Cases from cite.case.law:

MIAMI- DADE COUNTY, v. In FLORIDA POWER LIGHT CO., 208 So. 3d 111 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . Section 380.04(3)(b), Florida Statute (2013), part of “The Florida Environmental Land and Water Management . . . In addition, FPL contends that section 380.04 stands for the proposition that any work done by a utility . . . Section 380.04(3)(b) states that the “development” exception is limited to work conducted on “established . . .

HOWARD, LLC, v. MURRAY, K H A A, 184 So. 3d 1155 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . .” § 380.04(1), Fla. Stat. (2015). . . .

J. HOWELL, v. PASCO COUNTY, 165 So. 3d 12 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . asserted that the limerock mining was expressly excluded from the definition of "development” in section 380.04 . . .

O NEIL, O v. WALTON COUNTY, a a A. E. Jr., 149 So. 3d 699 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . .3d at 598, “development” is broadly construed and includes “any building activity” (§§ 163.3164(14), 380.04 . . . businesses, manufacturing establishments, offices, or dwelling units in a structure or on land.” § 380.04 . . .

SEMINOLE TRIBE OF FLORIDA, v. HENDRY COUNTY, a Co. LLC, a, 114 So. 3d 1073 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2013)

. . . consistency of the site and any associated facilities that constitute a “development,” as defined in s. 380.04 . . . are not exempt from the requirements of land use plans and zoning ordinances under chapter 163 and s. 380.04 . . .

GRAVES, v. CITY OF POMPANO BEACH, CITY COMMISSION, a PPI, INC., 74 So. 3d 595 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2011)

. . . Pursuant to section 163.3164(6), “development” has the meaning given it in section 380.04 of “The Florida . . . [or] the making of any material change in the use or appearance of any structure or land.” § 380.04(1 . . . The meaning of “development” in section 380.04(1) is more specifically defined in section 380.04(2)(b . . . Further, section 380.04(4) provides that “[rjeference to particular operations is not intended to limit . . .

WILSON, LLC, LLC, v. PALM BEACH COUNTY,, 62 So. 3d 1247 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2011)

. . . Section 163.3164(6) defines “development” by referencing section 380.04, which defines the term as “the . . . use or appearance of any structure or land, or the dividing of land into three or more parcels.” § 380.04 . . . However, section 380.04 also excludes various operations which do not involve “development” as defined . . . other agricultural or forestry products; raising livestock; or for other agricultural purposes.” § 380.04 . . .

M. JOHNSON, v. GULF COUNTY, a Jr. D K LLC, a GROUP, LLC, a, 26 So. 3d 33 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2009)

. . . Florida Statutes (2006) provides that “Development” has the same meaning as that term is given in section 380.04 . . . Section 380.04 provides in pertinent part: (1) The term “development” means the carrying out of any building . . .

D. KEENE, v. ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT,, 22 So. 3d 665 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2009)

. . . ascertain what constitutes “development,” it is necessary to examine the various provisions of section 380.04 . . . There is no category in section 380.04 suggesting that a special use permit like the one we have here . . . The closest is section 380.04(l)(b), which identifies as "development:” "[a] change in the intensity . . . Section 163.3215(6) defines “development" as having the meaning in section 380.04, Florida Statutes, . . .

M. JOHNSON, P. E. R. W. v. GULF COUNTY, a Jr., 965 So. 2d 298 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

. . . See § 380.04(f)(g). . . .

GALAXY FIREWORKS, INC. v. CITY OF ORLANDO,, 842 So. 2d 160 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2003)

. . . In addition, this statute provides that “development” has the meaning given it in section 380.04. § 163.3164 . . .

J. NEUMONT, v. MONROE COUNTY,, 242 F. Supp. 2d 1265 (S.D. Fla. 2002)

. . . . § 380.04. The Third District further held that Fla. . . . Stat. § 380.04. The Third District further held that Fla. . . .

LORIDA WILDLIFE FEDERATION v. COLLIER COUNTY, A. Jr., 819 So. 2d 200 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

. . . The above provision simply refers to the definition of development furnished in section 380.04, Florida . . . Statutes, which in turn states in section 380.04(1), Florida Statutes (1999), that it “means the carrying . . . An agricultural use or operation is explicitly excluded from the definition of development. § 380.04( . . . Section 380.04, included within the provisions of the Florida Environmental Land and Water Management . . . expand the statutory powers delegated to it, but was instead cognizant of the provisions of section 380.04 . . . Section 163.3164(6) adopts the definition of development set forth in section 380.04. . . . Section 380.04(3)(e) excludes from the definition of ''development” "the use of any land for the purpose . . .

