record is created, stored, and assigned in such a manner that:
1. A single authoritative copy of the transferable record exists which is unique, identifiable, and, except as otherwise provided in subparagraphs 4., 5., and 6., unalterable.
2. The authoritative copy identifies the person asserting control as the person to which the transferable record was issued or, if the authoritative copy indicates that the transferable record has been transferred, the person to which the transferable record was most recently transferred.
3. The authoritative copy is communicated to and maintained by the person asserting control or its designated custodian.
4. Copies or revisions that add or change an identified assignee of the authoritative copy can be made only with the consent of the person asserting control.
5. Each copy of the authoritative copy and any copy of a copy is readily identifiable as a copy that is not the authoritative copy.
6. Any revision of the authoritative copy is readily identifiable as authorized or unauthorized.
(d) Except as otherwise agreed, a person having control of a transferable record is the holder, as defined in s. 671.201(21), of the transferable record and has the same rights and defenses as a holder of an equivalent record or writing under the Uniform Commercial Code, including, if the applicable statutory requirements under s. 673.3021, s. 677.501, or s. 679.330 are satisfied, the rights and defenses of a holder in due course, a holder to which a negotiable document of title has been duly negotiated, or a purchaser, respectively. Delivery, possession, and indorsement are not required to obtain or exercise any of the rights under this paragraph.
(e) Except as otherwise agreed, an obligor under a transferable record has the same rights and defenses as an equivalent obligor under equivalent records or writings under the Uniform Commercial Code.
(f) If requested by a person against which enforcement is sought, the person seeking to enforce the transferable record shall provide reasonable proof that the person is in control of the transferable record. Proof may include access to the authoritative copy of the transferable record and related business records sufficient to review the terms of the transferable record and to establish the identity of the person having control of the transferable record.
(17) CREATION AND RETENTION OF ELECTRONIC RECORDS AND CONVERSION OF WRITTEN RECORDS BY GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES.—Each governmental agency shall determine whether, and the extent to which, such agency will create and retain electronic records and convert written records to electronic records.
(18) ACCEPTANCE AND DISTRIBUTION OF ELECTRONIC RECORDS BY GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES.—
(a) Except as otherwise provided in paragraph (12)(f), each governmental agency shall determine whether, and the extent to which, such agency will send and accept electronic records and electronic signatures to and from other persons and otherwise create, generate, communicate, store, process, use, and rely upon electronic records and electronic signatures.
(b) To the extent that a governmental agency uses electronic records and electronic signatures under paragraph (a), the Department of Management Services, in consultation with the governmental agency, giving due consideration to security, may specify:
1. The manner and format in which the electronic records must be created, generated, sent, communicated, received, and stored and the systems established for those purposes.
2. If electronic records must be signed by electronic means, the type of electronic signature required, the manner and format in which the electronic signature must be affixed to the electronic record, and the identity of, or criteria that must be met by, any third party used by a person filing a document to facilitate the process.
3. Control processes and procedures as appropriate to ensure adequate preservation, disposition, integrity, security, confidentiality, and auditability of electronic records.
4. Any other required attributes for electronic records which are specified for corresponding nonelectronic records or reasonably necessary under the circumstances.
(c) Except as otherwise provided in paragraph (12)(f), this section does not require a governmental agency of this state to use or permit the use of electronic records or electronic signatures.
(d) Service charges and fees otherwise established by law applicable to the filing of nonelectronic records shall apply in kind to the filing of electronic records.
(19) INTEROPERABILITY.—The governmental agency which adopts standards pursuant to subsection (18) may encourage and promote consistency and interoperability with similar requirements adopted by other governmental agencies of this and other states and the Federal Government and nongovernmental persons interacting with governmental agencies of this state. If appropriate, those standards may specify differing levels of standards from which governmental agencies of this state may choose in implementing the most appropriate standard for a particular application.
(20) SEVERABILITY.—If any provision of this section or its application to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the invalidity does not affect other provisions or applications of this section which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this act are severable.
History.—s. 1, ch. 2000-164; s. 49, ch. 2004-335; s. 22, ch. 2007-134; s. 16, ch. 2008-116; s. 2, ch. 2010-131; s. 16, ch. 2012-100; s. 29, ch. 2014-221; s. 27, ch. 2019-118.

