The 2023 Florida Statutes (including Special Session C)

Title X
PUBLIC OFFICERS, EMPLOYEES, AND RECORDS

Chapter 112
PUBLIC OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES: GENERAL PROVISIONS

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 112.30

112.30 Status of employees of other governments.—

(1) When any unit of government of this state acts as a receiving agency, employees of the sending agency who are assigned under authority of this part may be considered to be on detail to the receiving agency.

(2) Appointments of persons so assigned may be made without regard to the laws or regulations governing the selection of employees of the receiving agency. Such person shall be in the unclassified service of the state.

(3) Employees who are detailed to the receiving agency shall not by virtue of such detail be considered to be employees thereof, except as provided in subsection (4), nor shall they be paid a salary or wage by the receiving agency during the period of their detail. The supervision of the duties of such employees during the period of detail may be governed by agreement between the sending agency and the receiving agency.

(4) Any employee of a sending agency assigned in this state who suffers disability or death as a result of personal injury arising out of and in the course of such assignment, or sustained in the performance of duties in connection therewith, shall be treated for the purpose of sending agency’s employee compensation program, as an employee, as defined in such act, who has sustained such injury in the performance of such duty, but shall not receive benefits under that act for any period for which he or she elects to receive similar benefits as an employee under the receiving agency’s employee compensation program.

History.—s. 6, ch. 65-524; s. 697, ch. 95-147.

F.S. 112.30 on Google Scholar

F.S. 112.30 on Casetext

Amendments to 112.30

Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 112.30

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

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 112.30.

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases from cite.case.law:

ROSENBERG, v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT,, 13 F. Supp. 3d 92 (D.C. Cir. 2014)

. . . that if all of the potentially responsive pages were to be released, the Plaintiff would owe the FBI $112.30 . . .

ROSENBERG, v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT,, 959 F. Supp. 2d 61 (D.D.C. 2013)

. . . that if all of the potentially responsive pages were to be released, the Plaintiff would owe the FBI $112.30 . . . fees, or whether the Plaintiff would elect to receive the documents hard copy, thus incurring up to $112.30 . . .

FAUVERGUE v. UNITED STATES,, 85 Fed. Cl. 50 (Fed. Cl. 2008)

. . . Mitsui protested the classification, claiming that its tuna should alternatively be classified as 112.30 . . .

MITSUI FOODS, INC. v. UNITED STATES,, 867 F.2d 1401 (Fed. Cir. 1989)

. . . States pack of canned tuna * * * as reported by the National Marine Fisheries Service,” as used in item 112.30 . . . “United States [P]ack,” as Used in Item 112.30, TSUS, Does Not Include Tuna from American Samoa Schedule . . . Mitsui contends that “United States pack,” as it appears in item 112.30, TSUS, includes tuna packed in . . . The Court of International Trade denied Mit-sui’s motion in light of its interpretation of item 112.30 . . . The plain language of item 112.30, TSUS, is clear that Customs only may assess duties at the rate of . . .

MITSUI FOODS, INC. v. UNITED STATES,, 688 F. Supp. 605 (Ct. Int'l Trade 1988)

. . . this classification and contends that the imported merchandise is properly classifiable under item 112.30 . . . If the imported merchandise is properly classifiable under item 112.30, TSUS, as maintained by plaintiff . . . 3, Subpart C: Fish, prepared or preserved in any manner, not in oil, in airtight containers: Tuna: 112.30 . . . Merchandise imported within the quota level is classified under item 112.30, TSUS, and subject to a duty . . . In 1983, Congress enacted Public Law 97-446 which amended item 112.30, TSUS, by adding the phrase “and . . .

v., 12 Ct. Int'l Trade 276 (Ct. Int'l Trade 1988)

. . . this classification and contends that the imported merchandise is properly classifiable under item 112.30 . . . If the imported merchandise is properly classifiable under item 112.30, TSUS, as maintained by plaintiff . . . Merchandise imported within the quota level is classified under item 112.30, TSUS, and subject to a duty . . . The tariff-rate quota found in item 112.30, TSUS, was implemented pursuant to the Protocol of Terms of . . . In 1983, Congress enacted Public Law 97-446 which amended item 112.30, TSUS, by adding the phrase "and . . .

