The 2023 Florida Statutes (including Special Session C)

Title V
JUDICIAL BRANCH

Chapter 28
CLERKS OF THE CIRCUIT COURTS

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 28.30

28.30 Records; destruction; reproduction; electronic recordkeeping.—

(1) The purpose of this section and s. 28.31 is to make available for the use of the clerks of the circuit court of the several counties of the state sufficient space to enable them to efficiently administer the affairs of office.

(2) The clerk of the circuit court of each county of the state is authorized to destroy and dispose of public records pursuant to the rules adopted by the Division of Library and Information Services of the Department of State pursuant to s. 257.36.

(3) Each clerk of the circuit court is authorized to photograph, microphotograph, or reproduce on film, or to maintain in an electronic recordkeeping system, any public record that the clerk may select. Such photographs, microphotographs, or other reproductions on film or reproductions from an electronic recordkeeping system shall be admissible in evidence with the same force and effect as the originals. Duly certified or authenticated reproductions of such photographs, microphotographs, reproductions on film, or reproductions from an electronic recordkeeping system shall be admitted in evidence equally with the original photographs, microphotographs, reproductions on film, or reproductions from an electronic recordkeeping system.

(4) The clerk of the circuit court shall follow procedures for electronic recordkeeping in accordance with rules adopted by the Division of Library and Information Services of the Department of State.

(5) Except when otherwise provided by law or applicable rule, a document that is submitted to the clerk of the circuit court by electronic transmission is deemed filed when the document is received and the date and time are acknowledged by the clerk, as opposed to the date and time of transmission. The clerk is not liable for malfunctions or errors occurring in the transmission of documents for filing by electronic means.

History.—ss. 1, 2, 3, 4, ch. 25433, 1949; s. 8, ch. 69-82; s. 6, ch. 94-348.

F.S. 28.30 on Google Scholar

F.S. 28.30 on Casetext

Amendments to 28.30

Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 28.30

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

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 28.30.

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases from cite.case.law:

WHITT, Jr. Sr. v. KALEIDA HEALTH,, 298 F. Supp. 3d 558 (W.D.N.Y. 2018)

. . . was paid $29.05 per hour; (5) Militello, who was paid $28.91 per hour; and (6) Cerra, who was paid $28.30 . . .

RAYMO a H. T. R. v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES,, 129 Fed. Cl. 691 (Fed. Cl. 2016)

. . . Andry’s time by 28.30 hours, Ms. Cumberland’s time by 23.70 hours, Mr. . . .

ALABAMA LEGISLATIVE BLACK CAUCUS, v. ALABAMA, v., 989 F. Supp. 2d 1227 (M.D. Ala. 2013)

. . . In 2010, District 22 had a total population that was 65.96 percent white, 28.30 percent black, and 3.44 . . .

In WASHINGTON STATE APPLE ADVERTISING COMMISSION, 257 F. Supp. 2d 1290 (E.D. Wash. 2003)

. . . (v) Controlled atmosphere storage, chapter 15.30 RCW; (vi) Higher education in agriculture, chapter 28.30 . . .

In WASHINGTON STATE APPLE ADVERTISING COMMISSION, 257 F. Supp. 2d 1274 (E.D. Wash. 2003)

. . . (v) Controlled atmosphere storage, chapter 15.30 RCW; (vi) Higher education in agriculture, chapter 28.30 . . .

WEBSTER, v. FULTON COUNTY, GEORGIA,, 51 F. Supp. 2d 1354 (N.D. Ga. 1999)

. . . Boston determined that total MFBE availability was 28.30%. . . .

AMENDMENTS TO THE RULES OF JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION- RULE ELECTRONIC TRANSMISSION AND FILING OF DOCUMENTS, 681 So. 2d 698 (Fla. 1996)

. . . transform previously filed paper documents into electronic records; (8) provide, consistent with section 28.30 . . .

BANCAMERICA COMMERCIAL CORPORATION ASARCO v. TRINITY INDUSTRIES, INC., 900 F. Supp. 1427 (D. Kan. 1995)

. . . $641.25 13.35% $376.78 $50.28 $691.53 9/88 10/19/88 $2,450.00 $250.00 $0.00 $100.00 $150.00 6.12% $28.30 . . .

D. RICHARDS, v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES,, 884 F. Supp. 256 (N.D. Ohio 1995)

. . . Fraser 22.20 $105/hr 5.80 2331.00 Total 57.25 28.30 5310.00 Defendant objects to the amount of attorney . . .

WEST, v. B. WEST,, 825 F. Supp. 1033 (N.D. Ga. 1992)

. . . 8.09 8.03 6.77 4.05 West Enterprises 7.97 8.08 7.97 7.76 7.66 West Equipment 27.42 28.13 28.45 28.34 28.30 . . .

In PUFFER, v. J. RAYNOLDS, C. v. PUFFER, In De, 761 F. Supp. 838 (D. Mass. 1990)

. . . In that time period, Attorney Fray spent approximately 28.30 hours and Attorney Rothman spent 139.10 . . .

G. SKELTON, Jr. v. GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION, NEWTON, v. GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION,, 661 F. Supp. 1368 (N.D. Ill. 1987)

. . . Tennenbaum $125/hr. 28.30 $ 15,000.00 (jt.E) M. Denlow $110/hr. 22.55 (brief) C. . . .

v., 84 T.C. 996 (T.C. 1985)

. . . to 74.56 percent while the parent corporation’s share increased to a range of from 22.90 percent to 28.30 . . .

W. KOONTZ, v. JAFFARIAN,, 617 F. Supp. 1108 (E.D. Va. 1985)

. . . On page 28.30 of Koontz 1979 manual (PX All A), there is inserted for the voltage for the item with catalog . . .

