Florida Statute 770.02 - Full Text and Legal Analysis

The 2025 Florida Statutes

Title XLV
TORTS

Chapter 770
DEFAMATION

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 770.02

770.02 Correction, apology, or retraction by newspaper or broadcast station.—

(1) If it appears upon the trial that said article or broadcast was published in good faith; that its falsity was due to an honest mistake of the facts; that there were reasonable grounds for believing that the statements in said article or broadcast were true; and that, within the period of time specified in subsection (2), a full and fair correction, apology, or retraction was, in the case of a newspaper or periodical, published in the same editions or corresponding issues of the newspaper or periodical in which said article appeared and in as conspicuous place and type as said original article or, in the case of a broadcast, the correction, apology, or retraction was broadcast at a comparable time, then the plaintiff in such case shall recover only actual damages.

(2) Full and fair correction, apology, or retraction shall be made:

(a) In the case of a broadcast or a daily or weekly newspaper or periodical, within 10 days after service of notice;

(b) In the case of a newspaper or periodical published semimonthly, within 20 days after service of notice;

(d) In the case of a newspaper or periodical published less frequently than monthly, in the next issue, provided notice is served no later than 45 days prior to such publication.

History.—s. 2, ch. 16070, 1933; CGL 1936 Supp. 7064(2); s. 1, ch. 76-123; s. 233, ch. 77-104; s. 1, ch. 80-34.

F.S. 770.02 on Google Scholar

F.S. 770.02 on CourtListener

Amendments to 770.02

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases Citing Statute 770.02

Total Results: 21

Jews for Jesus, Inc. v. Rapp

997 So. 2d 1098, 36 Media L. Rep. (BNA) 2540, 33 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 849, 2008 Fla. LEXIS 2010, 2008 WL 4659374

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Oct 23, 2008 | Docket: 1379009

Cited 144 times | Published

contained in the article or broadcast. Id. Further, section 770.02, Florida Statutes (2007), limits the amount

Ross v. Gore

48 So. 2d 412, 1950 Fla. LEXIS 1562

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Oct 31, 1950 | Docket: 543606

Cited 73 times | Published

the statute may be stated as follows: 1. Is Section 770.02 unconstitutional in that it (a) denies punitive

O'NEAL v. Tribune Company

176 So. 2d 535

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 7, 1965 | Docket: 1649091

Cited 21 times | Published

the Times[4] and the Tribune[5] pursuant to section 770.02, Florida Statutes. The ruling of the court

Bridges v. Williamson

449 So. 2d 400, 10 Media L. Rep. (BNA) 1983

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 2, 1984 | Docket: 1695683

Cited 15 times | Published

that could irreparably injure appellants. See § 770.02, Fla. Stat. (1981). We hold chapter 770, Florida

Firestone v. Time, Inc.

271 So. 2d 745, 1972 Fla. LEXIS 3113

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Dec 20, 1972 | Docket: 2467362

Cited 15 times | Published

fact, our state legislature has provided in Section 770.02, Florida Statutes, F.S.A., for correction,

Davies v. Bossert

449 So. 2d 418, 10 Media L. Rep. (BNA) 1838

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 8, 1984 | Docket: 1325200

Cited 14 times | Published

Ross' equal protection argument with respect to Section 770.02, which in 1950 referred only to newspapers

Tornillo v. Miami Herald Publishing Company

287 So. 2d 78

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Jul 18, 1973 | Docket: 2466942

Cited 13 times | Published

the vagueness of certain provisions of Florida Statute 770.02, F.S.A., viz: "good faith"; "falsity";

Miami Herald Pub. Co. v. Brown

66 So. 2d 679, 1953 Fla. LEXIS 1592

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Jul 28, 1953 | Docket: 1668149

Cited 13 times | Published

newspaper published and its efficacy under Section 770.02, Florida Statutes 1951, and F.S.A., which provides

Cook v. Pompano Shopper, Inc.

582 So. 2d 37, 1991 WL 98034

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 12, 1991 | Docket: 348219

Cited 12 times | Published

drugs, ... . Consequently, and pursuant to Florida Statute 770.02 and 836.08 (Sup. 1986) demand is respectfully

Dorestin v. Hollywood Imports, Inc.

45 So. 3d 819, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 12337, 2010 WL 3154848

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 11, 2010 | Docket: 60296072

Cited 10 times | Published

. Mich. Comp. Laws § 445.903(n), (bb). . § 770.02(1), Fla. Stat. (2008) (providing that a plaintiff

Laney v. Knight-Ridder Newspapers, Inc.

532 F. Supp. 910, 1982 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12127

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Feb 24, 1982 | Docket: 443938

Cited 9 times | Published

plaintiff may only recover actual damages. Fla.Stat. § 770.02. Notice, therefore, is preferable because, at

Zelinka v. Americare Healthscan, Inc.

763 So. 2d 1173, 2000 WL 60913

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 26, 2000 | Docket: 1278135

Cited 6 times | Published

false and defamatory. (emphasis supplied). Section 770.02 allows the defendants to whom section 770.01

Mancini v. PERSONALIZED AIR CONDITIONING

702 So. 2d 1376, 1997 WL 795797

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 31, 1997 | Docket: 460239

Cited 6 times | Published

Section 770.01, the notice provision, and section 770.02, the retraction provision, grant valuable rights

Comins v. Vanvoorhis

135 So. 3d 545, 42 Media L. Rep. (BNA) 2021, 2014 WL 1393081, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 5318

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 11, 2014 | Docket: 60239696

Cited 4 times | Published

The following additions were also made to Section 770.02: “or broadcast station” in the section’s heading;

MacGregor v. Miami Herald Publishing Co.

119 So. 2d 85

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 23, 1960 | Docket: 1510457

Cited 4 times | Published

supra, but also by Florida Statutes, § 770.01 and § 770.02. The facts in Layne v. Tribune Company were that

Mazur v. Ospina Baraya

275 So. 3d 812

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 10, 2019 | Docket: 64719889

Cited 3 times | Published

or corrections quickly, as provided for in section 770.02: 770.02. Correction, apology, or retraction

United States v. Ortiz De Zevallos

748 F. Supp. 1569, 1990 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14118, 1990 WL 162038

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Oct 18, 1990 | Docket: 1792690

Cited 2 times | Published

one foreign destination to another." 15 C.F.R. § 770.2. It is not essential, however, that this Court

Mazur v. Ospina Baraya

275 So. 3d 812

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 10, 2019 | Docket: 64719890

Cited 1 times | Published

or corrections quickly, as provided for in section 770.02: 770.02. Correction, apology, or retraction

Canonico v. Callaway

26 So. 3d 53, 38 Media L. Rep. (BNA) 1339, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 8, 2010 WL 21170

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 6, 2010 | Docket: 1115433

Cited 1 times | Published

before satisfying a presuit notice requirement. See § 770.02, Fla. Stat. (2005). His lawsuit was thereafter

ANNE MCQUEEN v. CAROLE BASKIN

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 17, 2023 | Docket: 68015778

Published

defamatory. In conjunction with section 770.01, section 770.02 states: (1) If it appears upon the trial

ROBERT MAZUR, KYC SOLUTIONS, INC., PENGUIN RANDOM HOUSE, LLC, LITTLE, BROWN & COMPANY v. FRANCISCO JAVIER OSPINA BARAYA

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 10, 2019 | Docket: 15897419

Published

or corrections quickly, as provided for in section 770.02: 770.02. Correction, apology