Cases from cite.case.law:

MAZUR, KYC LLC LLC U. S. v. OSPINA BARAYA,, 275 So. 3d 812 (Fla. App. Ct. 2019)

. . . Apparently agreeing with Baraya's position that section 770.01 does not apply here, the circuit court . . . "The denial of a motion to dismiss for failure to provide the presuit notice required by section 770.01 . . . , which provides as follows: 770.01. . . . "In its original form, section 770.01 applied only to newspapers and periodicals." . . . meant to expand the scope of section 770.01 beyond the news media. . . .

COUSINS, v. POST- NEWSWEEK STATIONS FLORIDA, INC., 275 So. 3d 674 (Fla. App. Ct. 2019)

. . . Second, Cousins claims the presuit letter provided to Post-Newsweek complied with section 770.01. . . . But the sufficiency of notice, for purposes of compliance with the notice provision of section 770.01 . . . According to Post-Newsweek, Cousins is required to "strict[ly] compl[y] with Section 770.01, Florida . . . Gore, 48 So.2d 412, 415 (Fla. 1950) (explaining section 770.01 "was enacted ... to afford to newspapers . . . Because Cousins sufficiently complied with section 770.01, we find Cousins sufficiently pleads a claim . . .

DYCK- O NEAL, INC. v. LANHAM,, 264 So. 3d 1115 (Fla. App. Ct. 2019)

. . . . §§ 770.01-.02, Fla. Stat. (2014). . . .

NORKIN, v. THE FLORIDA BAR, a, 311 F. Supp. 3d 1299 (S.D. Fla. 2018)

. . . . § 770.01 did not start the statute-of-limitations clock. . . .

DEL PINO- ALLEN, v. SANTELISES,, 240 So. 3d 89 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . . § 770.01, Fla. Stat. (2015). . . .

ROLLE, v. COLD STONE CREAMERY, INC., 212 So. 3d 1073 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . does not, on its face, indicate that it was sent as a five day pre-suit notice required under section 770.01 . . . Stat. § 770.01.” . . . letter further states that the purpose of the letter is to serve as notice that, pursuant to section 770.01 . . . Additionally, those letters from Rolle’s counsel appear to comply with section 770.01’s requirement to . . . information it is difficult to characterize the Letter as a pre-suit notice as required by section 770.01 . . .

BRINDISE v. U. S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION,, 183 So. 3d 1215 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . . §§ 770.01-.02, Fla. Stat. (2014). . . .

OPINION CORP. v. ROCA LABS, INC., 312 F.R.D. 663 (M.D. Fla. 2015)

. . . Thereafter, on January 13, 2015, Roca allegedly sent the Opinion Parties a correspondence under Section 770.01 . . . Stat. § 770.01 give rise to a cause of action of defamation.” . . .

PLANT FOOD SYSTEMS, INC. v. S. IREY,, 165 So. 3d 859 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . , Florida Statutes that requires pre-suit notification in certain slander and libel cases: 770.01. . . . article or broadcast and the statements therein which he or she alleges to be false and defamatory. § 770.01 . . . does not necessarily mean that only media defendants are entitled to pre-suit notice under section 770.01 . . . hand and concluded that Vanvoorhis’s blog was covered under the “other medium” language in section 770.01 . . . Accordingly, on these facts, the trial court properly concluded that section 770.01’s pre-suit notice . . .

M. COMINS, v. VANVOORHIS,, 135 So. 3d 545 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . VanVoorhis [“VanVoorhis”], for Comins’s failure to comply with the presuit notice requirement of section 770.01 . . . The issue in Ross was the constitutionality of section 770.01. . . . However, the amended language of section 770.01 was not so specific. In Laney v. . . . Bd DCA 1984), in which it also held that section 770.01 applies only to media defendants. . . . “Accordingly, § 770.01 does not extend to nonmedia defendants.” Id. . . .

GREENE, v. TIMES PUBLISHING CO., 130 So. 3d 724 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . the reporters, and he sent timely, written post-publication retraction demands pursuant to section 770.01 . . .

B. GREEN, v. PALATKA DAILY NEWS,, 108 So. 3d 739 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2013)

. . . Indeed, in response to Green’s notice to the newspaper, pursuant to section 770.01, Florida Statutes . . .

