The 2023 Florida Statutes (including Special Session C)

Title XL
REAL AND PERSONAL PROPERTY

Chapter 718
CONDOMINIUMS

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 718.202

718.202 Sales or reservation deposits prior to closing.—

(1) If a developer contracts to sell a condominium parcel and the construction, furnishing, and landscaping of the property submitted or proposed to be submitted to condominium ownership has not been substantially completed in accordance with the plans and specifications and representations made by the developer in the disclosures required by this chapter, the developer shall pay into an escrow account all payments up to 10 percent of the sale price received by the developer from the buyer towards the sale price. The escrow agent shall give to the purchaser a receipt for the deposit, upon request. In lieu of the foregoing, the division director has the discretion to accept other assurances, including, but not limited to, a surety bond or an irrevocable letter of credit in an amount equal to the escrow requirements of this section. Default determinations and refund of deposits shall be governed by the escrow release provision of this subsection. Funds shall be released from escrow as follows:

(a) If a buyer properly terminates the contract pursuant to its terms or pursuant to this chapter, the funds shall be paid to the buyer together with any interest earned.

(b) If the buyer defaults in the performance of his or her obligations under the contract of purchase and sale, the funds shall be paid to the developer together with any interest earned.

(c) If the contract does not provide for the payment of any interest earned on the escrowed funds, interest shall be paid to the developer at the closing of the transaction.

(d) If the funds of a buyer have not been previously disbursed in accordance with the provisions of this subsection, they may be disbursed to the developer by the escrow agent at the closing of the transaction, unless prior to the disbursement the escrow agent receives from the buyer written notice of a dispute between the buyer and developer.

(2) All payments which are in excess of the 10 percent of the sale price described in subsection (1) and which have been received prior to completion of construction by the developer from the buyer on a contract for purchase of a condominium parcel shall be held in a special escrow account established as provided in subsection (1) and controlled by an escrow agent and may not be used by the developer prior to closing the transaction, except as provided in subsection (3) or except for refund to the buyer. If the money remains in this special account for more than 3 months and earns interest, the interest shall be paid as provided in subsection (1).

(3) If the contract for sale of the condominium unit so provides, the developer may withdraw escrow funds in excess of 10 percent of the purchase price from the special account required by subsection (2) when the construction of improvements has begun. He or she may use the funds for the actual costs incurred by the developer in the construction and development of the condominium property in which the unit to be sold is located. For purposes of this subsection, the term “actual costs” includes, but is not limited to, expenditures for demolition, site clearing, permit fees, impact fees, and utility reservation fees, as well as architectural, engineering, and surveying fees that directly relate to construction and development of the condominium property. However, no part of these funds may be used for salaries, commissions, or expenses of salespersons; for advertising, marketing, or promotional purposes; or for loan fees and costs, principal and interest on loans, attorney fees, accounting fees, or insurance costs. A contract which permits use of the advance payments for these purposes shall include the following legend conspicuously printed or stamped in boldfaced type on the first page of the contract and immediately above the place for the signature of the buyer: ANY PAYMENT IN EXCESS OF 10 PERCENT OF THE PURCHASE PRICE MADE TO DEVELOPER PRIOR TO CLOSING PURSUANT TO THIS CONTRACT MAY BE USED FOR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES BY THE DEVELOPER.

(4) The term “completion of construction” means issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the entire building or improvement, or the equivalent authorization issued by the governmental body having jurisdiction, and, in a jurisdiction where no certificate of occupancy or equivalent authorization is issued, it means substantial completion of construction, finishing, and equipping of the building or improvements according to the plans and specifications.

(5) The failure to comply with the provisions of this section renders the contract voidable by the buyer, and, if voided, all sums deposited or advanced under the contract shall be refunded with interest at the highest rate then being paid on savings accounts, excluding certificates of deposit, by savings and loan associations in the area in which the condominium property is located.

(6) If a developer enters into a reservation agreement, the developer shall pay into an escrow account all reservation deposit payments. Reservation deposits shall be payable to the escrow agent, who shall give to the prospective purchaser a receipt for the deposit, acknowledging that the deposit is being held pursuant to the requirements of this subsection. The funds may be placed in either interest-bearing or non-interest-bearing accounts, provided that the funds shall at all reasonable times be available for withdrawal in full by the escrow agent. The developer shall maintain separate records for each condominium or proposed condominium for which deposits are being accepted. Upon written request to the escrow agent by the prospective purchaser or developer, the funds shall be immediately and without qualification refunded in full to the prospective purchaser. Upon such refund, any interest shall be paid to the prospective purchaser, unless otherwise provided in the reservation agreement. A reservation deposit shall not be released directly to the developer except as a down payment on the purchase price simultaneously with or subsequent to the execution of a contract. Upon the execution of a purchase agreement for a unit, any funds paid by the purchaser as a deposit to reserve the unit pursuant to a reservation agreement, and any interest thereon, shall cease to be subject to the provisions of this subsection and shall instead be subject to the provisions of subsections (1)-(5).

(7) Any developer who willfully fails to comply with the provisions of this section concerning establishment of an escrow account, deposits of funds into escrow, and withdrawal of funds from escrow is guilty of a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084, or the successor thereof. The failure to establish an escrow account or to place funds in an escrow account is prima facie evidence of an intentional and purposeful violation of this section.

(8) Every escrow account required by this section shall be established with a bank; a savings and loan association; an attorney who is a member of The Florida Bar; a real estate broker registered under chapter 475; a title insurer authorized to do business in this state, acting through either its employees or a title insurance agent licensed under chapter 626; or any financial lending institution having a net worth in excess of $5 million. The escrow agent shall not be located outside the state unless, pursuant to the escrow agreement, the escrow agent submits to the jurisdiction of the division and the courts of this state for any cause of action arising from the escrow. Every escrow agent shall be independent of the developer, and no developer or any officer, director, affiliate, subsidiary, or employee of a developer may serve as escrow agent. Escrow funds may be invested only in securities of the United States or an agency thereof or in accounts in institutions the deposits of which are insured by an agency of the United States.

