Cases from cite.case.law:

CITY OF RIVIERA BEACH, a v. J B MOTEL CORP. N. A. N. A. F. S. B. f k a, 213 So. 3d 1102 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . . § 162.09(1), Fla. Stat. (2003). . . . . § 162.09(3), Fla. Stat. (2003). . . . order imposing a fine has been recorded, unless within that time an action is commenced pursuant to s. 162.09 . . . Thus, when read in conjunction with section 162.09(3), the plain language of section 162.10 establishes . . .

CITY OF PALM BAY, v. WELLS FARGO BANK, N. A., 114 So. 3d 924 (Fla. 2013)

. . . that the ordinance irreconcilably conflicts with the mechanical recording statute provided in section 162.09 . . . The majority reasons that section 162.09(3) “contains no provision expressly authorizing municipalities . . . Because the language contained in sections 162.09, 695.11, and related provisions does not expressly . . . Section 162.09(3), Florida Statutes (2004), provides that “[a] certified copy of [a code enforcement] . . .

CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, v. JANOTS, P., 101 So. 3d 864 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2012)

. . . The City recorded the orders in the public record pursuant to section 162.09(3), Florida Statutes, which . . . In support of its ruling, the court relied on the presence of the term “petition” in section 162.09(3 . . . The court then reasoned as follows: section 162.09(3) requires a petition, a petition is one form of . . . pleading, so section 162.09(3) requires a pleading. . . . To determine what the term “petition” means in section 162.09(3), we must apply the well established . . .

A. CIOLLI, v. CITY OF PALM BAY,, 59 So. 3d 295 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2011)

. . . order in the public records in an attempt to create a lien in favor of the City pursuant to section 162.09 . . . Section 162.09(3) provides that a certified copy of a Code Enforcement Board order imposing a fine may . . .

S. OSBORNE, v. J. DUMOULIN,, 55 So. 3d 577 (Fla. 2011)

. . . County of Volusia, 618 So.2d 754, 756 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993) (“Although the statute [§ 162.09, Fla. . . .

MOUSTAKIS, v. CITY OF FORT LAUDERDALE,, 338 F. App'x 820 (11th Cir. 2009)

. . . Section 162.09 of the Florida Statutes provides that a local government may impose a fine for each day . . . Stat. 162.09(1), (2)(a). . . . Section 162.09(2)(a) of the Florida Statutes clearly provides a cap on the amount of fines that can accrue . . .

W. KUPKE, O. v. ORANGE COUNTY, FL,, 293 F. App'x 695 (11th Cir. 2008)

. . . . § 162.09(1). The Kupkes appealed the order to Florida’s Ninth Judicial Circuit. . . .

HON REALTY CORP. a v. FIRST AMERICAN TITLE INSURANCE CO. a, 291 F. App'x 951 (11th Cir. 2008)

. . . . § 162.09(3) (West 2000) (providing same). . . . Stat. § 162.09(3) expressly contemplates that a “certified copy of an order imposing a fine, or a fine . . .

A. STRATTON, v. SARASOTA COUNTY, a, 983 So. 2d 51 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2008)

. . . Section 162.09(1), Florida Statutes (2004), permits a local code enforcement board to impose fines against . . . Section 162.09(2)(a) sets forth the permissible per diem fines and permits those fines to be imposed . . . Section 162.09(2)(b) sets forth the criteria to be used in determining the amount of the fine. . . . Section 162.09(2)(d) permits counties to impose higher fines than those set out in section 162.09(2)( . . . In addition to those higher fines, section 162.09(2)(d) permits a county to “impose additional fines . . .

In S. NEASE M., 391 B.R. 470 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 2008)

. . . violation exists and upon any other real or personal property owned by the violator, pursuant to section 162.09 . . .

HENLEY, v., 971 So. 2d 998 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2008)

. . . The violations in question were rendered pursuant to section 162.09(1), Florida Statutes (2005), which . . . on which the violation exists and upon any other real or personal property owned by the violator.” § 162.09 . . .

SCHWARZ, v. CITY OF TREASURE ISLAND,, 521 F. Supp. 2d 1307 (M.D. Fla. 2007)

. . . protection and procedural due process provisions of the United States and Florida Constitutions, and Section 162.09 . . . , Plaintiffs also argue that the CEB failed to observe the statutory procedures outlined in Section 162.09 . . . Accordingly, the City did not violate Plaintiffs’ due process rights or Section 162.09, Florida Statutes . . . due process rights pursuant to the United States and Florida Constitutions and Sections 162.11 and 162.09 . . .

TOWN OF LAKE PARK, v. F. GRIMES, Jr. E. a, 963 So. 2d 940 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

. . . Section 162.09, Florida Statutes, authorizes county or municipal code enforcement boards to levy fines . . . X of the State Constitution. § 162.09(3), Fla. Stat. (2006). Relying on language in Demura v. . . .