FIVE FOR ENTERTAINMENT S. A. v. RODRIGUEZ,, 877 F. Supp. 2d 1321 (S.D. Fla. 2012)

. . . Plaintiffs failed to comply with the pre-suit notice requirement set forth in Florida Statute § 770.01 . . . Stat. § 770.01. . . . That the internet constitutes a “other medium” for the purposes of § 770.01 should be well-settled. . . . There is no dispute in Florida about who is entitled to receive pre-suit notice under § 770.01. . . . Accordingly, § 770.01 does not extend to nonmedia defendants. . . .

CANONICO, v. CALLAWAY E. W. ABC ABC,, 26 So. 3d 53 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2010)

. . . The interplay between section 770.01 and Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.090(a) is central to our review . . . The statute provides as follows: 770.01 Notice condition precedent to action or prosecution for libel . . . Section 770.01 does not specify whether the five-day period is calculated using business or calendar . . . Canónico mailed his section 770.01 notice on Tuesday, October 4, 2005. . . . Under section 770.01, Mr. Canónico could not act until the five-day notice period expired. . . .

ALVI ARMANI MEDICAL, INC. Dr. v. HENNESSEY, 629 F. Supp. 2d 1302 (S.D. Fla. 2008)

. . . Next, Defendants argue that Plaintiffs have failed to comply with Section 770.01 of the Florida Statutes . . . Next, Plaintiffs argue that Section 770.01 of the Florida Statutes is not applicable to internet chat . . . Stat. § 770.01 (2008) (emphasis added). . . . Whether the internet is included as part of the “other medium” language used in Section 770.01 is an . . . The court, however, held that the phrase “other medium” in Section 770.01 includes the internet. . . .

JEWS FOR JESUS, INC. v. RAPP,, 997 So. 2d 1098 (Fla. 2008)

. . . . § 770.01, Fla. Stat. (2007). . . .

RUDLOE, a v. Dr. KARL,, 899 So. 2d 1161 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005)

. . . The second amended complaint alleges compliance with the notice requirement laid down by section 770.01 . . .

COOPER, v. A. DILLON,, 403 F.3d 1208 (11th Cir. 2005)

. . . Stat. ch. 112.532(3) & 770.01 et seq., rather than a restriction which operates to suppress members of . . .

CITY OF COCONUT CREEK, a v. CITY OF DEERFIELD BEACH, a LLC,, 840 So. 2d 389 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2003)

. . . Inc., 702 So.2d 1376, 1377 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997) (finding that failure to provide notice under section 770.01 . . .

CALLAWAY LAND CATTLE CO. INC. a Co. a v. BANYON LAKES C. CORP. a Sr. C. L. P. a L. L. C. a POD a, 831 So. 2d 204 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

. . . See § 770.01, Fla. Stat. (2001). . . . .

ZELINKA, v. AMERICARE HEALTHSCAN, INC. P. D L., 763 So. 2d 1173 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

. . . Florida Statutes section 770.01 requires that, in certain circumstances, notice must be given to a potential . . . Section 770.02 allows the defendants to whom section 770.01 is applicable the right to avoid punitive . . . In its original form, section 770.01 applied only to newspapers and periodicals. . . . That was the last substantive amendment to section 770.01. . . . The denial of a motion to dismiss for failure to provide the presuit notice required by section 770.01 . . .

HAMILTON BANK, N. A. v. KOOKMIN BANK,, 44 F. Supp. 2d 653 (S.D.N.Y. 1999)

. . . Ann § 770.01 (West 1997). . See Gifford v. Bruckner, 565 So.2d 887 (Fla.App.1990); Davies v. . . .

MUSCULOSKELETAL INSTITUTE CHARTERED, d b a E. III, M. D. E. III, M. D. P. A. A. M. D. v. S. PARHAM,, 745 So. 2d 946 (Fla. 1999)

. . . 859 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998), and the statutory notice requirements in defamation actions under section 770.01 . . .

ORTEGA TRUJILLO, v. BANCO CENTRAL DEL ECUADOR, a BANCO CENTRAL DEL ECUADOR, S. A. N. V. v. ORTEGA TRUJILLO, a a a, 17 F. Supp. 2d 1334 (S.D. Fla. 1998)

. . . Fla.Stat. § 770.01; see Time v. Firestone, 424 U.S. 448, 452, 96 S.Ct. 958, 47 L.Ed.2d 154 (1976). . . . Moreover, resolution of this question is irrelevant, as section 770.01 of the Florida Statutes is not . . . As such, Section 770.01 is not applicable. . . . In 1982, this Court held that 770.01 applies to all defendants in civil actions for libel or slander. . . . Subsequently, however, Florida courts have construed 770.01 to apply only to media defendants (Davies . . .