(9) Any developer who is subject to the provisions of this section is not subject to the provisions of s. 501.1375.

(10) Nothing in this section shall be construed to require any filing with the division in the case of condominiums other than residential condominiums.

(11) All funds deposited into escrow pursuant to subsection (1) or subsection (2) may be held in one or more escrow accounts by the escrow agent. If only one escrow account is used, the escrow agent must maintain separate accounting records for each purchaser and for amounts separately covered under subsections (1) and (2) and, if applicable, released to the developer pursuant to subsection (3). Separate accounting by the escrow agent of the escrow funds constitutes compliance with this section even if the funds are held by the escrow agent in a single escrow account. It is the intent of this subsection to clarify existing law.

History.—s. 1, ch. 76-222; s. 7, ch. 79-314; s. 3, ch. 80-323; s. 3, ch. 81-185; s. 9, ch. 84-368; s. 5, ch. 87-117; s. 14, ch. 90-151; s. 860, ch. 97-102; s. 14, ch. 2010-174; s. 10, ch. 2021-99.

F.S. 718.202 on Google Scholar

F.S. 718.202 on Casetext

Amendments to 718.202

Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 718.202

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

S718.202 - EMBEZZLE - CONDOMINIUM DEVELOPER FTC ESCROW ACCOUNT REQ - F: T

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases from cite.case.law:

OAK GROVE RESOURCES, LLC, AIG, v. DIRECTOR, OWCP, U. S. LLC, U. S. v. M. O. B. O. OWCP,, 920 F.3d 1283 (11th Cir. 2019)

. . . . § 718.202(a)(1) (emphasis added). . . . Steel puts it, the ALJ's " 'later is better' analysis is not allowed under 20 C.F.R. § 718.202." . . . The text of § 718.202 says nothing of the sort, so U.S. . . .

ELKAY MINING COMPANY, v. C. SMITH, W., 712 F. App'x 222 (4th Cir. 2017)

. . . Although a medical opinion need not rely on chest x-ray evidence, see 20 C.F.R. 718.202(a)(4), an ALJ . . . Compare 20 C.F.R. § 718.304(a), with 20 C.F.R. § 718.202(a)(1). . . .

GRAYSON COAL STONE COMPANY, INC. v. TEAGUE, 688 F. App'x 331 (6th Cir. 2017)

. . . . § 718.202(a)(4). . . . Section 718.202(a)(4) is a federal regulation that sets out one of the ways in which a fact-finder may . . . Such a finding must be supported by a reasoned medical opinion. 20 C.F.R. § 718.202(a)(4). . . . Habre’s, in determining the existence of legal pneumoconiosis pursuant to 20 C.F.R. § 718.202(a)(4). . . . See 20 C.F.R. § 718.202(a)(4). . . .

HELVETIA COAL COMPANY, v. DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, R., 677 F. App'x 790 (3d Cir. 2017)

. . . . § 718.202(a0(4) The ALJ also had a substantial basis for according little weight to the opinions of . . .

WESTMORELAND COAL COMPANY, v. DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, W., 662 F. App'x 213 (4th Cir. 2016)

. . . . § 718.202(a)(1), (4) (2016). . . .

QUARTO MINING COMPANY, v. DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, L., 657 F. App'x 428 (6th Cir. 2016)

. . . . § 718.202(a)). . . .

SEA B MINING COMPANY, c o v. ADDISON, Of, 831 F.3d 244 (4th Cir. 2016)

. . . . § 718.202(a). . . . J.A. 13 (citing 20 C.F.R. §§ 718.102, 718.202). . . .

ISLAND CREEK COAL COMPANY, v. MARCUM Of, 657 F. App'x 370 (6th Cir. 2016)

. . . . § 718.202(a). . . . . § 718.202(b). . . . See 20 C.F.R. § 718.202(b). . . . Forehand’s diagnosis was acceptable in the absence of a positive x-ray, 20 C.F.R. § 718.202(b), and that . . . See id. at 181 (Fino Dep. at 18:16-18); 20 C.F.R. § 718.202(b). . . .

CHEVRON MINING, INC. v. DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS COMPENSATION PROGRAMS,, 653 F. App'x 659 (11th Cir. 2016)

. . . . § 718.202(a)(4) (“notwithstanding a negative X-ray,” a physician may find, based on sound medical judgment . . .

DIXIE FUEL CO. LLC v. DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS COMPENSATION PROGRAMS,, 820 F.3d 833 (6th Cir. 2016)

. . . . § 718.202(a)(1)-(4) — x-rays, biopsy, medical opinions, and CT scans — together. Id. at 881. . . . remanded the case for the ALJ to weigh together all of the relevant evidence referenced in 20 C.F.R. § 718.202 . . . See 20 C.F.R. § 718.202(a)(1), Thus, he found the September 10, 1990 x-ray evidence to be in equipoise . . . different issue to the Board, arguing that “by essentially reiterating his findings at -20 C.F.R. § 718.202 . . .

LANCE COAL CORPORATION GOLDEN OAK MINING CO. INC. v. W. CAUDILL, 636 F. App'x 355 (6th Cir. 2016)

. . . . § 718.202(a)(4). . The ALJ's reference to Dr. . . .

EASTERN ASSOCIATED COAL CORPORATION, v. DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, R., 805 F.3d 502 (4th Cir. 2015)

. . . for a coal miner’s claim, including that the miner must have “pneumoconiosis” as .it is defined in § 718.202 . . . Section 718.202 identifies several ways a miner can establish pneumoconiosis, including by use of the . . . See 20 C.F.R. § 718.202(a)(3) (requiring the decisionmaker to presume that the coal miner has pneumoconiosis . . .