F.S. 668.50 on Google Scholar

F.S. 668.50 on Casetext

Amendments to 668.50


Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 668.50
Level: Degree
Misdemeanor/Felony: First/Second/Third

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 668.50.

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

10 Cases from Casetext:Date Descending

U.S. Supreme Court11th Cir. - Ct. App.11th Cir. - MD FL11th Cir. - ND FL11th Cir. - SD FLFed. Reg.Secondary Sources - All

  1. Brewfab, LLC v. 3 Delta, Inc.

    580 F. Supp. 3d 1201 (M.D. Fla. 2022)
    Fla. Stat. § 668.50(7)(a-d). Florida's UETA only applies to transactions between consenting parties; "[w]hether the parties agree to conduct a transaction by electronic means is determined from the context and surrounding circumstances, including the parties’ conduct." Fla. Stat. § 668.50(5)(b). Finally, Florida's UETA also accounts for electronic signatures and electronic records:
    PAGE 1209

  2. Pflug v. Allstate Fire & Cas. Ins. Co.

    8:20-cv-2480-TPB-SPF (M.D. Fla. Dec. 30, 2021)
    Defendant next argues that there is no genuine issue of material of fact as to whether Plaintiff signed the UM form. Under Florida law, an electronic signature “means an electronic sound, symbol, or process attached to or logically associated with a record and executed or adopted by a person with the intent to sign the record.” § 668.50(2)(h) F.S. “An electronic record or electronic signature is attributable to a person if the record or signature was the act of the person.” § 668.50(9)(a) F.S. “The act of the person may be shown in any manner, including a showing of any security procedure applied to determine the person to which the electronic record or electronic signature was attributable[.]” Id.

  3. Robson v. D.R. Horton, Inc.

    6:21-cv-719-GAP-LRH (M.D. Fla. Aug. 12, 2021)   Cited 1 times
    “Florida law recognizes an electronic signature like it does a written signature.” Bannister v. Sally Beauty Supply, LLC, No. 3:19-cv-143-J-20JRK, 2020 WL 8223534, at *2 (M.D. Fla. Dec. 15, 2020) (discussing Fla. Stat. § 668.50(7)). Here, Plaintiff does not dispute the validity of her signature merely because it is in electronic form. Indeed, in response to the motion to compel arbitration, Plaintiff agrees that she “signed an E-Signature Consent statement which allowed her to electronically sign various documents presented by Defendant in the application and hiring process.” Doc. No. 12, at 2 ¶ 4.
    PAGE 22

  4. Dandridge v. Sherwin Williams, Inc.

    Case No. 8:21-cv-400-KKM-TGW (M.D. Fla. May. 26, 2021)
    Under Florida law, an electronic signature "means an electronic sound, symbol, or process attached to or logically associated with a record and executed or adopted by a person with the intent to sign the record." Fla. Stat. § 668.50(2)(h) (2020). "An electronic record or electronic signature is attributable to a person if the record or signature was the act of the person." § 668.50(9)(a) "The act of the person may be shown in any manner, including a showing of the efficacy of any security procedure applied to determine the person to which the electronic record or electronic signature was attributable," and the effect of such a signature is "determined from the context and surrounding circumstances at the time of its creation, execution, or adoption, including the parties' agreement, if any, and otherwise provided by law." § 668.50(9) (emphasis added). Florida law also provides that "[w]hether the parties agree to conduct a transaction by electronic means is determined from the context and surrounding circumstances, including the parties' conduct." § 668.50(5)(b).
    PAGE 6