MANCINI, v. PERSONALIZED AIR CONDITIONING HEATING, INC. a, 702 So. 2d 1376 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1997)

. . . certiorari is whether a columnist for a local newspaper is entitled to pre-suit notice pursuant to section 770.01 . . . to dismiss asserted plaintiff’s failure to comply with the statutory notice requirements of section 770.01 . . . Failure to comply with the notice provision of section 770.01 requires dismissal of the complaint for . . . If section 770.01 applies, defendant is entitled to certio-rari relief from the trial court’s refusal . . . Although plaintiff is unable to point to any limiting language within section 770.01, plaintiff points . . .

TOBKIN, v. L. JARBOE, 695 So. 2d 1257 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1997)

. . . Stat. ch. 770.01 (1993) precludes the filing of a lawsuit for libel or slander until five days after . . . Flanagan, 629 So.2d 113 (Fla.1993), courts were in disagreement over whether section 770.01 applied only . . . F.Supp. 1152, 1158 (D.Colo.1984) (applying Florida law and holding that the requirements of Section 770.01 . . . Failure to comply with Section 770.01 mandates dismissal of the action. . . . Section 770.01, Florida Statutes (1995), states: Notice condition precedent to action or prosecution . . .

TIME WARNER, INC. v. GADINSKY, 639 So. 2d 176 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)

. . . superiors submitted to prepare a response to a notice served on the publication pursuant to section 770.01 . . .

O. COOK v. POMPANO SHOPPER, INC., 582 So. 2d 37 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)

. . . dismissing their complaint for failure to comply with the statutory notice requirement under section 770.01 . . . trial court erred: by finding appellants’ demand letters for retraction insufficient under section 770.01 . . . Section 770.01, Florida Statutes, provides: Notice condition precedent to action or prosecution for libel . . . with particularity” the alleged defamatory statements to satisfy the notice requirement of section 770.01 . . .

L. GIFFORD, v. BRUCKNER, Jr. a k a a, 565 So. 2d 887 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1990)

. . . failed to allege a cause of action and that Gifford had not complied with the requirements of section 770.01 . . . However, this court has held that section 770.01 does not apply when an action is brought against a non-media . . . Compli-atice with section 770.01, where necessary, is a condition precedent to maintaining an action, . . .

WATERMAN BROADCASTING CORPORATION d b a WBBH- TV f k a v. SARO, INC. d b a, 555 So. 2d 1273 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1989)

. . . On the other hand, Saro is required under section 770.01, Florida Statutes (1987), to furnish WBBH with . . . Section 770.01 does not provide for the preservation of evidence during the interim five-day period before . . . Section 770.01, Florida Statutes (1987) provides: Notice condition precedent to action or prosecution . . .

PANNELL v. ASSOCIATED PRESS, d b a d b a, 690 F. Supp. 546 (N.D. Miss. 1988)

. . . . § 770.01 (1976) provides as follows: "Before any civil action is brought for publication or broadcast . . .

NELSON, v. ASSOCIATED PRESS, INC., 667 F. Supp. 1468 (S.D. Fla. 1987)

. . . Section 770.01 (West 1986) and Rule 16 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. . . . Section 770.01 states: 770.01. . . . Fla.Stat.Ann. § 770.01 (West 1986). Plaintiff, relying on Bridges v. . . . In this situation, the Court finds as a matter of law that § 770.01 has not been complied with. . . . Ann. § 770.01. The remainder of the statement is not actionable, at least not by Ms. . . .

ORTEGA, v. POST- NEWSWEEK STATIONS, FLORIDA, INC. a d b a WPLG- TV,, 510 So. 2d 972 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1987)

. . . In compliance with the mandatory notice requirement of section 770.01, Florida Statutes (1981), Ortega . . . Section 770.01 requires that a plaintiff first notify the broadcaster and specify the alleged defamatory . . .

M. CORKERY, A. v. SUPERX DRUGS CORPORATION,, 602 F. Supp. 42 (M.D. Fla. 1985)

. . . . § 770.01. The Court recognizes that Ross v. . . .

DELLA- DONNA, v. GORE NEWSPAPERS COMPANY, a C., 463 So. 2d 414 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1985)

. . . Section 770.01, Florida Statutes (1983), does not apply to non-media defendants. Demolfetta v. . . .

KING, v. H. BURRIS, a k a, 588 F. Supp. 1152 (D. Colo. 1984)

. . . . § 770.01 reads: Before any civil action is brought for publication in a newspaper, periodical, or other . . .