SIMCO PEABODY COAL COMPANY, v. DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, W., 630 F. App'x 447 (6th Cir. 2015)

. . . . § 718.202(a)(1)-(4). . . . examination, and medical and work histories,” if “supported by a reasoned medical opinion.” 20 C.F.R. § 718.202 . . .

COASTAL COAL- WEST VIRGINIA, LLC, v. DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, L., 624 F. App'x 824 (4th Cir. 2015)

. . . . §§ 718.202(a)(1), 718.304(a). . . .

PBS COALS, INC. v. DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, A., 607 F. App'x 159 (3d Cir. 2015)

. . . . § 718.202(a)(1). . . .

PREMIUM COAL COMPANY, INC. v. DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, 619 F. App'x 447 (6th Cir. 2015)

. . . . §§ 718.202-04. . . .

BRANDYWINE EXPLOSIVES SUPPLY v. DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, 790 F.3d 657 (6th Cir. 2015)

. . . . §§ 718.202-205. . . .

BUD DAVIS TRUCKING Co. v. DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, 603 F. App'x 104 (3d Cir. 2015)

. . . . §§ 718.202-718.205 (articulating the eligibility requirements to receive black lung benefits). . . .

CARPENTERTOWN COAL AND COKE CO. INC. Co. v. DIRECTOR OWCP,, 597 F. App'x 54 (3d Cir. 2015)

. . . . § 718.202(a)(4) (noting that the “determination of the existence of pneumoconiosis may also be made . . .

ANTELOPE COAL COMPANY, v. J. GODDARD, F., 580 F. App'x 665 (10th Cir. 2014)

. . . . § 718.202(a). . . . . § 718.202(a)(1), and the second is through biopsy or autopsy evidence, id. § 718.202(a)(2). . . . Id. § 718.202(a)(3). . . . Id. § 718.202(a)(4). . . . Evaluating each category of § 718.202(a) evidence, he concluded that x-ray evidence under § 718.202(a . . .

CENTRAL OHIO COAL COMPANY, v. DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS COMPENSATION PROGRAMS T., 762 F.3d 483 (6th Cir. 2014)

. . . . §§ 718.202-04). . . . biopsy evidence, or reasoned medical opinions, or by invoking an applicable presumption. 20 C.F.R. § 718.202 . . .

ARCH ON THE GREEN, INC. v. L. GROVES, 761 F.3d 594 (6th Cir. 2014)

. . . . § 718.202(a)(4).” . . .

J. CILIBERTO, v. POPPLE BROTHERS, 573 F. App'x 223 (3d Cir. 2014)

. . . . §§ 718.202-718.204 Mr. . . . alone not enough to satisfy the regulatory definition of clinical pneumoco-niosis under 20 C.F.R. §§ 718.202 . . .

PARAMONT COAL COMPANY OF VIRGINIA, LCC, v. DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, J., 565 F. App'x 166 (4th Cir. 2014)

. . . . §§ 718.202-204, 725.202. . . .

NATIONAL MINES CORPORATION v. DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, E., 553 F. App'x 273 (3d Cir. 2014)

. . . . § 718.202(b); see also 20 C.F.R. § 718.202(a)(4) (noting “determination of the existence of pneumoconiosis . . . that pneumoconiosis may be diagnosed “notwithstanding a negative X-ray” as set forth in 20 C.F.R. § 718.202 . . .

NORTH CARILLON, LLC, v. CRC LLC,, 135 So. 3d 274 (Fla. 2014)

. . . Section 718.202, Florida Statutes (2006), sets forth the pertinent provisions of the Condominium Act . . . In brief, section 718.202(1) requires the payment “into an escrow account” of “all-payments up to 10 . . . percent of the sale price,” and section 718.202(2) provides that payments “which are in excess of the . . . The statutory history of section 718.202 is extensive and complex. . . . See §§ 718.202(2), (8), Fla. Stat. (Supp.1984). . . .

PRETKA, O v. KOLTER CITY PLAZA II, INC., 550 F. App'x 830 (11th Cir. 2013)

. . . . § 718.202(3) requires. . . . as a result of Kolter’s omission of the disclosure, which the court concluded was required under § 718.202 . . . Florida courts have held that Condominium Act provisions similar to § 718.202(3) require plaintiffs to . . . The district court correctly concluded that the plaintiffs have failed to state a claim under § 718.202 . . . Stat. § 718.202(3). . . . .

CONSOLIDATION COAL COMPANY, v. DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, 732 F.3d 723 (7th Cir. 2013)

. . . . § 718.202 (“Determining the existence of pneumoconiosis”). . . . See 20 C.F.R. § 718.202(b)(2)(i). . . . See 20 C.F.R. § 718.202(b)(2)(iv). . . . judgment, based on objective medical evidence and supported by a reasoned medical opinion. 20 C.F.R. § 718.202 . . .

COWIN COMPANY, INC. v. DIRECTOR, OWCP, U. S. R., 535 F. App'x 779 (11th Cir. 2013)

. . . . § 718.202(a)(4). The administrative law judge reasonably found Dr. . . .

MINGO LOGAN COAL COMPANY, v. OWENS, R., 724 F.3d 550 (4th Cir. 2013)

. . . . § 718.202(a)(ii)(C), (E). . . . consider “the radiological qualifications of the physicians interpreting such X-rays.” 20 C.F.R. § 718.202 . . .

CONSOLIDATION COAL COMPANY, v. DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS COMPENSATION PROGRAMS,, 721 F.3d 789 (7th Cir. 2013)

. . . (d) lists the elements of a claim, including that the claimant has pneumoco-niosis, as set out in § 718.202 . . . See 20 C.F.R. § 718.202(a)(3) (“If the presumption[ ] described in § ... 718.305 ... . . .