WHITTENBERG, Mr. P. NAACP, Dr. T. H. v. SCHOOL DISTRICT OF GREENVILLE COUNTY, SOUTH CAROLINA,, 607 F. Supp. 289 (D.S.C. 1985)

. . . 5.14 28.44 5.97 24.84 24.95 6.81 12.25 18.66 31.68 18.64 18.26 38.92 23.16 26.13 22.46 15.25 21.22 28.30 . . .

In HURRICANE ELKHORN COAL CORP. II,, 15 B.R. 990 (Bankr. W.D. Ky. 1981)

. . . After deducting a 4% agent’s commission, the net selling price was reduced to $28.30 per ton. . . .

In IMPERIAL NATIONAL, INC., 431 F. Supp. 155 (D.N.J. 1977)

. . . .-72 partner hours and 28.30 associate hours in performing its services. . . .

MEEROPOL v. NIZER, 417 F. Supp. 1201 (S.D.N.Y. 1976)

. . . .” § 9 at 28.30 n. 208b (1975 Supp.). . In Folsom v. . . .

RAWLEIGH, MOSES CO. INC. v. THE UNITED STATES, 201 Ct. Cl. 295 (Ct. Cl. 1973)

. . . (f.o.b. destination), and ¡56,070 pairs of trousers at a unit price of $28.16 (f.o.b. origin), or $28.30 . . .

PPG v., 55 T.C. 928 (T.C. 1970)

. . . to 74.56 percent while the parent corporation’s share increased to a range of from 22.90 percent to 28.30 . . .

UNITED STATES v. DREIER, 307 F. Supp. 810 (S.D.N.Y. 1969)

. . . Horn 89.26 28.30 28.30 Thomas Morris 140.25 157.55 140.25 Patrick F. . . .

RELIANCE INTERNATIONAL MFG. LTD. v. UNITED STATES,, 295 F. Supp. 1110 (Cust. Ct. 1969)

. . . plated with nickelled base, without d. b. 1.78 6.50 #113 ditto, galvanized copper plated with d. b. 8.37 28.30 . . . cages, chromium plated with d. b. 4.46 16.50 R59/9870 #98 Combined bird cages with double bottom 7.17 28.30 . . . affidavit states that the list price of cage No. 497N was DM 6.50 per cage and for cage No. 3452/1, DM 28.30 . . .

ELI LILLY AND COMPANY v. UNITED STATES, 372 F.2d 990 (Ct. Cl. 1967)

. . . percent to 74.56 percent, while Eli Lilly’s share had increased to a range of from 22.90 percent to 28.30 . . .

ELI LILLY COMPANY v. THE UNITED STATES, 178 Ct. Cl. 666 (Ct. Cl. 1967)

. . . percent to 74.56 percent, while Eli Lilly’s share had increased to a range of from 22.90 percent to 28.30 . . .

ROUGH DIAMOND COMPANY, INC. AND A. G. PARSER INCORPORATED v. THE UNITED STATES, 173 Ct. Cl. 15 (Ct. Cl. 1965)

. . . instance during the then current marketing year the average selling price was slightly in excess of 28.30 . . . The discounts in the cotton merchants’ commitments to plaintiffs were based on such 28.30-cent price . . . and practice of maintaining the same floor price throughout the entire marketing year, that the past 28.30 . . . The CCC arbitrarily established on May 12, 1958 a minimum acceptable export sales price of 28.30 cents . . . It was on this basis that CCC’s floor price of 28.30 cents per pound was established. . . .

v., 54 Cust. Ct. 626 (Cust. Ct. 1965)

. . . 283 " " " " 750003 8/18/62 " " " " 736282 7/30/62 " " " " IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that 28.30 . . . “ “ 722947 283 “ “ “ “ 750003 “ “ “ “ 736282 “ “ “ “ “ and that, for tbe purposes of tbe foregoing, 28.30 . . .

GELB, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE,, 298 F.2d 544 (2d Cir. 1962)

. . . See generally 4 Mertens, Law of Federal Gift and Estate Taxation (1959), § 28.30. . . .

DELANEY v. UNITED SERVICES LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, 201 F. Supp. 25 (W.D. Tex. 1961)

. . . by the insured as well as new forms indicating that the increase in the monthly allotment would be $28.30 . . .

HAMLEN v. WELCH,, 116 F.2d 413 (1st Cir. 1940)

. . . Mason Machine Works Co., supra; see III Paul & Mertens, The Law of Federal Income Taxation (1934) § 28.30 . . .

v. J. W., 133 Fla. 722 (Fla. 1938)

. . . Amount No. 4986 ..... 1925 10.45 No. 10405 ... 1926 23.63 No. 2263-A . 1927 26.75 No. 9234-A . 1928 28.30 . . .

WILLIAM E. JOHNSON v. THE UNITED STATES, 77 Ct. Cl. 51 (Ct. Cl. 1933)

. . . distance of 563 miles, and from Honolulu to Fort Shafter, a distance of three miles, amounting in all to $28.30 . . .

SILVERTOWN MOTOR CO. v. THE UNITED STATES, 62 Ct. Cl. 171 (Ct. Cl. 1926)

. . . salary a refund of $4,462 was allowed and paid, and by reason thereof and a small conceded item of $28.30 . . .

H. M. D. W., 43 Fla. 142 (Fla. 1901)

. . . 1895, upon the real estate described in the bill for the sum of $157.06, principal and interest, and $28.30 . . .

, 28 Fla. 191 (Fla. 1891)

. . . “ FenveCliquot “ quarts, 29.25... 58.50 2 “ “ “ “ pints, 31.25... 62.50 2 “ Dry Monopole “ quarts, 28.30 . . .