Cases from cite.case.law:

MALOY, v. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF LEON COUNTY,, 946 So. 2d 1260 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

. . . Valdes, 407 So.2d 277, 279 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981) (“This statute [section 111.07, Florida Statutes (1979) . . .

A. GRIFFIN R. P. v. CITY OF OPA LOCKA,, 891 So. 2d 1127 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004)

. . . final judgment made such a determination of intentional harm which satisfies the language of section 111.07 . . .

FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF INSURANCE, DIVISION OF RISK MANAGEMENT, v. AMADOR,, 841 So. 2d 612 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2003)

. . . Furthermore, Amador is not entitled by statute to have his fees paid under § 111.07, Florida Statutes . . . , as individual application of § 111.07 is to be decided by the respective governmental unit (i.e. the . . . Section 111.07, Florida Statutes (2001), provides, in pertinent part: Any agency of the state, or any . . .

SMITH O B O C. SMITH v. S. APFEL,, 87 F. Supp. 2d 621 (W.D. La. 2000)

. . . As the basis for her assertion of disability, plaintiff points to Listing 111.07(B)(3), Listing 111.07 . . . Plaintiff first argues that Vanessa’s severe developmental delays meet the criteria of Listing 111.07 . . . In order to meet the criteria of Listing 111.07, the claimant must have cerebral palsy with: (a) Motor . . . Plaintiff also argues that Vanessa’s impairments meet the standards in Listing 111.07(B)(2) because of . . . Plaintiff also argues that Vanessa has a severe impairment that meets the criteria of Listing 111.07( . . .

ALEMAN, A. v. MILWAUKEE COUNTY, B., 35 F. Supp. 2d 710 (E.D. Wis. 1999)

. . . . §§ 111.70(4)(a) and 111.07(1). . . .

THORNBER, Al v. CITY OF FORT WALTON BEACH,, 622 So. 2d 570 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)

. . . specifically claimed reasonable attorney's fees "for bringing this action to enforce their rights under F.S. 111.07 . . . attorney's right to recovery of fees from the appellants for the action to enforce fees under section 111.07 . . .

TORCO OIL COMPANY, v. INNOVATIVE THERMAL CORPORATION, a a a, 763 F. Supp. 1445 (N.D. Ill. 1991)

. . . Id., 111.07[2], at pp. 1-26 to 1-27; In re Fuel Oil Supply & Terminaling, Inc., 837 F.2d 224, 229 n. . . . “The standby letter is often clean,” Dolan, supra, 111.07[2], at pp. 1-26, because it may require merely . . .

OF AMERICA BANK, MID- MICHIGAN, N. A. a E. W. v. UNITED STATES, 752 F. Supp. 764 (E.D. Mich. 1990)

. . . 81.29 23.08 2006 85.63 22.42 2007 90.20 21.80 2008 95.02 21.21 2009 100.09 20.65 2010 105.44 20.12 2011 111.07 . . .

THORNBER, v. CITY OF FORT WALTON BEACH,, 568 So. 2d 914 (Fla. 1990)

. . . court denied the recall petition claim because the council members initiated the action and section 111.07 . . . recover their attorney’s fees expended in enjoining the recall petition from the city under section 111.07 . . . our inquiry does not end at whether the council members are entitled to recover fees under section 111.07 . . . The express language of section 111.07 makes no mention of whether it superseded the common law with . . . We agree with the district court that section 111.07 recognizes the common law but disagree that the . . .

CHAVEZ, v. CITY OF TAMPA,, 560 So. 2d 1214 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1990)

. . . ENTITLEMENT UNDER A STATUTORY THEORY We begin our analysis of this case by examining section 111.07, . . . The First District Court of Appeal has implicitly held that section 111.07 supplants the common law, . . . trial court which awarded the appellant reimbursement for her attorney's fees and costs under section 111.07 . . . The pertinent statute, section 111.07, provides the following: Any agency of the state, or any county . . .

CITY OF FORT WALTON BEACH, v. Al GRANT, THORNBER, Al v. CITY OF FORT WALTON BEACH,, 544 So. 2d 230 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1989)

. . . The Councilmen sued under section 111.07, Florida Statutes (1981), for reimbursement of attorney’s fees . . . Finally, the court found that section 111.07 did not contemplate reimbursement of attorney’s fees for . . . Therefore, he was not entitled to attorney’s fees under section 111.07. . . . Section 111.07, Florida Statutes (1981). . . . The Ferrara court did not address the propriety of an attorney’s fee award under section 111.07. . . . defendants in the civil action alleged in that count and thus did not fall within the language of section 111.07 . . . The majority opinion predicates its holding entirely on a strict construction of section 111.07 as requiring . . . It should be noted that the court in Ferrara did not mention section 111.07 in reaching its result, apparently . . . to the question now before us because, as cited above and conceded by the majority opinion, “section 111.07 . . .