FRIENDS OF FLORIDA, INC. v. ST. JOHNS COUNTY,, 765 So. 2d 216 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

. . . See §§ 163.3215(1), 163.3164, 380.04(3)(b). . . .

J. NEUMONT, v. MONROE COUNTY FLORIDA,, 104 F. Supp. 2d 1368 (S.D. Fla. 2000)

. . . . § 380.04. The Third District further held that Fla. . . .

RATHKAMP, a a a v. DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS, 740 So. 2d 1209 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)

. . . Principles of Guiding Development for the Florida Keys area of critical state concern pursuant to section 380.04 . . .

FRIENDS OF MATANZAS, INC. v. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION,, 729 So. 2d 437 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)

. . . with Matanzas’ argument, and indeed there may be an oversight with regard to sections 163.3164(b) and 380.04 . . .

FLORIDA ROCK PROPERTIES, v. KEYSER,, 709 So. 2d 175 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998)

. . . The County shall require new development, as defined in Section 380.04, FS, on sites of 50 acres or more . . .

LOVE PGI PARTNERS, LP, v. SCHULTZ,, 706 So. 2d 887 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998)

. . . Both the statute and the county code define “development” by reference to section 380.04, which provides . . .

LEE COUNTY, a v. LIPPI J M a d b a S, 693 So. 2d 686 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1997)

. . . The term “development” is defined in subsection 163.3164(5) as having “the meaning given it in s. 380.04 . . . Section 380.04(1) generally defines “development” as “the carrying out of any building activity or mining . . . In section 380.04(3)(h), Florida Statutes (1989), the definition of development is narrowed to exclude . . .

C. DAS, v. OSCEOLA COUNTY,, 685 So. 2d 990 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1997)

. . . Section 380.04 defines "development” as "the carrying out of any building activity or mining operation . . .

ROBBINS, v. CITY OF MIAMI BEACH,, 664 So. 2d 1150 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)

. . . “Development” for purposes of “development orders” is defined in section 380.04(1), Florida Statutes . . . improvement of a road ... if the work is carried out on land within the boundaries of the right-of-way.” § 380.04 . . .

In PULLMAN CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRIES, INC. PULLMAN CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRIES, INC. v. UNITED STATES, 186 B.R. 88 (Bankr. N.D. Ill. 1995)

. . . Thus, $112,659.10 ($79,620.07 + ⅜ of ($64,-380.04) + $603.29 + ⅜ of ($491.44)) represented Pullman’s . . .

EDGEWATER BEACH OWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC. v. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF WALTON COUNTY, FLORIDA KPM,, 645 So. 2d 541 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)

. . . Such a conclusion is compelled by Section 380.04, Florida Statutes, which provides in pertinent part: . . .

BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS FOR LEE COUNTY, E. St. v. ROYAL PELICAN DEVELOPMENT, INC. Co., 614 So. 2d 1164 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)

. . . found as a matter of law that the “proposed wetslips do not constitute a ‘development’ under Section 380.04 . . . The trial court based these conclusions upon the notion that subsection 380.04(3)(d) excludes from the . . .

In C. P. CARIBE, INC. In EER REALTY, S. E. In EMERITO ESTRADA RIVERA PARTS AND SERVICE, INC. In EER AGRICULTURAL EQUIPMENT, INC. In BORICUA MOTORS CORPORATION, In EMERITO ESTRADA RIVERA, INC. In ISUZU CARIBE, INC. In JEEP EAGLE PUERTO RICO, INC. In EMERITO ESTRADA RIVERA- ISUZU P. R. INC. In CARIBE MOTORS PROPERTY CORP. In E. E. R. REALTY CORP. In DAIHATSU PUERTO RICO, INC. In EER ENTERPRISES, INC. In BORICUA MOTORS LEASING CORPORATION,, 140 B.R. 320 (Bankr. D.P.R. 1992)

. . . Amended claim No. 73 in 91-00499 for $170,-380.04; amended claim No. 27 in 91-00501 for $15,046.73; amended . . .

RIDGEWOOD PROPERTIES, INC. v. DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS,, 595 So. 2d 1101 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)

. . . . § 380.04(1), Fla.Stat. (1989). . . .

BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE COUNTY, v. DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS,, 560 So. 2d 240 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1990)

. . . subject matter because the County’s road work is not “development,” as that term is defined under section 380.04 . . . The definition of development in section 380.04, Florida Statutes, specifically excludes “[w]ork by a . . . improvement of a road ... if the work is carried out on land within the boundaries of the right-of-way.” § 380.04 . . . complies with the County’s development regulations and the provisions of chapter 380, Florida Statutes. § 380.04 . . . The FDCA contends the exception from development under section 380.04(3)(a), Florida Statutes, does not . . .

v., 13 Ct. Int'l Trade 1098 (Ct. Int'l Trade 1989)

. . . 10% marking duties [Item 685.90 7.3% or 7.7% ¡Item 685.21, 685.23, 685.23 685.12 Various rates [Item 380.04 . . . Item 376.56 Various rates litem 683.70 26.3% ¡Item 127.10 1.5c per lb. litem 127.10 1.5c per lb. litem 380.04 . . . or 382.81 Various rates ¡Item 380.04 or 382.81 Various rates ¡Item 380.04 or 382.81 Various rates ¡87 . . .

HARBOR COURSE CLUB, INC. a v. DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS, HARBOR COURSE CLUB, INC. a v. DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS,, 510 So. 2d 915 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1987)

. . . “Section 380.04 Definition of development.— ****** “(4) ‘Development,’ as designated in an ordinance, . . . In addition, to interpret Section 380.04(4), supra, to include all activities of any kind that are found . . .

RINKER MATERIALS CORPORATION, a v. TOWN OF LAKE PARK, a, 494 So. 2d 1123 (Fla. 1986)

. . . However, for purposes of this act, development is given the same meaning it has in section 380.04, Florida . . . Section 380.04(3) specifically excludes from the term development any work done on the maintenance or . . .

In BEKER INDUSTRIES CORP. BEKER INDUSTRIES CORP. v. FLORIDA LAND AND WATER ADJUDICATORY COMMISSION,, 57 B.R. 611 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 1986)

. . . . § 380.04. . . .

CALOOSA PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC. v. PALM BEACH COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS,, 429 So. 2d 1260 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1983)

. . . This definition must be read in pari mate-ria with the definition of a “development” in Section 380.04 . . .

SEMINOLE COUNTY, v. E. MERTZ M. a a, 415 So. 2d 1286 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1982)

. . . “Development” is defined in section 380.04 as including the dividing of land into three or more parcels . . . Section 380.04(1), Florida Statutes (1981), states as follows: “Development” means the carrying out of . . .

O D. ASKEW v. CROSS KEY WATERWAYS O D. ASKEW v. POSTAL COLONY CO. INC., 372 So. 2d 913 (Fla. 1978)

. . . Section 380.04. . . .

CROSS KEY WATERWAYS v. O D. ASKEW CITY OF KEY WEST v. O D. ASKEW CITY OF KEY WEST v. O D. ASKEW, 351 So. 2d 1062 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1977)

. . . Section 380.04. . . .

GENERAL ELECTRIC CREDIT CORPORATION OF GEORGIA, a v. METROPOLITAN DADE COUNTY,, 346 So. 2d 1049 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1977)

. . . Development is specifically defined in § 380.04(2)(b) as including “[a] change in the intensity of use . . . is defined as including “any material change in the use or appearance of any structure or land,” § 380.04 . . . change in the intensity of use of land, such as an increase in the number of dwelling units . . . .” § 380.04 . . .

PINELLAS COUNTY, a v. LAKE PADGETT PINES, a a, 333 So. 2d 472 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1976)

. . . contends that the Cypress Creek project falls within the definition of “development” which under § 380.04 . . .

INTERCONTINENTAL GROUP, v. DADE COUNTY,, 44 Fla. Supp. 6 (Dade Cty. Cir. Ct. 1976)

. . . from being a “stranger”, GECC is a “developer” as it is defined in the Act, §§380.03 (2) (3) (4) and §380.04 . . .

HELVERING, r v. JONES, 120 F.2d 828 (8th Cir. 1941)

. . . The taxes for the year 1934, amounting to $380.04, were past due and unpaid, and when the note became . . .

JOHNSON v. NORTH STAR LUMBER CO., 206 F. 624 (9th Cir. 1913)

. . . Johnson, for the sum of-§380.04, and the sale was subsequently confirmed by the court. . . .