  5. Sole v. DeVos

    Case No. 8:19-cv-3114-T-60JSS (M.D. Fla. Aug. 20, 2020)
    In Count I, Plaintiff seeks declaratory judgment, alleging that she has no obligation to Defendants based on their noncompliance with Florida law and the Electronic Signatures Act. See §§ 725.01; 673.3011; 559.715; 668.50, F.S.; 15 U.S.C. § 7021. Even when seeking declaratory relief, a plaintiff "must still establish a valid waiver of sovereign immunity ..." Kigh v. U.S. District Court, N. Dist. Of Georgia, 681 F. App'x 882, 883 (11th Cir. 2017) (citing Lynch v. United States, 292 U.S. 571, 582 (1934)). Congress has not waived the United States' sovereign immunity under Florida statutory law or the Electronic Signatures Act. See 15 U.S.C. § 7001 et seq. Accordingly, Plaintiff's declaratory judgment claim against the United States is barred by sovereign immunity.
    PAGE 4

  6. Decisive Innovations, LLC v. Eel River Organics, LLC

    Case No. 8:18-cv-00565-SPF (M.D. Fla. Jan. 16, 2019)
    A person having control of a transferable record is the holder of the transferable record and has the same rights and defenses as a holder of an equivalent record or writing under the Uniform Commercial Code. Fla. Stat. § 668.50(16)(a). "A person has control of a transferable record if a system employed for evidencing the transfer of interests in the transferable record reliably establishes that person as the person to which the transferable record was issued or transferred." Fla. Stat. § 668.50(16)(b). A system satisfies this requirement if the Note was created and stored in a manner that a single authoritative copy exists, and it identifies the person asserting control as the person to which the transferable record was issued. Fla. Stat. § 668.50(16)(c).
    PAGE 5

  7. Cuevas v. Verizon Wireless Pers. Commc'ns, LLP

    Case No: 2:18-cv-371-FtM-99CM (M.D. Fla. Aug. 22, 2018)
    Here, based upon the documentary evidence produced by Verizon, only plaintiff signed the Retail Installment Contracts (Doc. #21-2.) Only plaintiff's signature is at the end of the agreements (Doc. #21-2) and Verizon has pointed the Court to no other provision(s) of the agreements that could suffice as Verizon's (or Best Buy's) electronic signature. See Fla. Stat. § 668.50 (An electronic signature may be used to sign a writing and has the same force and effect as a written signature.). Thus, the Court cannot find on this record that there is a valid agreement to arbitrate. It may well be that a signed copy exists or was otherwise delivered or made available to plaintiff, but based upon the documentary proof provided by Verizon the Court cannot make such a determination at this time. Therefore, the Court will deny the Motion without prejudice.
    PAGE 9

  8. Gregorius v. NPC Int'l, Inc.

    Case No: 2:16-cv-593-FtM-99MRM (M.D. Fla. Nov. 30, 2016)
    To determine whether an enforceable agreement to arbitrate exists, the Court notes that the Agreement was executed and plaintiff's claims arose in Florida. Under Florida law, a contract requires offer, acceptance, consideration, and sufficient specification of essential terms. Vega v. T-Mobile USA, Inc., 564 F.3d 1256, 1272 (11th Cir. 2009) (applying Florida law). "In Florida, '[a] party has a duty to learn and know the contents of a proposed contract before he signs and delivers it and is presumed to know and understand its contents, terms and conditions.'" Williams v. Eddie Acardi Motor Co., 3:07-cv-782-J- 32JRK, 2008 WL 686222, at *4 (M.D. Fla. Mar. 10, 2008). An electronic signature may be used to sign a writing and has the same force and effect as a written signature. See Fla. Stat. § 668.50.
    PAGE 7

  9. Rivera v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

    189 So. 3d 323 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)   Cited 1 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Applying the Uniform Electronic Transaction Act here, the bank presented competent, substantial evidence proving that Fannie Mae owned the e-note and authorized the bank to pursue the foreclosure. The e-note, on its face, is a “transferable record” because it is an electronic record that would be a note under chapter 673 if it were in writing, and its issuer expressly agreed on its face that it was a transferable record. § 668.50( 16)(a). The bank's evidence proved that Fannie Mae had control of the e-note by showing that the bank, as Fannie Mae's servicer, employed a system reliably establishing Fannie Mae as the entity to which the e-note was transferred. § 668.50( 16)(b). According to the bank's evidence, the bank's system stored the e-note in such a manner that a single authoritative copy of the e-note exists which is unique, identifiable, and unalterable. § 668.50( 16)(c) 1. That authoritative copy, introduced into evidence by the bank as Fannie Mae's designated custodian, identified Fannie Mae as the entity to which the transferable record was most recently transferred. § 668.50( 16)(c) 2., 3. That authoritative copy was supplemented by…