UNITED STATES v. D. RAY,, 828 F.2d 399 (7th Cir. 1987)

. . . Moore, Moore’s Federal Practice ¶111.07[1] (2d ed. 1985). . . .

LaMARCA, H. Jr. v. R. V. TURNER,, 662 F. Supp. 647 (S.D. Fla. 1987)

. . . omission of action of any officer, employee, or agent in a civil or civil rights lawsuit described in s. 111.07 . . . (c) Any reimbursement required under s. 111.07 for court costs and reasonable attorney’s fees when the . . .

JORDI, W. R. v. SAUK PRAIRIE SCHOOL BOARD D., 651 F. Supp. 1566 (W.D. Wis. 1987)

. . . . § 111.07 “shall govern procedure in all cases involving prohibited practices under this subchapter . . . Next, defendants refer to § 111.07(14), which provides that “[t]he right of any person to proceed under . . . Wis.Stat. § 111.07 governs the procedures to be followed in proceedings before the Wisconsin Employment . . . Relations Commission. § 111.07(1) provides specifically that “[a]ny controversy concerning unfair labor . . . I conclude that the one year limitation period of Wis.Stat. § 111.07(14) is not applicable to court cases . . .

I. GAMBLE, v. FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES,, 779 F.2d 1509 (11th Cir. 1986)

. . . Fla.Stat.Ann. § 111.07 (West Supp.1985). . . . Fla.Stat.Ann. § 111.07 (emphasis added). . . . In addition, § 111.07 indicates that attorney’s fees awards against state officers will be reimbursed . . . Thus, § 111.07 merely reflects a scheme of defending and reimbursing state officers which is consistent . . . We reject the court’s conclusion in Meeker "that § 111.07(4) is a savings .clause reserving any or all . . .

ILLINOIS CENTRAL GULF RAILROAD COMPANY, v. D. BAIR,, 626 F. Supp. 747 (S.D. Iowa 1985)

. . . At maturity, the Clerk shall pay $15,-111.07 in principal and $266.62 in accrued interest thereon to . . .

E. SIMMONS, v. SCHIMMEL, M. D., 476 So. 2d 1342 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1985)

. . . Evans, 474 So.2d 392 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985) (this court upheld an award of fees pursuant to section 111.07 . . .

METROPOLITAN DADE COUNTY, v. EVANS, Jr., 474 So. 2d 392 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1985)

. . . the county, and that he was therefore entitled to reimbursement of his attorney’s fees under section 111.07 . . .

J. R. REDDISH v. W. SMITH L., 468 So. 2d 929 (Fla. 1985)

. . . See § 111.07, Fla.Stat. (1977). . . . See id. § 111.07. We find that the allegations of impropriety and bad faith are too conclusory. . . .

FLORIDA POLICE BENEVOLENT ASSOCIATION, INC. v. C. W. MILLER,, 464 So. 2d 236 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1985)

. . . The statute in Nuzum is section 111.07. . . .

J. VAUGHNS, Jr. v. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF PRINCE GEORGE S COUNTY, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR ADVANCEMENT OF COLORED PEOPLE, v. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF PRINCE GEORGE S COUNTY,, 627 F. Supp. 837 (D. Md. 1985)

. . . Farquhar 18.50 -1.85 16.65 Hassett 279.93 -27.99 251.94 Hollman 143.50 -14.35 129.15 Keeney 123.41 -12.34 111.07 . . . Cohen 49.34 0 49.34 Farquhar 16.65 0 16.65 Hassett 251.94 -17.00 234.94 Hollman 129.15 0 129.15 Keeney 111.07 . . .

MEEKER a k a v. R. E. ADDISON a, 586 F. Supp. 216 (S.D. Fla. 1983)

. . . Florida Statute § 111.07, “Defense of Civil Actions Against Public Officers,” states, in pertinent part . . . Florida Statute § 111.07, prior to the revisions of 1979, see Laws 1979, c. 79-139, § 1, had been titled . . . act or omission of any officer, employee or agent in a civil or civil rights lawsuit described in §111.07 . . . In the case at bar, however, Fla.Stat. §§ 284.31, 111.07 and 111.071 are of central importance because . . . Florida Statute § 111.07 was subsequently amended, as discussed above, to explicitly include federal . . .

