Florida Statutes

Fla. Stat. § 760.50 (2025)

Discrimination on the basis of AIDS, AIDS-related complex, and HIV prohibited.

✓ 2025 Florida Statutes — current through the 2025 Regular Session

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us JustiaFla. Statutes CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

760.50 Discrimination on the basis of AIDS, AIDS-related complex, and HIV prohibited.—

(1) The Legislature finds and declares that persons infected or believed to be infected with human immunodeficiency virus have suffered and will continue to suffer irrational and scientifically unfounded discrimination. The Legislature further finds and declares that society itself is harmed by this discrimination, as otherwise able-bodied persons are deprived of the means of supporting themselves, providing for their own health care, housing themselves, and participating in the opportunities otherwise available to them in society. The Legislature further finds and declares that remedies are needed to correct these problems.

(2) Any person with or perceived as having acquired immune deficiency syndrome, acquired immune deficiency syndrome related complex, or human immunodeficiency virus shall have every protection made available to handicapped persons.

(3)(a) No person may require an individual to take a human immunodeficiency virus-related test as a condition of hiring, promotion, or continued employment unless the absence of human immunodeficiency virus infection is a bona fide occupational qualification for the job in question.

(b) No person may fail or refuse to hire or discharge any individual, segregate or classify any individual in any way which would deprive or tend to deprive that individual of employment opportunities or adversely affect his or her status as an employee, or otherwise discriminate against any individual with respect to compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment on the basis of knowledge or belief that the individual has taken a human immunodeficiency virus test or the results or perceived results of such test unless the absence of human immunodeficiency virus infection is a bona fide occupational qualification of the job in question.

(c) A person who asserts that a bona fide occupational qualification exists for human immunodeficiency virus-related testing shall have the burden of proving that:

1. The human immunodeficiency virus-related test is necessary to ascertain whether an employee is currently able to perform in a reasonable manner the duties of the particular job or whether an employee will present a significant risk of transmitting human immunodeficiency virus infection to other persons in the course of normal work activities; and

2. There exists no means of reasonable accommodation short of requiring that the individual be free of human immunodeficiency virus infection.

(4)(a) A person may not discriminate against an otherwise qualified individual in housing, public accommodations, or governmental services on the basis of the fact that such individual is, or is regarded as being, infected with human immunodeficiency virus.

(b) A person or other entity receiving or benefiting from state financial assistance may not discriminate against an otherwise qualified individual on the basis of the fact that such individual is, or is regarded as being, infected with human immunodeficiency virus.

(c) A person who asserts that an individual who is infected with human immunodeficiency virus is not otherwise qualified shall have the burden of proving that no reasonable accommodation can be made to prevent the likelihood that the individual will, under the circumstances involved, expose other individuals to a significant possibility of being infected with human immunodeficiency virus.

(d) A person may not fail or refuse to hire or discharge any individual, segregate or classify any individual in any way which would deprive or tend to deprive that individual of employment opportunities or adversely affect his or her status as an employee, or otherwise discriminate against any individual with respect to compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment on the basis of the fact that the individual is a licensed health care professional or health care worker who treats or provides patient care to persons infected with human immunodeficiency virus.

(5) Every employer who provides or administers health insurance benefits or life insurance benefits to its employees shall maintain the confidentiality of information relating to the medical condition or status of any person covered by such insurance benefits. Such information in the possession of a public employer is exempt from the provisions of s. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution. An employer shall be liable in damages to any person damaged by its failure to implement such a procedure.

(6)(a) Any person aggrieved by a violation of this section shall have a right of action in the circuit court and may recover for each violation:

1. Against any person who violates a provision of this section, liquidated damages of $1,000 or actual damages, whichever is greater.

2. Against any person who intentionally or recklessly violates a provision of this section, liquidated damages of $5,000 or actual damages, whichever is greater.

3. Reasonable attorney’s fees.

4. Such other relief, including an injunction, as the court may deem appropriate.

(b) Nothing in this section limits the right of the person aggrieved by a violation of this section to recover damages or other relief under any other applicable law.

History.—s. 45, ch. 88-380; s. 14, ch. 89-350; s. 6, ch. 94-90; s. 421, ch. 96-406; s. 1796, ch. 97-102.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 16 cases, 1990–2016 · leading case: Adem A. Albra v. Advan, Inc., 490 F.3d 826 (11th Cir. 2007).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Adem A. Albra v. Advan, Inc., 490 F.3d 826 (11th Cir. 2007). · cites it 5× “, and the Florida Omnibus *828 AIDS Act (“FOAA”), Fla. Stat. § 760.50 . As a matter of first impression, we hold that individuals are not amenable to private suit for violating the ADA’s anti-retaliation provision, 42 U.”

X Corp. v. Y Person, 622 So. 2d 1098 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993). · cites it 13× “*1100 "X" Corporation filed an action for declaratory relief against one of its employees, "Y" Person, appellee, alleging in count I of the second amended complaint, inter alia, that it is in doubt as to its rights, duties, and responsibilities concerning section 760.50, Florida…”

Byrd v. BT Foods, Inc., 948 So. 2d 921 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007). · cites it 6× “We also reverse the dismissal of the count seeking relief under section 760.50. While we find that section 760.”