In MONA LISA AT CELEBRATION, LLC, v., 495 B.R. 535 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 2013)

. . . . § 718.202(1). . . . Id. § 718.202(2)-(3). These funds must be held in a special escrow account. Id. . . . Id. § 718.202(5). . . . Stat. § 718.202(5). . . . Stat. § 718.202(5) (emphasis added). . . . .

T. J. S. MINING, INC. Co. v. M. PATRICK OWCP,, 528 F. App'x 242 (3d Cir. 2013)

. . . . § 718.202(a). . . . Fino’s opinion was inconsistent with 20 C.F.R. § 718.202(a)(4), which, in the ALJ’s words, “explicitly . . . Kaplan, contrary to § 718.202(a)(4), would not diagnose emphysema from coal dust exposure without a positive . . . notwithstanding a negative X-ray, finds that the miner suffers or suffered from pneumoconiosis....” 20 C.F.R. § 718.202 . . .

WESTMORELAND COAL COMPANY, INCORPORATED, v. D. COCHRAN, 718 F.3d 319 (4th Cir. 2013)

. . . . § 718.202. . . . less weight” to the opinions of an employer’s expert because it was “inconsistent with 20 C.F.R. § 718.202 . . .

WHITAKER COAL CORPORATION, v. OSBORNE Of, 526 F. App'x 567 (6th Cir. 2013)

. . . . § 718.202(a)(l)(ii)(E); see also Woodward v. . . .

J. JACKSON F. A. v. THE PALMS OF PERDIDO, LLC, 107 So. 3d 446 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2013)

. . . The Palms at Perdido (“The Palms”) on their claims for breach of contract and violations of section 718.202 . . . The Jacksons assert that The Palms violated section 718.202, Florida Statutes, which governs the use . . . Miller, 450 So.2d 875, 878 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984) (“The obvious purpose of section 718.202 is to protect . . . We note that section 718.202 does not make clear how courts are to handle situations where a seller commits . . . BCRE Brickell, LLC, 79 So.3d 91, 95 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012) (reversing entry of summary judgment on section 718.202 . . .

DIXIE FUEL CO. LLC v. DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS COMPENSATION PROGRAMS,, 700 F.3d 878 (6th Cir. 2012)

. . . . § 718.202(a). . . . Claimant may establish the existence of pneumoconiosis under any one of the alternate methods” in § 718.202 . . . Although § 718.202(a) lists four alternatives, each of which may be sufficient to support a diagnosis . . . According to the Director, “although section 718.202(a) enumerates four distinct methods of establishing . . . relevant evidence is to be considered together rather than merely within discrete subsections of § 718.202 . . .

A E COAL CO. v. ADAMS, 694 F.3d 798 (6th Cir. 2012)

. . . . § 718.202(a)(4) (“A determination of the existence of pneumoconiosis may also be made if a physician . . . Id. § 718.202(b). . . .

LITTLE DAVID COAL CO. Co. v. DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, Of, 532 F. App'x 633 (6th Cir. 2012)

. . . . §§ 718.102; 718.106; 718.202(a)(l)-(2). . . .

R. F. I. ENERGY, INC. v. DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS COMPENSATION PROGRAMS,, 488 F. App'x 622 (3d Cir. 2012)

. . . . §§ 718.202-205. . . . evidence that the miner suffers from pneumoconiosis, even if the x-rays are inconclusive. 20 C.F.R. 718.202 . . .

In MONA LISA AT CELEBRATION, LLC, v. LLC, v. LLC, v. LLC, v. LLC,, 472 B.R. 582 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 2012)

. . . . § 718.202. Mona Lisa relied on Fla. . . . Stat. § 718.202. . . . Stat. § 718.202(3). . Fla. Stat. § 718.202(3). . CRC 603, LLC v. . . . . § 718.202(5). . § 718.202(5) (emphasis added). . Fla. . . . Stat. § 718.202. . . .

HARMAN MINING COMPANY v. DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, v., 678 F.3d 305 (4th Cir. 2012)

. . . . § 718.202(b) (“No claim for benefits shall be denied solely on the basis of a negative chest X-ray. . . . that “[n]o claim for benefits shall be denied solely on the basis of a negative chest X-ray,” id. § 718.202 . . . less weight” to the opinions of an employer’s expert because it was “inconsistent with 20 C.F.R. § 718.202 . . .

BRIDGER COAL COMPANY, v. DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR,, 669 F.3d 1183 (10th Cir. 2012)

. . . . §§ 718.202-204; Energy W. Mining Co. v. Oliver, 555 F.3d 1211, 1214 (10th Cir.2009). . . . or suffered from a chronic dust disease of the lung which: (a) When diagnosed by chest X-ray (see § 718.202 . . .

ISLAND CREEK COAL COMPANY, v. CALLOWAY,, 460 F. App'x 504 (6th Cir. 2012)

. . . . § 718.202(a)(4). The ALJ found Majmudar’s report and findings well-documented and well-reasoned. . . . has proven by a preponderance of the evidence that he suffers from pneumoconiosis under [20 C.F.R.] § 718.202 . . .

ISLAND CREEK COAL CO. v. GARRETT,, 459 F. App'x 524 (6th Cir. 2012)

. . . . § 718.202(a)(4); Cornett v. . . . 569, 576 (6th Cir.2000) (agreeing that “mere restatement” of a positive x-ray is insufficient under § 718.202 . . .

DANERI, v. BCRE BRICKELL, LLC,, 79 So. 3d 91 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2012)

. . . We reverse because there are issues of fact that affect whether BCRE adhered to section 718.202, Florida . . . Daneri argued in count III that the contract should be voided because BCRE violated section 718.202. . . . Resolution of this case requires the Court to interpret section 718.202, which imposes requirements upon . . . See § 718.202(1). . . . Thus, BCRE may have violated section 718.202 because the funds held in escrow were withheld in violation . . .

