The 2023 Florida Statutes (including Special Session C)

Title X
PUBLIC OFFICERS, EMPLOYEES, AND RECORDS

Chapter 115
LEAVES OF ABSENCE TO OFFICIALS AND EMPLOYEES

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 115.02

115.02 Governor to grant application; proviso.—When any such officer shall be granted a leave of absence pursuant to this chapter, the Governor shall, upon application being made by such officer, grant such officer leave of absence during the time he or she shall be retained in such military service; provided, such service shall not extend beyond the term of office of such officer, in which event the office shall be filled by election at the expiration thereof.

History.—s. 2, ch. 7393, 1917; RGS 401; CGL 466; s. 733, ch. 95-147; s. 6, ch. 2003-72.

F.S. 115.02 on Google Scholar

F.S. 115.02 on Casetext

Amendments to 115.02

Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 115.02

Level: Degree
Misdemeanor/Felony: First/Second/Third

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 115.02.

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases from cite.case.law:

MARSHALL v. CITY OF FARMINGTON HILLS, a, 693 F. App'x 417 (6th Cir. 2017)

. . . Civil Jury Instruction 115.02, citing Tinkler v. Richter, 295 Mich. 396, 295 N.W. 201 (1940). . . .

RUSSELL, v. BRONSON HEATING AND COOLING, BCN, 345 F. Supp. 2d 761 (E.D. Mich. 2004)

. . . SJI2d 115.02. . . .

WORKMAN, v. UNITED FIXTURES COMPANY,, 116 F. Supp. 2d 885 (W.D. Mich. 2000)

. . . Id., § 115.02. . . .

G. CAMPBELL T. v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE,, 943 F.2d 815 (8th Cir. 1991)

. . . McKee, supra, 115.02[l][b], at 5-13. . . . McKee, supra, 115.02[l][b], at 5-13 to -14. . . .

In HOLYWELL CORPORATION, MIAMI CENTER LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, B. v. BANK OF NEW YORK, M. C. a H. D. M., 93 B.R. 780 (Bankr. S.D. Fla. 1988)

. . . collateral estoppel from relitigating these issues in this action. a. granting BNY a credit of $27,050,-115.02 . . .

CENTRAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS, INC. v. TCI CABLEVISION, INC., 800 F.2d 711 (8th Cir. 1986)

. . . therein; and (4) His consummation of contracts. 10 Von Kalinowski, Antitrust Laws and Trade Regulation, § 115.02 . . . the plaintiff may recover a sum in damages even if it is merely an approximation. 10 Von Kalinowski § 115.02 . . .

MIWON, U. S. A. INC. v. CRAWFORD,, 629 F. Supp. 153 (S.D.N.Y. 1985)

. . . debtor had acknowledged at an examination before trial in a related proceeding that he had borrowed $11,-115.02 . . .

F. RAY, Sr. L. D. W. O. v. INDIANA MICHIGAN ELECTRIC COMPANY,, 606 F. Supp. 757 (N.D. Ind. 1984)

. . . Von Kalinowski, Antitrust Laws and Trade Regulations § 115.02[1], “There must be concrete evidence on . . . Von Kalinowski, supra, at § 115.02[2]. Plaintiffs’ proof has failed to meet this requirement. . . . Von Kalinowski, Antitrust Laws and Trade Regulations § 115.02. . . .

SOUTHERN PACIFIC COMMUNICATIONS COMPANY, v. AMERICAN TELEPHONE AND TELEGRAPH COMPANY,, 556 F. Supp. 825 (D.D.C. 1982)

. . . Von Kalinowski, Antitrust § 115.02[l][a] (1980); E. . . .

WHITE AND WHITE, INC. Co. v. AMERICAN HOSPITAL SUPPLY CORPORATION,, 540 F. Supp. 951 (W.D. Mich. 1982)

. . . inferential in nature, as well as from more direct and positive evidence.” 15 Von Kalinowski, supra, § 115.02 . . .

ROSEBROUGH MONUMENT COMPANY, v. MEMORIAL PARK CEMETERY ASSOCIATION, a a a a d b a a a a d b a a d b a a a d b a, 666 F.2d 1130 (8th Cir. 1981)

. . . Von Kalinowski, Antitrust Laws and Trade Regulation § 115.02 (1981). . . .

GRAVES v. BARNES REGESTER v. BULLOCK MARRIOTT v. SMITH, ARCHER v. SMITH A. ESCALANTE v. WHITE GASKIN v. WHITE L. CHAPMAN v. W. WHITE, Jr., 446 F. Supp. 560 (W.D. Tex. 1977)

. . . That part of Tarrant County included in census tracts 115.01, 115.02, 217.-01, 219, 220, 221, 222, 223 . . .

In H. HARE A., 205 F. Supp. 881 (D. Md. 1962)

. . . In Re Pauline’s Fashion Salon, 121 F.Supp. 845 (D.C.S.D.Cal.1954), 1 Collier, Bankruptcy (1961 Ed.), 115.02 . . .

R. v., 35 T.C. 398 (T.C. 1960)

. . . in the face amount of $109,250, plus interest, have been paid in full except for a small balance of $115.02 . . .

OTTO H. KAHN AND HENRI P. WERTHEIM VAN HEUKELOM, AS EXECUTORS OF THE LAST WILL AND TESTAMENT OF ABRAHAM WOLFF, DECEASED, v. THE UNITED STATES, 55 Ct. Cl. 271 (Ct. Cl. 1920)

. . . net value of the decedent’s interest in said transactions was only $49,993, an overvaluation of $729,-115.02 . . .