  10. In re Amendments to the Fla. Rules of Civil Procedure

    153 So. 3d 258 (Fla. 2014)   Cited 6 times
    (b) Delegated Claim for Relief.If a claimant has been delegated the authority to institute a mortgage foreclosure action on behalf of the person entitled to enforce the note, the claim for relief shall describe the authority of the claimant and identify with specificity the document that grants the claimant the authority to act on behalf of the person entitled to enforce the note. The term “original note” or “original promissory note” means the signed or executed promissory note rather than a copy of it. The term includes any renewal, replacement, consolidation, or amended and restated note or instrument given in renewal, replacement, or substitution for a previous promissory note. The term also includes a transferrable record, as defined by the Uniform Electronic Transaction Act in section 668.50(16), Florida Statutes.
    PAGE 260

    Cases from cite.case.law:

    NATIONAL EDUCATION ASSOCIATION, v. DEVOS,, 379 F. Supp. 3d 1001 (N.D. Cal. 2019)

    . . . . § 668.50 ). . . . reside to provide that distance-education or correspondence-course program, id. at 92,263 ( 34 C.F.R. § 668.50 . . . state where its enrolled distance-education or correspondence-course students reside, id. ( 34 C.F.R. § 668.50 . . . defrauding students or an accrediting agency's revoking the institution's accreditation), id. ( 34 C.F.R. § 668.50 . . . for teaching certificates), and whether the program satisfies those requirements, id. ( 34 C.F.R. § 668.50 . . .

    NATIONAL EDUCATION ASSOCIATION, v. DEVOS,, 345 F. Supp. 3d 1127 (N.D. Cal. 2018)

    . . . Section 668.50 of the regulations (the "Disclosure Rule") required the institutions to issue certain . . .

    M. RIVERA J. v. WELLS FARGO BANK, N. A. FDIC, 189 So. 3d 323 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

    . . . We base this conclusion on: (a)our examination of section 668.50, Florida Statutes (2010), otherwise . . . it were in writing, and its issuer expressly agreed on its face that it was a transferable record. § 668.50 . . . a single authoritative copy of the e-note exists which is unique, identifiable, and unalterable. § 668.50 . . . the same rights as a holder of an equivalent record or writing under the Uniform Commercial Code. § 668.50 . . . .. includes a transferable record, as defined by the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act in section 668.50 . . .

    In AMENDMENTS TO FLORIDA RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 153 So. 3d 258 (Fla. 2014)

    . . . also includes a transferable record, as defined by the Uniform Electronic Transaction Act in section 668.50 . . .

    L. WESLOWSKI, v. ZUGIBE, J., 14 F. Supp. 3d 295 (S.D.N.Y. 2014)

    . . . He further alleges that, on December 4, his “accumulated leave account ... stood ... at 668.50 hours . . .

    STATE OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL, v. R. B. SHORE,, 41 So. 3d 966 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2010)

    . . . Likewise, section 668.50, Florida Statutes (2009), the Uniform Electronic Transaction Act, does not help . . . See § 668.50(3)(b)(4) (noting that the statute "does not apply to a transaction to the extent the transaction . . .

    SMITH, v. ZAZZLE. COM, INC., 589 F. Supp. 2d 1345 (S.D. Fla. 2008)

    . . . . § 7001; and (2) the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act, section 668.50 of the Florida Statutes) support . . .

    CICORIA, v. A. GAZI, I., 901 So. 2d 282 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005)

    . . . . § 668.50, Fla. Stat.; Charles W. Ehrhardt, Florida Evidence (2004). See Tillman v. . . .

