Florida Statute 15.15 - Full Text and Legal Analysis

The 2025 Florida Statutes

Title IV
EXECUTIVE BRANCH

Chapter 15
SECRETARY OF STATE

View Entire Chapter

15.15 Publication of summaries of documents; charge.—The Department of State may in its discretion publish summaries of all instruments, papers, or documents filed with it pursuant to any law and may establish a reasonable fee for providing such service. All fees collected hereunder shall be deposited in the General Revenue Fund.

History.—s. 1, ch. 67-392; ss. 10, 35, ch. 69-106.

F.S. 15.15 on Google Scholar

F.S. 15.15 on CourtListener

Amendments to 15.15

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases Citing Statute 15.15

Total Results: 10 | Sort by: Relevance | Newest First

Copy

Delong Equip. Co. v. Washington Mills Abrasive Co., 840 F.2d 843 (11th Cir. 1988).

Cited 171 times | Published | Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | 1988 U.S. App. LEXIS 3580, 1988 WL 18325

established under § 4 of the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. § 15, 15 § 12 of the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. § 22

Copy

Galuppi v. Viele, 232 So. 2d 408 (Fla. 4th DCA 1970).

Cited 19 times | Published | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal

...have such an identity of interest that the relation back is not prejudicial. This portion of the exception was relied on by the majority. However, this is not the only element that the movant must establish. As stated in 3 Moore's Federal Practice, Section 15.15, page 1046: "In addition to demonstrating this absence of prejudice, to qualify under the exception to the general rule, the plaintiff had to show that his failure to join the correct parties at the outset had not been due to his own inexcusable neglect." (Emphasis supplied.) See McDonald v....

Copy

Babbit Elec., Inc. v. Dynascan Corp., 828 F. Supp. 944 (S.D. Fla. 1993).

Cited 8 times | Published | District Court, S.D. Florida | 1993 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10539, 1993 WL 289258

affidavits pursuant to § 8, 15 U.S.C. § 1058, and § 15, 15 U.S.C. § 1065, have been filed and each of these

Copy

Arthur v. Comm'r, Alabama Dep't of Corr., 840 F.3d 1268 (11th Cir. 2016).

Cited 6 times | Published | Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 19752, 2016 WL 6500595

the denial. See 3-15 Moore’s Federal Practice § 15.15 (Matthew Bender 3d ed.) ("[A] trial court must

Copy

Garrido v. Markus, Winter & Spitale Law Firm, 358 So. 2d 577 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978).

Cited 6 times | Published | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal

...have such an identity of interest that the relation back is not prejudicial. This portion of the exception was relied on by the majority. However, this is not the only element that the movant must establish. As stated in 3 Moore's Federal Practice, Section 15.15, page 1046: "`In addition to demonstrating this absence of prejudice, to qualify under the exception to the general rule, the plaintiff had to show that his failure to join the correct parties at the outset had not been due to his own inexcusable neglect....

Copy

Maas Bros. v. Peo, 498 So. 2d 657 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986).

Cited 6 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 11 Fla. L. Weekly 2603

...in an effort to comply with employer rules regarding parking, the circumstances surrounding her injury were sufficiently connected to her employment to entitle her to workers' compensation benefits. In 1 A. Larson, The Law of Workmen's Compensation, § 15.15, the above concept was explained as follows: Claimant has been subjected to a particular risk because of his employment, the risk of crossing certain railway tracks near the plant entrance, for example....

Copy

Babbit Elec., Inc. v. Dynascan Corp., 38 F.3d 1161 (11th Cir. 1994).

Cited 2 times | Published | Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | 1994 WL 622982

affidavits pursuant to § 8, 15 U.S.C. § 1058, and § 15, 15 U.S.C. § 1065, have been filed and each of these

Copy

Click v. Pardoll, 359 So. 2d 537 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978).

Cited 2 times | Published | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal

...t the amended complaint does not "relate back" to the date the original complaint was filed. Cabot v. Clearwater Construction Company, 89 So.2d 662 (Fla.); Barron and Holtzoff, Federal Practice and Procedure, Section 448; 3 Moore's Federal Practice, Section 15.15 at pages 1040-41; and Galuppi v....

Copy

United States v. Branch D. Kloess, 251 F.3d 941 (11th Cir. 2001).

Published | Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | 2001 U.S. App. LEXIS 10489

district court also framed the issue as "whether Section 15 15(c) is an affirmative defense which the defendant

Copy

Laura Esterbrook, Etc. v. Mastec, Inc., Etc. (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2022).

Published | District Court of Appeal of Florida

neglect” (quoting 3 Moore’s Federal Practice, § 15.15)). 2

This Florida statute resource is curated by Graham W. Syfert, Esq., a Jacksonville, Florida personal injury and workers' compensation attorney. For legal consultation, call 904-383-7448.