DEMOLFETTA, v. AMERICAN SIGHTSEEING TOURS, INC. a a, 450 So. 2d 312 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1984)

. . . The trial court’s order of dismissal for failure to serve the 5 day notice provided by Section 770.01 . . .

C. DAVIES, v. BOSSERT,, 449 So. 2d 418 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1984)

. . . This appeal questions the applicability of Section 770.01, Florida Statutes (1983)— which requires a . . . The court did not hold, as does Laney, that Section 770.01 applies to media and non-media libelees alike . . . The earlier version of Section 770.01, which was construed in Ross v. . . . Since no other section of Chapter 770 uses the language “other medium” as found in Section 770.01, we . . . There is no logical reason to suppose that Section 770.01 contemplates any form of medium not covered . . .

BRIDGES P. v. WILLIAMSON, Al, 449 So. 2d 400 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1984)

. . . Appellees filed a motion to dismiss the complaint because appellants failed to comply with section 770.01 . . . motion but allowed appellants twenty days to amend their complaint to allege compliance with section 770.01 . . . Therefore, we find the trial court erred in requiring appellant to comply with section 770.01. . . . Section 770.01, Florida Statutes (1981), provides as follows: Notice condition precedent to action or . . . Ch. 76-123, Laws of Fla. (1976) (codified as amended at § 770.01, Fla.Stat. (1983)). . . .

E. CUMMINGS, v. DAWSON, WTLV-, 444 So. 2d 565 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1984)

. . . proper also on the ground that appellant did not show adequately that he complied with the section 770.01 . . .

MIAMI HERALD PUBLISHING COMPANY, v. ANE,, 423 So. 2d 376 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1982)

. . . acknowledged, but no effort was made [either then or later after proper written notice was served, see §§ 770.01 . . .

EDWARD L. NEZELEK, INC. a v. SUNBEAM TELEVISION CORPORATION, A d b a WCKT- TV, 413 So. 2d 51 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1982)

. . . .2d 412 (Fla.1950) the supreme court held that compliance with the -demand for retraction of Section 770.01 . . . Neze-lek’s response to appellees’ motion to strike the pleadings indicates compliance with Section 770.01 . . . that Hulander, supra, may bar a single amendment of a demand for retraction made pursuant to Section 770.01 . . . Though Section 770.01, Florida Statutes (1979) has been held constitutional, Ross v. . . . for denying a plaintiff the opportunity to amend his demand notice in order to comply with Section 770.01 . . .

J. LANEY, v. KNIGHT- RIDDER NEWSPAPERS, INC., 532 F. Supp. 910 (S.D. Fla. 1982)

. . . . § 770.01. . . . Fla.Stat.Ann. § 770.01. . . . statute’s language and the lack of dispositive precedent, leads the Court to hold that Fla.Stat.Ann. § 770.01 . . . Plaintiff is free to refile this action upon compliance with Fla.Stat.Ann. § 770.01. . . . . Ann. § 770.01, however, has such a significant impact upon the extent and nature of both the harm and . . .

CAPE PUBLICATIONS, INC. a v. TERI S HEALTH STUDIO, INC. a, 385 So. 2d 188 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1980)

. . . Of primary concern here are sections 770.01 and 770.02, and they are as follows: 770.01 Notice condition . . .

CORBO, v. MIAMI DAILY NEWS, INC., 371 So. 2d 1066 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1979)

. . . alleges libel, is fatally defective in that the plaintiff has failed to allege compliance with Section 770.01 . . .

E. HULANDER, v. SUNBEAM TELEVISION CORPORATION, a d b a WCKT- TV, a, 364 So. 2d 845 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1978)

. . . Motion the Defendant claims that the Plaintiff has failed to comply with the requirements of Section 770.01 . . . Section 770.01, Florida Statutes, states: ‘Before any civil action is brought for publication or broadcast . . .

WESTPHAL v. LAKELAND LEDGER PUBLISHING CO., 46 Fla. Supp. 26 (Polk Cty. Cir. Ct. 1977)

. . . Section 770.01, Florida Statutes (1975); Ross v. . . .

TIME, INC. v. FIRESTONE, 424 U.S. 448 (U.S. 1976)

. . . . §§770.01-770.02 (1963). . . .

ORLANDO SPORTS STADIUM, INC. v. SENTINEL STAR COMPANY, a, 316 So. 2d 607 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1975)

. . . initial complaint on September IS, 1971, appellants, in an apparent attempt to comply with Fla.Stat. 770.01 . . . result might very well enable plaintiffs in libel to circumvent the notice requirements of Fla.Stat. 770.01 . . . action is insufficient due to appellants’ failure to serve the written notice requirement of Fla.Stat. 770.01 . . . appellants’ complaint an examination of appellants’ notice letter purportedly in compliance with F.S. 770.01 . . . Ma.Stat. 770.01. . . .