KAUFMAN, d b a v. SWIRE PACIFIC HOLDINGS, INC. a, 836 F. Supp. 2d 1320 (S.D. Fla. 2011)

. . . The Florida legislature, however, added subsection 11 to F.S. § 718.202 in 2010. . . . occurred before the enactment of F.S. § 718.202(11). . . . or the new amendment to F.S. § 718.202. . . . (1) and ‘in excess of the ten percent’ buyer deposits under section 718.202(2).” . . . The plain language of F.S. § 718.202(5) does not require any showing of prejudice. . . .

CRC LLC, CRC LLC, v. NORTH CARILLON, LLC,, 77 So. 3d 655 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2011)

. . . appeals is not whether a condominium developer and its escrow agent violated the requirements of section 718.202 . . . That count merely alleges that the developer and the escrow agent violated section 718.202, Florida Statutes . . . [Appellants] argue that the requirements of § 718.202 are met by a “separate accounting” of the funds . . . However, even if a separate accounting of the escrowed deposits satisfies the requirements of § 718.202 . . . escrow account or two,[FN2] the district court did not err in finding the contract voidable under § 718.202 . . . escrow agent (appellee First American Title Insurance Company) violated the requirements of section 718.202 . . . In May 2006, section 718.202(2) required, in pertinent part: All payments which are in excess of the . . . Subsection (3) of section 718.202 allows a developer to withdraw “escrow funds in excess of 10 percent . . . (1) and the amounts deposited or withdrawn under section 718.202(2) and (3). . . . Section 718.202 has been amended since then, as detailed below. . § 718.202(5), Fla. . . .

MORRISON, v. TENNESSEE CONSOLIDATED COAL COMPANY A. T., 644 F.3d 473 (6th Cir. 2011)

. . . . § 718.202(a)(1). . . . . § 718.202(a)(4), and found that Drs. . . . The ALJ also addressed the issue of disability under 20 C.F.R. § 718.202(b)(2), and concluded that Morrison . . . See 20 C.F.R. §§ 718.202-204 (2000); Adams v. Director, OWCP, 886 F.2d 818, 820 (6th Cir.1989). . . . . § 718.202. . . .

PBS COALS, INC. v. DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS COMPENSATION PROGRAMS,, 435 F. App'x 149 (3d Cir. 2011)

. . . .] § 718.202(a)(4)” and remanded for further consideration of the opinions offered by these two doctors . . . pneumoconiosis by the preponderance of the reasoned medical opinion evidence, pursuant to 20 C.F.R. § 718.202 . . .

J. KEENE, v. CONSOLIDATION COAL COMPANY, 645 F.3d 844 (7th Cir. 2011)

. . . . §§ 718.202-718.204. Mrs. Keene argues that the ALJ ignored evidence regarding the last element. . . .

SEWELL COAL COMPANY, v. O. DEMPSEY Of, 429 F. App'x 311 (4th Cir. 2011)

. . . it supports [] findingfs] of the existence of pneumoconiosis [and total disability] under Sectionfs] 718.202 . . .

HELEN MINING COMPANY, v. DIRECTOR OWCP,, 650 F.3d 248 (3d Cir. 2011)

. . . . § 718.202(a)(l)-(4), discrediting Dr. . . . See 20 C.F.R. § 718.202(a)(4). . . . Renn’s statement was inconsistent with 20 C.F.R. § 718.202(a)(l)-(4) and with the preamble to the regulations . . . Moreover, the ALJ reasonably concluded that this position is at odds with 20 C.F.R. § 718.202(a)(4) ( . . .

ISPAT INLAND, INC, v. DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, L., 422 F. App'x 153 (3d Cir. 2011)

. . . . § 718.202(a)(4) (“A determination of the existence of pneumoconiosis may also be made if a physician . . . See 20 C.F.R. § 718.202(a)(1) (“A chest X-ray conducted and classified in accordance with § 718.102 may . . . Significantly, the Board did not differentiate between § 718.202(a)(1), which allows for a finding of . . . the existence of pneumoconiosis based on positive xray reports, and § 718.202(a)(4), which allows for . . . (a)(1)) and the testimony (which he concluded established legal pneumoconiosis under § 718.202(a)(4)) . . .

ISPAT INLAND, INC. v. DIRECTOR OWCP,, 422 F. App'x 149 (3d Cir. 2011)

. . . . § 718.202(a)(1) (“A chest X-ray conducted and classified in accordance with § 718.102 may form the . . . See 20 C.F.R. § 718.202(a)(4) (“A determination of the existence of pneumoconiosis may also be made if . . . See 20 C.F.R. § 718.202(a)(4). . . .

DOUBLE AA INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENT GROUP, INC. v. SWIRE PACIFIC HOLDINGS, INC. a AA v. a, 637 F.3d 1169 (11th Cir. 2011)

. . . . § 718.202. . . . Swire and Lawyers Title argue that the district court erred in concluding that § 718.202 requires the . . . They argue that the requirements of § 718.202 are met by a “separate accounting” of the funds placed . . . Stat. § 718.202(1) (“the developer shall pay into an escrow account”); § 718.202(6) (“[t]he developer . . . See § 718.202(5). . . .

In MONA LISA AT CELEBRATION, LLC, v. LLC, v. LLC,, 436 B.R. 179 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 2010)

. . . . § 718.202. . . . Chap. 517); • Count IV: Florida Condominium Act (Fla.Stat. § 718.202); • Count V: Florida Condominium . . . Plaintiffs also have alleged predicate violations under Fla.Stat. §§ 718.202 and 190.048. . . . First, a violation of Fla.Stat. § 718.202 does not constitute a violation of FDUT-PA. . . . Fla.Stat. § 718.202(1). . Prospectus, Ex. 4, Doc. No. 48; Doc. No. 125, Ex. 1. . . . .