BONANZA TRUCKING CORPORATION, v. UNITED STATES U. S. U. S. II J. F. K., 664 F. Supp. 1453 (Ct. Int'l Trade 1987)

. . . . § 19.48(a)(3) and § 112.30(a)(5)] providing for revocation of licenses held by corporations with officers . . . administrative level, and following entry of the court’s judgment, the Service proposed to change section 112.30 . . .

v. U. S. U. S. II, U. S. JFK, 11 Ct. Int'l Trade 436 (Ct. Int'l Trade 1987)

AMERITRADE CORPORATION, v. W. CARNES, Of, 637 F. Supp. 1213 (Ct. Int'l Trade 1986)

. . . . § 112.30(3)(e). . . .

v. W., 10 Ct. Int'l Trade 334 (Ct. Int'l Trade 1986)

. . . . § 112.30(3)(e). . . .

v., 10 Ct. Int'l Trade 314 (Ct. Int'l Trade 1986)

. . . , JFK Airport Area, issued a letter to Bonanza stamped May 8, 1985 and stating: * * * Pursuant to § 112.30 . . . of the Customs Regulations (19 C.F.R. 112.30), the District (Area) Director of Customs may revoke or . . . a license or an officer of a corporation holding such a license is convicted of a felony (19 C.F.R. 112.30 . . . Accordingly, I propose to revoke your license for the following reason: CHARGE: Violation of § 112.30 . . . For example, subsection (d)(2) of 19 C.F.R. § 112.30 states: Conduct of hearing. . . .

BONANZA TRUCKING CORPORATION, v. UNITED STATES, 642 F. Supp. 1170 (Ct. Int'l Trade 1986)

. . . Pursuant to § 112.30 of the Customs Regulations (19 C.F.R. 112.30), the District (Area) Director of Customs . . . a license or an officer of a corporation holding such a license is convicted of a felony (19 C.F.R. 112.30 . . . Accordingly, I propose to revoke your license for the following reason: CHARGE: Violation of § 112.30 . . . A second letter dated May 14th [RD D] requested a hearing pursuant to 19 C.F.R. § 112.30 on the revocation . . . For example, subsection (d)(2) of 19 C.F.R. § 112.30 states: Conduct of hearing. . . .

UNITED STATES, C. v. BAR BEA TRUCK LEASING CO. INC. Co., 713 F.2d 1563 (Fed. Cir. 1983)

. . . . § 112.30. . . . authority to issue and revoke cartman’s licenses. 19 U.S.C. § 1565 and 19 C.F.R. §§ 112.21, 112.24 and 112.30 . . . actual license holder is specifically set forth as grounds for revocation of the license in 19 C.F.R. § 112.30 . . .

Co. v., 5 Ct. Int'l Trade 124 (Ct. Int'l Trade 1983)

. . . CHL No. 1777 issued to another bonded cartman—such use plainly constituted a violation of 19 CFR § 112.30 . . .

BAR BEA TRUCK LEASING CO. INC. Co. v. UNITED STATES,, 546 F. Supp. 558 (Ct. Int'l Trade 1982)

. . . not predicated upon any Customs regulation nor upon a revocation proceeding in accordance with 19 CFR 112.30 . . . Customs’ nullification letter, BMW then asked for a hearing as authorized by Customs regulation 19 CFR 112.30 . . .

Co. Co. v., 4 Ct. Int'l Trade 70 (Ct. Int'l Trade 1982)

DIAZ, Sr. d b a v. E. CHASEN, 642 F.2d 764 (5th Cir. 1981)

. . . Diaz that it was proposed to revoke his cartman’s license pursuant to § 112.30(a)(5) of the Customs Regulations . . .

