CopyCited 872 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 53 U.S.L.W. 2573, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 249, 1985 Fla. LEXIS 3238
...tes and the acts of the Legislature of this state. [4] See, e.g., §
61.181(5)(b), Fla. Stat. (Supp. 1984) (alimony and child support enforcement); §
77.28, Fla. Stat. (1983) (garnishment); §
718.303, Fla. Stat. (Supp. 1984) (condominium actions); §
725.07, Fla....
14 red8 yellow313 green6 procedural
Receded fromCullen (2010)phrase: "receded from"
Receded fromTetrault (2001)phrase: "receding from"
CopyCited 21 times | Published | District Court, M.D. Florida | 38 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 437, 1982 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10641
...issue an order prohibiting the practice, including reasonable attorney's fees." Fla.Stat.Ann. § 23.167(13). The omission of punitive damages from this legislation is made all the more glaring when the Act is compared to Florida's equal pay statute. Section 725.07, Florida Statutes, prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, sex, or marital status in providing "equal pay for equal services," and permits a victim of such discrimination to recover punitive as well as compensatory damages, along with reasonable attorney's fees. Fla.Stat.Ann. § 725.07(2)....
0 red0 yellow7 green0 procedural
Cited as authorityGlezos (1987)phrase: "rule_authority"
CopyCited 7 times | Published | District Court, S.D. Florida | 1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7989, 1992 WL 124401
...Rosalind Stern claims that the Bank discriminated against her when it required her to guarantee her husband's loans. The Second Amended Complaint contains five counts: (1) violation of the Equal Credit Opportunity Act ("ECOA"), 15 U.S.C. §§ 1691 et seq. (1982 & Supp.1991); (2) violation of Fla. Stat. § 725.07; (3) slander of credit; (4) intentional infliction of emotional distress; and (5) abuse of process....
0 red0 yellow6 green0 procedural
Cited as authorityArcher (2007)phrase: "rule_authority"
Cited as authorityVargas (2002)phrase: "rule_authority"
CopyCited 6 times | Published | District Court, M.D. Florida | 1997 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15556, 1997 WL 619219
...Count III; Claim for Lost Wages under Fla.Stat. §
448.08. The plaintiff is foreclosed from bringing an action under Fla.Stat. §
448.08 because the Fair Labor Standards Act is Plaintiff's exclusive remedy for lost wages. Section
448.07(4) Fla.Stat., states "[n]othing in this section or in §
725.07, relating to discrimination based on sex in providing equal pay for equal services performed, is applicable to any employer, labor organization or member thereof, or employee whose employer is subject to the federal Fair Labor Standards Act...
0 red0 yellow3 green0 procedural
Cited as authorityAnderson (2025)phrase: "rule_authority"
CopyCited 5 times | Published | District Court, M.D. Florida | 35 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 876, 26 Wage & Hour Cas. (BNA) 1396, 1984 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20139, 36 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 35, 040
...Dunlap, Tampa, Fla., for defendant. ORDER GEORGE C. YOUNG, Senior District Judge. Before the Court is the question of which statute of limitations provision governs plaintiff's pendant state law claim brought pursuant to the Florida Equal Pay Act, § 725.07, Florida Statutes (1981)....
...Defendant contends that the applicable statute is §
95.11(4)(c), Fla.Stat., which prescribes a two-year limitations period for *10 any "action to recover wages or overtime or damages or penalties concerning payment of wages and overtime." Because the Florida Equal Pay Act, §
725.07, Fla....
...the four year limitations period generally applicable under §
95.11(3)(f), Fla.Stat., to actions "founded on a statutory liability." Although apparently no Florida case has considered which limitations period is applicable to actions brought under §
725.07, Fla....
...Having concluded that plaintiff's claim is not governed by §
95.11(4)(c), it remains to determine which statute of limitations is properly applicable. Because the basis for plaintiff's claim, as well as the measure of damages plaintiff can recover, derive expressly and exclusively from the Florida Equal Pay Act, §
725.07, Fla.Stat., the Court finds that the applicable limitations provision is the four-year statute governing actions "founded on a statutory liability", §
95.11(3)(f)....
0 red0 yellow2 green0 procedural
Cited as authorityPardini (2023)phrase: "rule_authority"
Cited as authoritySpencer (1986)phrase: "rule_authority"
CopyCited 2 times | Published | Florida 2nd District Court of Appeal | 1989 WL 11944
...In a related appeal, consolidated for our consideration, Munsey has sought to overturn awards of attorney's fees to General Telephone and to individuals who at an earlier time were dismissed from the lawsuit. We affirm the judgment but reverse the attorney's fee order. Munsey sued General Telephone under section 725.07, Florida Statutes (1983), which renders sex discrimination actionable....
...hat the issue of whether the individual defendants could be held liable for any alleged discrimination in the matter of Munsey's employment was "justiciable." Considering the paucity of relevant interpretation of the statute under which Munsey sued, section 725.07, her decision to pursue the individuals was not so frivolous as to justify the sanction of imposing attorney's fees upon her....
...In this case, however, there was at the outset at least some legitimate anticipation that liability would attach to the individual defendants if it could be demonstrated that they participated in activity for which they could be held responsible under section 725.07....
...er section
448.08, Florida Statutes. That section provides that "[t]he court may award to the prevailing party in an action for unpaid wages costs of the action and a reasonable attorney's fee." Munsey's lawsuit, however, was expressly grounded upon section
725.07, Florida Statutes, which states that: (1) No person ......
...sis of recovery was pursuant to the arbitration clause, as governed by Chapter 682, Florida Statutes, and not the general labor regulations of Chapter 448, Florida Statutes.
472 So.2d at 1358. Similarly, the basis for Munsey's attempted recovery was section
725.07, and not the general labor statutes. Appellees distinguish Buena Vista on the basis that section
682.11, Florida Statutes, specifically excludes recovery of counsel fees in actions to enforce arbitration awards. Section *1333
725.07 contains no specific exclusions but unmistakably restricts attorney's fees to the prevailing plaintiff....
...We are unable to formulate statutory construction gymnastics capable of importing section
448.08 into the gap; in fact, to do so would fly in the face of the legislative policy behind the enactment of the anti-discrimination statute. General Telephone has argued that section
725.07 and section
448.08 are in pari materia and should be read together to permit the trial court's award....
...The risk of financial obligation could well induce the aggrieved plaintiff's forbearance from seeking an award of damages that could include much more than "unpaid wages." We cannot extract from the enactment of section
448.08 a legislative purpose to create a chilling effect on the pursuit of claims encompassed within section
725.07....
CopyPublished | District Court of Appeal of Florida | 16 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 209, 1977 Fla. App. LEXIS 16823, 17 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 8363
...Her claim against appellee General Finance, her former employer, was that it withheld salary increases and promotion because she is a *1112 woman and eventually discharged her as a result of her repeated demands that she receive equal pay for equal services performed. The applicable statute, Section 725.07, Florida Statutes (1973), provided: “No person ....
...fees to one damaged by proscribed conduct. The trial court was correct in excising from Raulerson’s claim her allegation that she was denied promotion to a designated job category because of her sex. Titular promotion is not a matter addressed by Section 725.07....
...o more salary, although the discharge of one asserting a meritorious claim under the statute may properly be considered in assessing punitive damages. Because Raulerson’s claim was found not to be meritorious, her discharge is not remediable under Section 725.07....