WINKLER, v. LAWYERS TITLE INSURANCE CORP., 41 So. 3d 414 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2010)

. . . escrow agreement also specified that Coastal would be serving as escrow agent in accordance with section 718.202 . . .

ENERGY WEST MINING COMPANY, v. HUNSINGER, Of, 389 F. App'x 819 (10th Cir. 2010)

. . . . § 718.202(a)(4). In this case, Mr. . . .

In LAKETOWN WHARF MARKETING CORPORATION, n k a LLC, LLC, v., 433 B.R. 401 (Bankr. N.D. Fla. 2010)

. . . . § 718.202 The Original Purchasers are correct that the return of the deposits is based on Florida law . . . .. entitling the person to a refund of any deposit together with interest thereon as provided in s. 718.202 . . . Stat. § 718.202(2) (2005) states that the Special Deposits “may not be used by the developer ... except . . . Stat. § 718.202 does not mandate their return. . . .

WESTMORELAND COAL COMPANY, v. A. COX, 602 F.3d 276 (4th Cir. 2010)

. . . . §§ 718.202-204, 725.202. . . . See 30 U.S.C. §§ 901, 921; 20 C.F.R. §§ 718.202-204, 725.202. . . . did state that the 2005 biopsy established that Cox suffered from pneumoconiosis under 20 C.F.R. § 718.202 . . . The ALJ made it clear in her opinion that she was basing her award of benefits not on 20 C.F.R. § 718.202 . . . the presumption of 30 U.S.C. § 921(c)(3), a claimant establishing pneumoconiosis under 20 C.F.R. § 718.202 . . .

GUNDERSON, v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR,, 601 F.3d 1013 (10th Cir. 2010)

. . . Pneumoconiosis Section 718.202 provides that the existence of pneumoconiosis can be established by x-ray . . . Therefore, the Claimant has not established the presence of pneumoconiosis pursuant to § 718.202(a)(2 . . . Therefore, the Claimant has not established the presence of pneumoconiosis pursuant to § 718.202(a)(3 . . . Medica/deports Under § 718.202(a)(4), a determination of pneumoconiosis may also be made if a physician . . . Sgg 20 C.F.R. § 718.202(a)( 11(2002). This is the only information that can be determined ftom Dr. . . . . § 718.202(b). . . . Claimant has not established the presence of either clinical or legal pneumoconiosis, the criteria of § 718.202 . . . It therefore does not meet the standards for x-rays set forth in 20 C.F.R. §§ 718.202(a)(1); 718.102 . . . (a) and (2) in any event, the letter did not meet the standards for x-rays set forth in 20 C.F.R. § 718.202 . . . Such a finding shall be supported by a reasoned medical opinion. 20 C.F.R. § 718.202(a)(4). . . . .

DEGIRMENCI, v. SAPPHIRE- FORT LAUDERDALE, LLLP, a GP, LLC a, 693 F. Supp. 2d 1325 (S.D. Fla. 2010)

. . . Count IV alleges two violations of Florida Statutes § 718.202. . . . Stat. § 718.202; it is not a claim premised on a violation of § 1703(a)(1)(C) of the ILSF-DA. . . . Stat. § 718.202. iv. . . . Accordingly, claims premised on Florida Statutes § 718.202 are hereby dismissed, with leave to amend. . . . Stat. § 718.202. 5. . . .

DOUBLE AA INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENT GROUP, INC. v. SWIRE PACIFIC HOLDINGS, INC. a, 674 F. Supp. 2d 1344 (S.D. Fla. 2009)

. . . Stat. § 718.202(l)-(2); (b) Plaintiffs properly voided the Purchase Agreement under § 718.202(5); and . . . state that Swire “shall” comply with section 718.202. . . . Stat. § 718.202(5). B. . . . violation of Florida Statute Section 718.202. . . . Because Swire did in fact violate section 718.202, that argument fails. . . .

In EDGEWATER BY THE BAY, LLLP, LLLP, v., 419 B.R. 511 (Bankr. S.D. Fla. 2009)

. . . /Counterclaimants can lawfully rescind based on the Debtor’s alleged violations of § 489.1425 and § 718.202 . . . Stat. § 718.202(8). . . . Florida Statutes § 718.202(8) Although not the subject of Counterclaimants’ Motion for Summary Judgment . . . Stat. § 718.202(8) is not a statute “which proscribes unfair methods of competition, or unfair, deceptive . . . Finally, even if Counter-claimants could prove that the Escrow Agent was not independent under § 718.202 . . .

AHERN v. FIDELITY NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, LLC, N. A. MAS Co., 664 F. Supp. 2d 1224 (M.D. Fla. 2009)

. . . entitling the person to a refund of any deposit together with interest thereon as provided in Section 718.202 . . .

In MONA LISA AT CELEBRATION, LLC, v. LLC, v. LLC, v. LLC,, 410 B.R. 710 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 2009)

. . . Thereafter, in apparent reliance on Florida Statutes § 718.202, the debtor purchased from Westchester . . . Stat. § 718.202. In Count IV, plaintiffs allege Mona Lisa violated Fla. . . . . § 718.202 by withdrawing plaintiffs’ escrow funds prior to completion of the Hotel. . . . Stat. § 718.202(1). . . . Stat. § 718.202 when it withdrew the escrow funds. . . .