Belletete v. Halford, 886 So. 2d 308 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004). · cites it 11× “Wayne Belletete sued his former landlady, Gloria Halford, for discrimination under the Florida Civil Rights Act (FCRA), the Florida Fair Housing Act (FHA), and Florida Statutes section 760.50, in addition to alleging negligent infliction of emotional distress.”

Byrd v. Bt Foods, Inc., 26 So. 3d 600 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009). · cites it 8× “" [2] The Florida Omnibus Aids Act, Fla. Stat. § 760.50 , prohibits employers from discharging an employee or otherwise discriminating against any employee on the basis of knowledge or a belief that the employee has HIV.”

Hous. Opportunities Proj. for Excellence, Inc. v. Spv Realty, Lc, 212 So. 3d 419 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016). · cites it 4× “11 of the Florida Civil Rights Act, and for discrimination on the basis of his HIV-positive condition under section 760.50 of the Florida Statutes,6 after he 6 The causes of action alleged by Belletete under the Florida Civil Rights Act, the Florida Fair Housing Act, and the law…”

Huck v. Mega Nursing Servs., Inc., 989 F. Supp. 1462 (S.D. Fla. 1997). · cites it 4× “The Act states in relevant part that: No person may fail or refuse to hire or discharge any individual, segregate or classify any individual of employment opportunities or adversely affect his status as an employee, or otherwise discriminate against any individual with respect…”

Hummer v. Unemployment Appeals Com'n, 573 So. 2d 135 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991). “In 1989, the Legislature enacted section 760.50 which expressly provides that any person with or perceived as having AIDS, AIDS-related-complex or the HIV virus shall have every protection made available to handicapped persons.”

Meli Inv. Corp. v. Or, 621 So. 2d 676 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993). · cites it 2× “The tenants counterclaimed for wrongful eviction, harassment, and discrimination on the basis of acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS), pursuant to section 760.50, Florida Statutes (1991). The partial final judgment entered on the landlord's complaint found the tenants to…”

\Y\" Person v. \"X\" Corp.", 606 So. 2d 1219 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992). · cites it 5× ““X” Corporation sued for a declaration 1 of its rights under section 760.50, Florida Statutes (1989), and section 381.”

Chockla v. Celebrity Cruise Lines, Inc., 47 F. Supp. 2d 1365 (S.D. Fla. 1999). · cites it 2× “Wrongful Termination under Florida Statute § 760.50(3) In Count II of her First Amended Complaint, Plaintiff claims that she was wrongfully terminated in violation of Florida Statute § 760.”

Russell Kaufman v. Checkers Drive-In Restaurants, Inc., a Delaware Corp., 122 F.3d 892 (11th Cir. 1997). “Count Four alleged that Checkers’ “discriminatory treatment and discharge” of Kaufman violated the Florida AIDS discrimination statute, Fla. Stat. § 760.50 . Count Five sought recovery under the Florida Civil Rights Act, Fla.”

Show all 16 citing cases →

— 760.50(2) — 2 cases

Belletete v. Halford, 886 So. 2d 308 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004). “Wayne Belletete sued his former landlady, Gloria Halford, for discrimination under the Florida Civil Rights Act (FCRA), the Florida Fair Housing Act (FHA), and Florida Statutes section 760.50, in addition to alleging negligent infliction of emotional distress.”

Severino v. North Fort Myers Fire Control Dist., 935 F.2d 1179 (11th Cir. 1991).

— 760.50(3) — 1 case

Chockla v. Celebrity Cruise Lines, Inc., 47 F. Supp. 2d 1365 (S.D. Fla. 1999). “Wrongful Termination under Florida Statute § 760.50(3) In Count II of her First Amended Complaint, Plaintiff claims that she was wrongfully terminated in violation of Florida Statute § 760.”

— 760.50(3)(b) — 4 cases

Byrd v. BT Foods, Inc., 948 So. 2d 921 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007). “We also reverse the dismissal of the count seeking relief under section 760.50. While we find that section 760.”

Byrd v. Bt Foods, Inc., 26 So. 3d 600 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009). “" [2] The Florida Omnibus Aids Act, Fla. Stat. § 760.50 , prohibits employers from discharging an employee or otherwise discriminating against any employee on the basis of knowledge or a belief that the employee has HIV.”

X Corp. v. Y Person, 622 So. 2d 1098 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993). “*1100 "X" Corporation filed an action for declaratory relief against one of its employees, "Y" Person, appellee, alleging in count I of the second amended complaint, inter alia, that it is in doubt as to its rights, duties, and responsibilities concerning section 760.50, Florida…”

— 760.50(3)(b)(1995) — 1 case

Huck v. Mega Nursing Servs., Inc., 989 F. Supp. 1462 (S.D. Fla. 1997). “The Act states in relevant part that: No person may fail or refuse to hire or discharge any individual, segregate or classify any individual of employment opportunities or adversely affect his status as an employee, or otherwise discriminate against any individual with respect…”

— 760.50(3)(c) — 1 case

— 760.50(4)(a) — 1 case

— 760.50(6) — 1 case

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.