DI JUB LEASING CORP. v. UNITED STATES, 505 F. Supp. 1113 (Ct. Int'l Trade 1980)

. . . Lewis found that Di Jub had'violated 19 CFR § 112.30(a)(9); and as grounds for revocation, the hearing . . . These claims include: (1) The Customs Regulations under 19 CFR 112.30(a)(9) and the statement of findings . . . agreement with Ralph Pellecchia and is thus contrary to law. (9) The applicable regulation, 19 CFR 112.30 . . .

Di v., 1 Ct. Int'l Trade 42 (Ct. Int'l Trade 1980)

. . . Lewis found that Di Jub had violated 19 CFR 112.30(a)(9); and as grounds for revocation, the hearing . . . These claims include: (1) The Customs Regulations under 19 CFR 112.30(a)(9) and the statement of findings . . . agreement with Ralph Pellecchia and is thus contrary to law. (9) The applicable regulation, 19 CFR 112.30 . . .

TEMPO TRUCKING AND TRANSFER CORPORATION, v. G. R. DICKSON, U. S., 405 F. Supp. 506 (E.D.N.Y. 1975)

. . . . § 112.30(D). . . . Here the grounds for the suspension or revocation of a cartman’s license as set forth in 19 C.F.R. § 112.30 . . . The applicable customs regulation, 19 C.F.R. § 112.30(a)(5), provides that the conviction of a corporate . . . Further, the Hearing Officer was bound to follow the mandate of 19 C.F.R. § 112.30(d)(1) which provides . . . The administrative hearing was held pursuant to 19 C.M'.R. § 112.30 (d) (2). . . . .

Co. v., 73 Cust. Ct. 35 (Cust. Ct. 1974)

. . . the cans to be deducted from the full value of the imported article when duty is assessed under item 112.30 . . . There is no dispute that the importation is classifiable under item 112.30, the relevant language reading . . . States: Fish, prepared or preserved in any manner, nor in oil, in airtight containers : ******* Tuna: 112.30 . . .

WILLIAMS, CLARKE CO. Co. v. UNITED STATES, 436 F.2d 1039 (C.C.P.A. 1971)

. . . protests of decisions classifying imported tuna fish and the cans in which it was contained under item 112.30 . . . Item 112.30 of the Tariff Schedules of the United States: Tuna: 112.30 In containers weighing with their . . . imported from Ecuador were classified and liquidated on May 25, 1965 and September 7, 1965 under item 112.30 . . .

Co. Co. v., 58 C.C.P.A. 98 (C.C.P.A. 1971)

. . . protests of decisions classifying imported tuna fish and the-cans in which it was contained under item 112.30 . . . Item 112.30 of the Tariff Schedules of the United States: 'Tuna: 112.30 In containers weighing with their . . . imported from Ecuador were classified and liquidated on May 25,1965 and September 7,1965 under item 112.30 . . .

WILLIAMS, CLARKE CO. Co. v. UNITED STATES, 300 F. Supp. 878 (Cust. Ct. 1969)

. . . which was exported from Ecuador and entered for consumption at Los Angeles on July 10, 1965, under item 112.30 . . .

Co. Co. v., 62 Cust. Ct. 756 (Cust. Ct. 1969)

. . . which was exported from Ecuador and entered for consumption at Los Angeles on July 10, 1965, under item 112.30 . . .

FEDERAL GAS, OIL COAL CO. v. MAYNARD, 152 F.2d 372 (6th Cir. 1945)

. . . bit more than a year after the conveyances, the father and his wife deeded, for a consideration of $112.30 . . .

RAWLINGS v. COMMERCIAL NAT. BANK IN SHREVEPORT MOORE I, 44 F. Supp. 5 (W.D. La. 1942)

. . . Borrowed from In Bank 1,000,000.00 1,000,000.00 112.30 19. . . . Suspense items 112.30 16,473,678.41 4,435,799.54 9,643,810.99 2,994,067.88” It will be noted that item . . .

In CAMPBELL, 124 F. 417 (W.D. Va. 1903)

. . . 7.61 227 felt hats............ 101.77 Sundry store fixtures, including 24 “show-window stands” ... 112.30 . . .