L. GREENE, v. KING JAMES COAL MINING, INC., 575 F.3d 628 (6th Cir. 2009)

. . . . §§ 718.202-204 (2000); Adams v. Director, OWCP, 886 F.2d 818, 820 (6th Cir.1989). . . . . § 718.202. Only the fourth method is at issue in this appeal. . . . Together, the completion of these tasks will result in a medical opinion under 20 C.F.R. § 718.202(a) . . . an examination conducted by or on behalf of the Department of Health and Human Services. 20 C.F.R. § 718.202 . . .

A. FELTON, v. DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS COMPENSATION PROGRAMS,, 339 F. App'x 187 (3d Cir. 2009)

. . . . § 718.202(a). . . .

ENERGY WEST MINING COMPANY, v. OLIVER, 555 F.3d 1211 (10th Cir. 2009)

. . . . § 718.202(a) — the ALJ found that Mr. . . .

SPRAGUE, v. DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS COMPENSATION PROGRAMS,, 310 F. App'x 890 (7th Cir. 2009)

. . . . § 718.202(a)(1); Zeigler Coal Co. v. Dir., Office of Workers’ Comp. . . . not the reading, but the x-ray, that establishes the presumption [of pneumoconiosis].”); 20 C.F.R. § 718.202 . . . See 20 C.F.R. § 718.202(a)(l)(ii)(E). . . .

CONSOLIDATION COAL COMPANY, v. R. McGREEVY, 298 F. App'x 127 (3d Cir. 2008)

. . . . §§ 718.1(a), 718.202-204. III. Petitioner argues that the ALJ erred in crediting Dr. . . .

MOUNTAIN CLAY, INC. v. COLLINS,, 256 F. App'x 757 (6th Cir. 2007)

. . . . § 718.202(a)(4); Cornett, 227 F.3d at 575. . . . . § 718.202(a)(4). In crediting Dr. . . .

THE PITTSBURG MIDWAY COAL MINING CO. v. DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR,, 508 F.3d 975 (11th Cir. 2007)

. . . or suffered from a chronic dust disease of the lung which: (a)When diagnosed by chest X-ray (see § 718.202 . . .

GARCIA, Jr. v. SANTA MARIA RESORT, INC. d b a, 528 F. Supp. 2d 1283 (S.D. Fla. 2007)

. . . . §§ 718.202(1) & 718.503(Ɩ)(b)(Ɩ). Accordingly, Count VIII is also dismissed with prejudice. IV. . . .

ISLAND CREEK COAL COMPANY, v. L. GROVES, 246 F. App'x 842 (4th Cir. 2007)

. . . . § 718.202(a) (2006). . . . those B readers who are also board-certified radiologists are entitled to greater weight. 20 C.F.R. § 718.202 . . . See 20 C.F.R. § 718.202(b) (2006). . . .

R. CURTIS, v. PEABODY COAL COMPANY, 248 F. App'x 621 (6th Cir. 2007)

. . . . § 718.202(a)(l)-(4) and thus could not establish an entitlement to benefits pursuant to the Act. . . .

SMITH, v. MARTIN COUNTY COAL CORPORATION,, 233 F. App'x 507 (6th Cir. 2007)

. . . . §§ 718.202-204 (2000); Adams v. Director, OWCP, 886 F.2d 818, 820 (6th Cir.1989). . . . an examination conducted by or on behalf of the Department of Health and Human Services. 20 C.F.R. § 718.202 . . .

ENERGY WEST MINING COMPANY, v. C. JOHNSON, 233 F. App'x 860 (10th Cir. 2007)

. . . . § 718.202(a)(4). Applying the rebuttable presumption afforded Mr. . . .

CROCKETT COLLERIES, INC. v. BARRETT Of, 478 F.3d 350 (6th Cir. 2007)

. . . . §§ 718.202, 718.203, 718.204. . . . ALJ found that Barrett had established the existence of legal pneumoconio-sis pursuant to 20 C.F.R. § 718.202 . . . Such a finding shall be supported by a reasoned medical opinion.” 20 C.F.R. § 718.202(a)(4). Dr. . . .

PERRY, v. MYNU COALS, INCORPORATED, 469 F.3d 360 (4th Cir. 2006)

. . . . § 718.202, that the disease arose from coal mine employment, 20 C.F.R. § 718.203, and that death was . . .

L. COLLINS, J. v. POND CREEK MINING COMPANY, 468 F.3d 213 (4th Cir. 2006)

. . . . § 718.202(a), Mrs. . . . stated analysis for finding pneumo-coniosis — i a, “through physician’s reports as provided in Section 718.202 . . . We noted that the ALJ “did" in fact evaluate the evidence within subsections (a)(1) and (a)(4) of § 718.202 . . . relevant evidence is to be considered together rather than merely within discrete subsections of § 718.202 . . . sufficient to establish pneumo-coniosis under one of the four methods set out at 20 C.F.R. section 718.202 . . . . § 718.202(a)’s four subsections, a miner’s pneumoconiosis may be established in four ways: (1) chest . . . to find the existence of pneumoconiosis by looking exclusively at evidence within one of 20 C.F.R. § 718.202 . . . establish, by a preponderance of the evidence and through one of the four methods spelled out in § 718.202 . . . the ALJ was permitted to consider whether evidence of pneumoconiosis relating to one of the four § 718.202 . . . working in the coal mines) in the same manner (through one of the four methods prescribed by the § 718.202 . . .

C. ANDERSEN, J. v. DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS COMPENSATION PROGRAMS,, 455 F.3d 1102 (10th Cir. 2006)

. . . . § 718.202(b). . . . See § 718.202. . . .

FLORENCE MINING COMPANY, v. DIRECTOR, OWCP, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR L., 188 F. App'x 105 (3d Cir. 2006)

. . . . § 718.202(a)(1), the weight of the medical opinion evidence established the existence of both clinical . . . and legal pneumoconiosis, see n. 2, infra., pursuant to 20 C.F.R. § 718.202(a)(4). . . . when all of the x-ray evidence taken together did not merit a positive finding pursuant to 20 C.F.R. § 718.202 . . .