    ORENSTEIN ADVERTISING, INC. v. NEW YORK TIMES, 768 F. Supp. 1133 (E.D. Pa. 1991)

    . . . Since Orenstein placed sixteen ads, 750 actual agate lines by ruler, the alleged overcharge was $668.50 . . .

    v., 14 Ct. Int'l Trade 77 (Ct. Int'l Trade 1990)

    . . . the classification and contended that the imported merchandise is properly classifiable under item 668.50 . . .

    E. M. CHEMICALS, v. UNITED STATES,, 728 F. Supp. 723 (Ct. Int'l Trade 1989)

    . . . , aluminum photo-polymer plates used in printing presses were held properly classifiable under item 668.50 . . .

    E. M. v., 13 Ct. Int'l Trade 849 (Ct. Int'l Trade 1989)

    . . . 208, aluminum photopolymer plates used in printing presses were held properly classifiable under item 668.50 . . .

    In TARASI TIGHE a k a d b a a k a P. C. M. Jr. a k a d b a, 88 B.R. 706 (Bankr. W.D. Pa. 1988)

    . . . Counsel for alleged Debtors established expenses of $406.90 and fees of $12,-668.50, for a total award . . .

    E. ANGLE, v. UNITED STATES, 709 F.2d 570 (9th Cir. 1983)

    . . . On December 18, 1972, the fund was distributed, in equal amounts of $668.50, to eligible Indians, including . . .

    v., 4 Ct. Int'l Trade 234 (Ct. Int'l Trade 1982)

    . . . maintains that as parts of line printers the articles should properly have been classified under item 668.50 . . . including printing presses, 25% ad val offset duplicating machines, (Column 2) and stencil copy machines. 668.50 . . .

    DATA PRODUCTS CORPORATION, v. UNITED STATES,, 558 F. Supp. 124 (Ct. Int'l Trade 1982)

    . . . maintains that as parts of line printers the articles should properly have been classified under item 668.50 . . . (Column 2) 668.50 Other parts of printing machinery ... . . .

    v., 84 Cust. Ct. 208 (Cust. Ct. 1980)

    . . . that the imports are unfinished printing plates, and are properly dutiable under the provision in item 668.50 . . . half-tone plates, * * * and plates of other materials, engraved or otherwise prepared for printing_ * * * 668.50 . . . Hence, by virtue of rule 10(h), the provision for parts of printing machinery in item 668.50, TSUS, covers . . . Tariff Information (1969), schedule 6, volume 8, p. 277: The Bureau of Customs has also held that item 668.50 . . . imports are unfinished printing plates, they are classifiable as parts of printing machinery under item 668.50 . . .

    v., 79 Cust. Ct. 13 (Cust. Ct. 1977)

    . . . classified the plates as parts of printing machinery dutiable at 6 per centum ad valorem under item 668.50 . . . requests judgment over-ruling plaintiff’s claim and' sustaining the customs classification upder TSUS item 668.50 . . .

    v., 64 Cust. Ct. 462 (Cust. Ct. 1970)

    . . . See paragraph 372, Tariff Act of 1930, and items 668.50 and 670.74 of the Tariff Schedules of the United . . .

    L. ENKE, v. RIBICOFF,, 197 F. Supp. 319 (S.D. Fla. 1961)

    . . . $1,050.00 on July 19, 1956 300.00 on Nov. 30, 1956 600.00 on April 12, 1957 1,026.37 on July 9, 1958 668.50 . . .

    LOVELL CLAY PRODUCTS COMPANY, a v. UNITED STATES, 167 F. Supp. 891 (D. Wyo. 1957)

    . . . depletion it would have further reduced income tax payable by said Plaintiff in the amount of $17,-668.50 . . .

    BOWLES, v. BLUE RIBBON PROVISIONS,, 7 F.R.D. 603 (E.D.N.Y. 1947)

    . . . The United States of America is seeking to obtain from the defendant $29,-668.50. . . .