Cases from cite.case.law:

MONROE COUNTY CODE ENFORCEMENT, v. L. CARTER,, 14 So. 3d 1019 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2009)

. . . Part I, sections 162.01-162.13, establishes the pleading and proof requirements for an administrative . . . s findings by imposing Part II, sections 162.21-162.30, pleading requirements to a Part I, sections 162.01 . . .

JAZZ PHOTO CORPORATION, v. UNITED STATES,, 597 F. Supp. 2d 1364 (Ct. Int'l Trade 2008)

. . . The adjusted rate for 2006 is $162.01 ($125 x 211/162.8). . . .

v., 32 Ct. Int'l Trade 1293 (Ct. Int'l Trade 2008)

. . . The adjusted rate for 2006 is $162.01 ($125 x 211/162.8). . . .

BROWARD COUNTY, v. RECUPERO,, 949 So. 2d 274 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

. . . estate’s property were imposed pursuant to the Local Government Code Enforcement Boards Act, sections 162.01 . . .

SARASOTA COUNTY, a v. NATIONAL CITY BANK OF CLEVELAND, OHIO, F., 902 So. 2d 233 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005)

. . . See § 162.01-13, Fla. Stat. (2001). . . .

WILSON, Sr. v. COUNTY OF ORANGE,, 881 So. 2d 625 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004)

. . . complaint alleged that all actions of Orange County “were taken pursuant to Florida state statutes, § 162.01 . . .

FONG, v. TOWN OF BAY HARBOR ISLANDS,, 864 So. 2d 76 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2003)

. . . The Town filed an amended complaint, pursuant to section 162.01, Florida Statutes (2000), seeking to . . .

GOODMAN, v. COUNTY COURT IN BROWARD COUNTY, FLORIDA, 711 So. 2d 587 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998)

. . . enforcement board, but section 162.18 specifically provides that: It is the legislative intent of ss. 162.01 . . . Nothing contained in ss. 162.01-162.12 shall prohibit a local governing body from enforcing its codes . . .

In H. FELL M., 112 B.R. 219 (Bankr. N.D. Ohio 1989)

. . . unsecured claim, in the amount of Twenty-one Thousand One Hundred Sixty-two Dollars and One Cent ($21,-162.01 . . . hereby, Allowed in the amount of Twenty-one Thousand One Hundred Sixty-two Dollars and One Cent ($21,-162.01 . . .

M. DEEHL, v. WEISS,, 505 So. 2d 529 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1987)

. . . . — It is the legislative intent of ss. 162.01-162.12 to provide an additional or supplemental means . . . Nothing contained in ss. 162.01-162.12 shall prohibit a local governing body from enforcing its codes . . . of prosecuting, in county court, violators of any of the codes enumerated in the same statute. . §§ 162.01 . . .

STATE OF MINNESOTA v. UNITED STATES STEEL CORPORATION, 438 F.2d 1380 (8th Cir. 1971)

. . . . §§ 162.01-162.08. . . .

POWELL v. MALONE, 22 F. Supp. 300 (M.D.N.C. 1938)

. . . Malone paid $162.01. . . . Malone was forced by the receiver to pay $162.01. . . .

SIDNEY G. MOYSE, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE,, 4 B.T.A. 834 (B.T.A. 1926)

. . . This is a proceeding for the redetermination of a deficiency in income tax of $162.01 for the calendar . . .