MATHIEU, v. CITY OF LAUDERDALE LAKES,, 961 So. 2d 363 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

. . . Section 162.09(3), Florida Statutes (2003), provides the mechanism and limitations of the liens created . . .

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

. . . See § 162.09(1), Fla. Stat. . . . records and thereafter shall constitute a lien against the land on which the violation exists .... ” § 162.09 . . .

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

. . . Specifically, Count II alleged that section 162.09(1), Florida Statutes and section ll-37(a), Orange . . . Count III alleged that sections 162.07 and 162.09(1), Florida Statutes, and sections 11-35 and ll-37( . . . Count TV alleged that section 162.09(1), Florida Statutes, and section ll-37(a), Orange County Code, . . . Section 162.09(1), Florida Statutes (1997) provided in pertinent part: An enforcement board, upon notification . . .

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

. . . This was error under section 162.09(3), Florida Statutes (2000), which provides that “[a] fine imposed . . .

E. JONES, v. FLORIDA CITY OF WINTER HAVEN, a, 870 So. 2d 52 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2003)

. . . See § 162.09(3), Fla. Stat. (2000). . . .

I. MASSEY W. v. CHARLOTTE COUNTY,, 842 So. 2d 142 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2003)

. . . A fine may become a lien on your property pursuant to Section 162.09, Florida Statutes. . . . for each day the violation continues past the date set by the enforcement board for compliance.” § 162.09 . . . the violator to correct the violation, and (3) any previous violations committed by the violator. § 162.09 . . . The Code Enforcement Board did not consider the factors required by section 162.09(2)(b) in determining . . . Moreover, even though section 162.09(2)(c) permits a code enforcement board to reduce any fine it imposes . . .

DELUCA PROPERTIES, INC. v. CITY OF WILDWOOD,, 830 So. 2d 206 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

. . . Section 162.09, Florida Statutes, provides that if an order of fine is recorded in the public records . . . Section 162.09 further provides that the fíne continues to accrue until the violator comes into compliance . . . Effective April 2000, the legislature amended section 162.09 to provide that local governments could . . .

MIAMI- DADE COUNTY, v. BROWN,, 814 So. 2d 518 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

. . . the law when, erroneously believing that the County’s procedure conflicted with Sections 162.06 and 162.09 . . . The Circuit Court was persuaded by its reading of sections 162.06 and 162.09 which appear to require . . .

UNITED STATES v. ALCORN,, 27 F. App'x 317 (6th Cir. 2001)

. . . . § 841, was 162.09 grams of methamphetamine. . . .

L. KIRBY, v. CITY OF ARCHER,, 790 So. 2d 1214 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)

. . . property owned by him to satisfy a lien in favor of appellee, City of Archer, created pursuant to section 162.09 . . . of the Code Enforcement Board which levied the fine and led to the filing of the lien under section 162.09 . . .

UNITED STATES v. ALCORN,, 9 F. App'x 426 (6th Cir. 2001)

. . . The deputies recovered a total of 162.09 grams of methamphetamine from the vehicle. . . .

MONROE COUNTY, v. McCORMICK,, 752 So. 2d 1239 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

. . . court erred by failing to grant it a set-off based on a code enforcement lien, pursuant to section 162.09 . . . on which the violation exists and upon any other real or personal property owned by the violator.” § 162.09 . . . code enforcement lien cannot be foreclosed against her real property as it is homestead property. § 162.09 . . . Further, section 162.09(3) states that “[u]pon petition to the circuit court, such [code enforcement] . . .

CITY OF GAINESVILLE, A v. F. ENGLERT a k a D. F. J., 716 So. 2d 817 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998)

. . . the trial court concluded that the only enforcement method available to the city pursuant to section 162.09 . . .

CITY OF TAMPA, v. W. A. BROWN, On, 711 So. 2d 1188 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998)

. . . issue in this case is whether a code enforcement board order entered pursuant to sections 162.07 and 162.09 . . . See § 162.09, Fla. Stat. (1995). . . . violator fails to comply with the section 162.07 order, a second order may be entered under section 162.09 . . . See § 162.09(3), Fla. Stat. (1995). It is this type of order which is the subject of this case. . . . Section 162.09, however, does not provide for a hearing and does not require that the order entered be . . .

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

. . . circuit court, in its appellate capacity, found that the county court had jurisdiction under sections 162.09 . . .

MONROE COUNTY, v. WHISPERING PINES ASSOCIATES,, 697 So. 2d 873 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1997)

. . . On cross-appeal, the park argues that section 162.09 Florida Statutes (1995) does not authorize holding . . . present landowner, hable for a past landowner’s code violation, and further, that to the extent section 162.09 . . . Section 162.09 Florida Statutes provides in part: (1) An enforcement board, upon notification by the . . .

MONROE COUNTY, v. McCORMICK,, 692 So. 2d 214 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1997)

. . . a certified copy of the order was recorded in the Monroe County Public Records pursuant to section 162.09 . . .

