Florida Statutes

Fla. Stat. § 768.095 (2025)

Employer immunity from liability; disclosure of information regarding former or current employees.

✓ 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

768.095 Employer immunity from liability; disclosure of information regarding former or current employees.—An employer who discloses information about a former or current employee to a prospective employer of the former or current employee upon request of the prospective employer or of the former or current employee is immune from civil liability for such disclosure or its consequences unless it is shown by clear and convincing evidence that the information disclosed by the former or current employer was knowingly false or violated any civil right of the former or current employee protected under chapter 760.

History.—s. 1, ch. 91-165; s. 17, ch. 99-225.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 10 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1995–2025 · leading case: Blake v. City of Port Saint Lucie, 73 So. 3d 905 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Blake v. City of Port Saint Lucie, 73 So. 3d 905 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011). · cites it 10× “095 states: An employer who discloses information about a former or current employee to a prospective employer of the former or current employee upon request of the prospective employer or of the former or current employee is immune from civil liability for such disclosure or…”

Arce v. Wackenhut Corp., 40 So. 3d 813 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010). · cites it 6× “Wackenhut further argues that even if the FBI Report is not inadmissible hearsay, any statements made by Hill are protected under section 768.095, Florida Statutes, which provides: An employer who discloses information about a former or current employee to a prospective employer…”

Falic v. Legg Mason Wood Walker, Inc., 347 F. Supp. 2d 1260 (S.D. Fla. 2004). · cites it 2× “Florida courts recognize a qualified privilege in three types of defamation cases, namely those involving: (1) Mutuality of interest in the statement between the speaker and listener; (2) Statements made to an employer regarding the job performance of an employee, which are also…”

Linafelt v. Beverly Enter.-fl., Inc., 745 So. 2d 386 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999). · cites it 3× “Once again, we do not have a jury verdict that follows section 768.095, Florida Statutes. Instead, the jury found that appellees intentionally interfered with appellant without determining whether appellant had demonstrated by clear and convincing evidence that the interfering…”

Linafelt v. Bev, Inc., 662 So. 2d 986 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995). · cites it 2× “" Thus, the allegations of the complaint sufficiently allege a cause of action for intentional interference with an advantageous business relationship.”

Thomas v. Tampa Bay Downs, Inc., 761 So. 2d 401 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000). · cites it 2× “See § 768.095, Fla. Stat. (1993) [1] ; see also Linafelt v.”

Bates v. St. Lucie Cnty. Sheriff's Off., 31 So. 3d 210 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010). · cites it 3× “Section 768.095, Florida Statutes (2008), provides: An employer who discloses information about a former or current employee to a prospective employer of the former or current employee upon request of the prospective employer or of the former or current employee is immune from…”

Thompson v. Orange Lake Country Club, Inc., 224 F. Supp. 2d 1368 (M.D. Fla. 2002). “’ For purposes of this section, the presumption of good faith is rebutted upon a showing that the information disclosed by the former employer was knowingly false or deliberately misleading, was rendered with malicious purpose, or violated any civil right of the former employee…”

Matthew Bush v. Raytheon Co., 373 F. App'x 936 (11th Cir. 2010). “See Fla. Stat. § 768.095 . Under these circumstances, the employer is immune “unless it is shown by clear and convincing evidence that the information disclosed by the former or current employer was knowingly false or violated any civil right of the former or current employee”…”

Kevin Vericker v. Norman Christopher Powell (Fla. 2025). · cites it 2× “(2024) (health care facility or provider immunity); § 768.095, Fla. Stat. (2024) (employer immunity for disclosing information to prospective employer); § 768.”

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.