EASTERN ASSOCIATED COAL, LLC, v. M. WILES, 176 F. App'x 354 (4th Cir. 2006)

. . . . § 718.202(a). The ALJ determined that Ms. . . . establish that her husband suffered from pneumoconiosis is medical opinion evidence pursuant to 20 C.F.R. § 718.202 . . .

MOUNTAIN CLAY, INC. v. L. SPIVEY, 172 F. App'x 641 (6th Cir. 2006)

. . . . § 718.202(a)(4). . . . .2000) (agreeing that restatement of x-ray does not constitute reasoned medical judgment); 20 C.F.R. § 718.202 . . . gas and pulmonary function studies, physical examination, and medical and work histories. 20 C.F.R. § 718.202 . . .

DANTE COAL COMPANY, v. DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS COMPENSATION PROGRAMS,, 164 F. App'x 338 (4th Cir. 2006)

. . . . § 718.202(a)(1)(E) (2005). . . . .

YOGI MINING COMPANY, v. M. FIFE, 159 F. App'x 441 (4th Cir. 2005)

. . . . § 718.202. . . . See 20 C.F.R. § 718.202(a)(1)(ii)(E). . . . See 20 C.F.R. § 718.202(a)(1)(ii)(C). . . .

INLAND STEEL COMPANY, v. DIRECTOR, OWCP, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, 152 F. App'x 187 (3d Cir. 2005)

. . . result of pneumoconiosis if the claimant can prove that: “(1) [t]he miner had pneumoconiosis (see § 718.202 . . .

WEBB, v. ROXANA COAL COMPANY, INCORPORATED, 139 F. App'x 678 (6th Cir. 2005)

. . . . § 718.202. The new X-ray evidence consisted of three positive and five negative X-ray readings. . . .

CONSOLIDATION COAL COMPANY, v. DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS COMPENSATION PROGRAMS,, 144 F. App'x 291 (4th Cir. 2005)

. . . . § 718.202(a)(2) provides in part that “A report of autopsy shall be accepted unless there is evidence . . .

W. ULBIN, Sr. v. DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR,, 132 F. App'x 968 (3d Cir. 2005)

. . . . § 718.202. . . . the ALJ concluded that Ulbin had established the existence of pneumoconiosis by x-ray under section 718.202 . . . Based on that determination, the ALJ concluded that Ulbin, under section 718.202(a)(1), failed to carry . . .

ROBERTS SCHAEFER COMPANY, v. DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS COMPENSATION PROGRAMS L., 400 F.3d 992 (7th Cir. 2005)

. . . . §§ 725.202(d), 718.202-718.204. . . . See 20 C.F.R. § 718.202(a). . . .

MARTIN, v. LIGON PREPARATION COMPANY, 400 F.3d 302 (6th Cir. 2005)

. . . . § 718.202(a)(4). Based on the testimony of Drs. . . . See 20 C.F.R. § 718.202(a)(4). The second reason is that even if Dr. . . .

WESTMORELAND COAL COMPANY, v. M. AMICK, 123 F. App'x 525 (4th Cir. 2004)

. . . Section 718.202(a) provides that [a] finding of the existence of pneumoconiosis may be made as follows . . . Such a finding shall be supported by a reasoned medical opinion. 20 C.F.R. § 718.202(a) (2004). . . .

U. S. STEEL MINING COMPANY, LLC, v. DIRECTOR, OWCP,, 386 F.3d 977 (11th Cir. 2004)

. . . . § 718.202(a).” ALJ Order at 3. . . . I find physician opinion evidence at § 718.202(a)(4) a more probative basis to prove the existence of . . . pneumoconiosis then [sic] chest x-ray evidence at § 718.202(a)(1). . . . Department of Health and Human Services. 20 C.F.R. § 718.202(a)(l)(ii)(E); 42 C.F.R. § 37.51. . . . Title 20 C.F.R. § 718.202(a)(4) specifically provides that a diagnosis of pneumoconiosis based on "sound . . .

PINEY CREEK COAL COMPANY, v. MARSHALL,, 107 F. App'x 340 (4th Cir. 2004)

. . . . § 718.202(a) (2003). . . . may establish that he suffers from pneumoconiosis is medical opinion evidence pursuant to 20 C.F.R. § 718.202 . . .

BETHENERGY MINES, INCORPORATED, v. L. CUNNINGHAM, 104 F. App'x 881 (4th Cir. 2004)

. . . . § 718.202(a)(l)(ii)(E). . . . Id. § 718.202(a)(l)(ii)(C). . . . Id. § 718.202(a)(1) (emphasis added). . . . We consider only the two methods, chest x-ray evidence, see id. § 718.202(a)(1), and physician opinion . . . evidence, see id. § 718.202(a)(4), used in this case. . . .

ENERGY WEST MINING COMPANY, v. DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS COMPENSATION PROGRAMS,, 105 F. App'x 248 (10th Cir. 2004)

. . . . § 718.202(a)(l)-(4)). . . . ALJ satisfied his obligation under 30 U.S.C. § 923(b) to consider all relevant evidence and under § 718.202 . . . See § 718.202(a)(4). . . .

WILLIAMS MOUNTAIN COAL COMPANY, v. LUCAS, 100 F. App'x 893 (4th Cir. 2004)

. . . . §§ 718.202-204 (2003). . . . Pursuant to 20 C.F.R. § 718.202(a), a claimant can prove the existence of pneumoconiosis through four . . . different categories of evidence; the only two relevant here are x-ray evidence, § 718.202(a)(1), and . . . reasoned medical opinion evidence, § 718.202(a)(4). . . . . See Compton, 211 F.3d at 211 (requiring the ALJ to weigh all of the relevant evidence under § 718.202 . . .