F. WRIGHT, A. A. A. A. T. v. Dr. J. ACIERNO,, 437 So. 2d 242 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1983)

. . . defendants a windfall because the City has provided them with counsel under the authority of Section 111.07 . . . First, the appellees are not the intended beneficiaries of Section 111.07, which is designed to prevent . . .

R. W. T. K. M. R. T. S. C. A. J. L. C. E. v. E. DALTON R. T. L. J. W. R. W. T. K. M. R. T. S. C. A. J. L. C. E. v. E. DALTON R. T. L. J. W., 712 F.2d 1225 (8th Cir. 1983)

. . . Mo.Sup.CtR. 111.07(b). . . .

GREER, M. D. M. D. M. D. v. E. MATHEWS G., 409 So. 2d 1105 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1982)

. . . Neither Sections 111.07 nor 768.28(9) mandate the state to defend its employees. . . .

NUZUM, v. VALDES a, 407 So. 2d 277 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1981)

. . . Section 111.07, Florida Statutes (1979) provides, in pertinent part: Any agency of the state, or any . . .

B. SHINHOLSTER, v. GRAHAM,, 527 F. Supp. 1318 (N.D. Fla. 1981)

. . . federal civil rights cases instituted against them, the Florida Legislature in 1979 amended Section 111.07 . . . Section 111.07, Florida Statutes (Supp. 1980), provides: Defense of civil actions against public officers . . . Clearly, on their face, Sections 111.07 and 111.071 substantiate the conclusion that neither Section . . . Additionally, the legislative histories of Sections 111.07 and 111.071 also support this conclusion: . . . (1) S. 111.07, F.S., is broadened to allow the State or its subdivision to defend an employee in any . . .

DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD OF LAKE COUNTY, v. TALMADGE,, 381 So. 2d 698 (Fla. 1980)

. . . For example, section 111.07, Florida Statutes (1977), authorizes any agency or political subdivision . . .

DAVID, v. HOOKER, LTD, 560 F.2d 412 (9th Cir. 1977)

. . . it deprive the court of jurisdiction over the matter; it merely suspends the proceedings. 1A Collier 111.07 . . .

TOOL AND DIE MAKERS LODGE NO. INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS, AFL- CIO, v. GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY X- RAY DEPARTMENT, a X- RAY LODGE NO. DISTRICT NO. INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS, AFL- CIO, v. GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY X- RAY DEPARTMENT, a, 170 F. Supp. 945 (E.D. Wis. 1959)

. . . Section 111.07(2) (a). . . . Section 111.07(2) (b). . . . Section 111.07(2) (c). . . . Section 111.07(3). . . . Section 111.07(4). . . .

UNITED AUTOMOBILE, AIRCRAFT AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENT WORKERS OF AMERICA v. WISCONSIN EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS BOARD, 351 U.S. 266 (U.S. 1956)

. . . .” §111.07, p. 1908: “111.07 Prevention of unfair labor practices. (1) Any controversy concerning unfair . . .

INTERNATIONAL UNION, U. A. W. A. A. F. L. LOCAL v. WISCONSIN EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS BOARD, 336 U.S. 245 (U.S. 1949)

. . . The Board’s jurisdiction over unfair labor practices is delineated in § 111.07. . . .

La CROSSE TELEPHONE CORP. v. WISCONSIN EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS BOARD, 336 U.S. 18 (U.S. 1949)

. . . findings in-eluded therein unless reviewed in the same manner as provided by subsection (8) of section 111.07 . . .

ALLEN- BRADLEY LOCAL NO. UNITED ELECTRICAL, RADIO MACHINE WORKERS OF AMERICA, v. WISCONSIN EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS BOARD, 315 U.S. 740 (U.S. 1942)

. . . . § 111.07. Orders of the state Board are enforceable by the circuit courts. Id. . . . Sec. 111.07 (4) provides in part: “Final orders may disnnss the charges or require the person complained . . .

a v. H. E., 91 Fla. 1015 (Fla. 1926)

. . . . $111.07 “STATE OF FLORIDA ) COUNTY OF ESCAMBIA. )ss. . . .

ALEXANDER v. HARRIS, 1 F. Cas. 365 (C.C.D.C. 1805)

. . . The avowry is for $111.07, and the jjiry have found $111.-67. . . .