SCHULER v. MIAMI HERALD PUBLISHING CO., 42 Fla. Supp. 174 (Dade Cty. Cir. Ct. 1975)

. . . defendants a notice of the alleged defamatory character of this article prior to filing suit as required by §770.01 . . . Under §770.01, Florida Statutes, notice of the alleged defamatory nature of a publication must be served . . .

GANNETT FLORIDA CORPORATION, v. MONTESANO,, 308 So. 2d 599 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1975)

. . . the article appellee’s attorney wrote to appellant the following letter: “Pursuant to Florida Statute 770.01 . . .

FIRESTONE, v. TIME, INC., 305 So. 2d 172 (Fla. 1974)

. . . in requesting retraction of the defamatory publication which is the subject of this suit, Sections 770.01 . . .

MALONE v. OCALA STAR- BANNER CORP., 37 Fla. Supp. 122 (Marion Cty. Cir. Ct. 1972)

. . . Under F.S. 770.01, plaintiff must, prior to the time suit is brought, serve notice in writing; and paragraph . . . Under F.S. 770.01, notice is required “before any civil action is brought”; and under F.S. 95.11 (6), . . . The statute of limitation had run prior to the time of service of notice herein under F.S. 770.01 (as . . . that although the alleged libel was published on January 24, 1966, demand for retraction under F.S. 770.01 . . .

W. HARWOOD, v. BUSH a, 223 So. 2d 359 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1969)

. . . Since Section 770.01, F.S.1967, F.S.A., makes notice a condition precedent to a libel action against . . .

BROWN, v. FAWCETT PUBLICATIONS, INC. a a d b a, 196 So. 2d 465 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1967)

. . . Sec. 770.01, F.S.A. by serving written notice on Fawcett, the publisher, demanding apology and retraction . . . Sec. 770.01, F.S.A. provides: “Before any civil action is brought for publication, in a newspaper or . . .

HEVEY, v. NEWS- JOURNAL CORPORATION, M., 148 So. 2d 543 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1963)

. . . were: (1) that the complaint failed to state a cause of action, (2) that the notice pursuant to F.S. 770.01 . . . As to the second and third grounds of the motion, we first note that Section 770.01, Florida Statutes . . . It is seen that F.S. § 770.01 F.S.A., supra, required the plaintiff to perform certain acts as a condition . . . ), 84 So.2d 549, 553, the Florida Supreme Court held that in order to meet the requirements of F.S. 770.01 . . .

C. McCORMICK, v. MIAMI HERALD PUBLISHING COMPANY, a S., 139 So. 2d 197 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1962)

. . . The plaintiff further alleged notice to the defendants pursuant to Section 770.01, Florida Statutes, . . .

v. MIAMI HERALD PUBLISHING CO. a, 119 So. 2d 85 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1960)

. . . 236, 86 A.L.R. 466, holding that the principles expressed in that case were not changed by sections 770.01 . . . Tribune Company, supra, but also by Florida Statutes, § 770.01 and § 770.02. The facts in Layne v. . . . Chapter 16071, Laws of Florida, 1933 (§ 770.01 and § 770.02, Florida Statutes, 1959, F.S.A.) was passed . . . Tribune Company, supra, and that such holding is not affected or changed by Florida Statutes, § 770.01 . . .

W. ADAMS, v. NEWS- JOURNAL CORPORATION, M., 84 So. 2d 549 (Fla. 1955)

. . . . § 770.01, F.S.A., reads as follows: “Before any civil action is brought for publication, in a newspaper . . . . § 770.01, F.S.A. . . .

WALSH, v. MIAMI HERALD PUBLISHING CO. a, 80 So. 2d 669 (Fla. 1955)

. . . Secs. 770.01 and 770.-02, F.S.A., making notice a condition precedent to an action for libel, and affording . . .

In RICE, 62 So. 2d 911 (Fla. 1953)

. . . applicable to civil actions and not to criminal prosecutions, a statute identical in content, Section 770.01 . . .

CALDWELL v. CROWELL- COLLIER PUB. CO., 161 F.2d 333 (5th Cir. 1947)

. . . . § 770.01, but no apology, retraction or correction has been made. . . . Also under the Florida statute, F.S.A. § 770.01, notice of the intended suit was given so that a retraction . . .