Syfert Injury Law Firm

Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation

Call Now: 904-383-7448
Florida Statute 772.18 | Lawyer Caselaw & Research
Link to State of Florida Official Statute
Statute is currently reporting as:
F.S. 772.18 Case Law from Google Scholar Google Search for Amendments to 772.18

The 2024 Florida Statutes

Title XLV
TORTS
Chapter 772
CIVIL REMEDIES FOR CRIMINAL PRACTICES
View Entire Chapter
F.S. 772.18
772.18 Cumulative remedy.—The application of one civil remedy under this chapter does not preclude the application of any other remedy, civil or criminal, under this chapter or any other provision of law. Civil remedies under this act are supplemental, and not mutually exclusive.
History.—s. 3, ch. 86-277.

F.S. 772.18 on Google Scholar

F.S. 772.18 on Casetext

Amendments to 772.18


Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 772.18
Level: Degree
Misdemeanor/Felony: First/Second/Third

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 772.18.

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases Citing Statute 772.18

Total Results: 6

COMPTECH INTERN. v. Milam Commerce Park

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1998-05-20

Citation: 711 So. 2d 1255, 1998 WL 251087

Snippet: theft claims because the statute precludes it: 772.18 Cumulative remedy.—The application of one civil

Lawson v. Mulieri

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1991-04-24

Citation: 578 So. 2d 823, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 3785, 1991 WL 63773

Snippet: assigned to the Lawsons was wholly incorrect. Section 772.18 expressly forecloses the preclusion of any other

The Florida Bar v. Prior

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 1976-03-31

Citation: 330 So. 2d 697

Snippet: [17] The Florida Bar v. Smith, supra note 7 at 772. [18] Since 1965 the Court has considered 42 suspension

State Ex Rel. Gillespie v. Vickers

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 1933-05-10

Citation: 148 So. 526, 110 Fla. 157

Snippet: its collection. See Huie v. Barkman, 179 Ark. 772, 18 S.W. Rep. 2d 334. Where the effect of a mandamus

State Ex Rel. Dos Anigos, Inc. v. Lehman

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 1930-11-22

Citation: 131 So. 533, 100 Fla. 1313

Snippet: Decatur 119 Ala. 476, 23 So. R. 999; 38 C. J. 772, 18 R. C. L. 281; Dillon on Municipal Corporations

State Ex Rel. Nuveen v. Greer

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 1924-10-09

Citation: 102 So. 739, 88 Fla. 249

Snippet: purchasers. See, also, Supervisors v. Schenck, 5 Wall. 772, 18 L. Ed. 556; City of San Antonio v. Mehaffy,96 U