DENBY, v. DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE DENBY,, 685 So. 2d 982 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1997)

. . . then ordered the former husband to pay the ar-rearage at “$52 per week until paid in full” and to pay $162.09 . . . The former husband also argues the trial court imposed $162.09 costs by written order without allowing . . .

P. VERDI, Jr. v. METROPOLITAN DADE COUNTY, a, 684 So. 2d 870 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)

. . . Chapter 162 (or the “Local Government Code Enforcement Boards Act”) as evinced in sections 162.02 and 162.09 . . . in counties and municipalities, where a pending or repeated violation continues to exist. . .Section 162.09 . . .

PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF ESTATE OF JACOBSON, v. ATTORNEYS TITLE INSURANCE FUND, INC., 685 So. 2d 19 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)

. . . In addition, section 162.09(3), Florida Statutes (1989) states that, if the lien is to be recorded in . . .

F. DOTY, v. CITY OF TAMPA, a, 947 F. Supp. 468 (M.D. Fla. 1996)

. . . In Count IV, Doty seeks a declaratory judgment that Section 162.09, Fla.Stat. (1993), is unconstitutional . . .

MICHAEL D. JONES, P. A. v. SEMINOLE COUNTY,, 670 So. 2d 95 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)

. . . Although boards can assert a lien against real or personal property, presumably section 162.09 would . . . PETERSON, C.J., and GRIFFIN, JJ., concur. . § 162.09, Fla.Stat. (1993). . See State ex rel. . . .

C. MISKIN, v. CITY OF FORT LAUDERDALE, a, 661 So. 2d 415 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)

. . . Eventually, the City recorded the order as a lien in the public records pursuant to section 162.09, Florida . . . Specifically, section 162.09(3) provides: A certified copy of an order imposing a fine may be recorded . . .

COUNTY COLLECTION SERVICES, INC. a v. ALLEN,, 650 So. 2d 650 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)

. . . We note further that because section 162.09(3), Florida Statutes (1993), provides for the continued accrual . . .

PROPERTY RIGHTS PROTECTION GROUP, INC. a H. St. a A. v. CITY OF TAMPA, a, 627 So. 2d 61 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)

. . . In the complaint, the plaintiffs contend that all of chapter 162 and specifically sections 162.09 and . . .

A. DEMURA L. v. COUNTY OF VOLUSIA, a, 618 So. 2d 754 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)

. . . property of the Plaintiff, and accordingly, neither the statutory nor constitutional prohibitions of Sec. 162.09 . . . Section 162.09(3), Florida Statutes (1991), provides in pertinent part: A certified copy of an order . . .

CITY OF TAMPA, a FOR USE AND BENEFIT OF CITY OF TAMPA CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD, v. BRAXTON A. s s s, 616 So. 2d 554 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)

. . . intended to confer the right to maintain' an action at law to collect the fine when it enacted section 162.09 . . . The City contends that the following language in the 1989 amendment to section 162.09(3) authorizes a . . . Section 162.09(3), Florida Statutes (1989): A certified copy of an order imposing a fine may be recorded . . .

HUNT v. MIAMI SHORES VILLAGE AND CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD, 47 Fla. Supp. 2d 41 (Fla. Cir. Ct. 1991)

. . . Section 162.09, Fla. . . .

SARASOTA COUNTY, a v. V. ANDREWS, J. NCNB COAST FEDERAL SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATION, v. SARASOTA COUNTY, a, 573 So. 2d 113 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)

. . . Section 162.09 provides that the recording of a certified copy of an order imposing a fine constitutes . . . Section 11 of the ordinance mirrors the procedure referred to in section 162.09 but additionally stipulates . . .

SAWYER v. CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD CITY OF BOCA RATON,, 42 Fla. Supp. 2d 70 (Fla. Cir. Ct. 1990)

. . . Section 162.09(2), Florida Statutes. . . .

CITY OF LAUDERHILL, v. D. PHILPART Co., 561 So. 2d 479 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1990)

. . . the claim of lien filed by the Code Enforcement Board was not certified, it was unenforceable under § 162.09 . . .

CITY OF GAINESVILLE CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD, v. J. LEWIS L., 536 So. 2d 1148 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1988)

. . . Fla. 86-10 (January 29, 1986) (“AGO 86-10”) which interpreted section 162.09 to mean that a municipality . . . Fla. 85-84 (October 25, 1985) (“AGO 85-84”) which interpreted § 162.09 to mean that a code enforcement . . . Section 162.09 authorizes the board, upon notification by the code inspector that a previous order of . . . AGO 85-84 interpreted section 162.09 to require that a code enforcement board make a separate finding . . . The plain language of section 162.09 provides that a board may assess a fine when notified that “... . . .

CHATLOS SYSTEMS, INC. a v. NATIONAL CASH REGISTER CORPORATION NCR CORPORATION CHATLOS SYSTEMS, INC. No. NCR CORPORATION, INC. No., 635 F.2d 1081 (3d Cir. 1980)

. . . discarded “market value” because that term was “conspicuously lacking” from § 2-714, and began with $70,-162.09 . . .