The 2023 Florida Statutes (including Special Session C)

Title VI
CIVIL PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE

Chapter 48
PROCESS AND SERVICE OF PROCESS

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 48.29

48.29 Certification of process servers.—

(1) The circuit court administrator and the clerk of the court in each county in the circuit shall maintain the list of process servers approved by the chief judge of the circuit. Such list may, from time to time, be amended or modified to add or delete a person’s name in accordance with the provisions of this section or s. 48.31.

(2) A person seeking the addition of his or her name to the approved list in any circuit shall submit an application to the chief judge of the circuit or to the chief judge’s designee on a form prescribed by the court. A reasonable fee for processing the application may be charged.

(3) A person applying to become a certified process server shall:

(a) Be at least 18 years of age;

(b) Have no mental or legal disability;

(d) Submit to a background investigation, which shall include the right to obtain and review the criminal record of the applicant;

(e) Obtain and file with his or her application a certificate of good conduct, which specifies there is no pending criminal case against the applicant and that there is no record of any felony conviction, nor a record of a conviction of a misdemeanor involving moral turpitude or dishonesty, with respect to the applicant within the past 5 years;

(f) If prescribed by the chief judge of the circuit, submit to an examination testing his or her knowledge of the laws and rules regarding the service of process. The content of the examination and the passing grade thereon, and the frequency and location at which such examination shall be offered shall be prescribed by the chief judge of the circuit. The examination, if any, shall be offered at least once annually;

(g) Execute a bond in the amount of $5,000 with a surety company authorized to do business in this state for the benefit of any person wrongfully injured by any malfeasance, misfeasance, neglect of duty, or incompetence of the applicant, in connection with his or her duties as a process server. Such bond shall be renewable annually; and

(h) Take an oath of office that he or she will honestly, diligently, and faithfully exercise the duties of a certified process server.

(4) The chief judge of the circuit may, from time to time by administrative order, prescribe additional rules and requirements regarding the eligibility of a person to become a certified process server or to have his or her name maintained on the list of certified process servers.

(5)(a) An applicant who completes the requirements set forth in this section and whose name the chief judge by order enters on the list of certified process servers shall be designated as a certified process server.

(b) Each certified process server shall be issued an identification card bearing his or her identification number, printed name, signature and photograph, the seal of the circuit court, and an expiration date. Each identification card shall be renewable annually upon proof of good standing and current bond.

(6) A certified process server shall place the information required in s. 48.031(5) on the first page of at least one of the processes served. Return of service shall be made by a certified process server on a form which has been reviewed and approved by the court.

(7)(a) A person may qualify as a certified process server and have his or her name entered on the list in more than one circuit.

(b) A process server whose name is on a list of certified process servers in more than one circuit may serve process on a person found in any such circuits.

(c) A certified process server may serve foreign process in any circuit in which his or her name has been entered on the list of certified process servers for that circuit.

(8) A certified process server may charge a fee for his or her services.

History.—s. 4, ch. 88-135; s. 284, ch. 95-147; s. 4, ch. 2004-273; s. 6, ch. 2011-159.

F.S. 48.29 on Google Scholar

F.S. 48.29 on Casetext

Amendments to 48.29

Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 48.29

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

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 48.29.

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases from cite.case.law:

C. BUCKLER, v. UNITED STATES, 919 F.3d 1038 (8th Cir. 2019)

. . . . § 48.29 for failing to have training documentation for Mr. . . . See 3 Program Policy Manual § 48.9/48.29 (addressing the use of composite forms rather than individual . . .

BOULAHANIS, C. R. v. BOARD OF REGENTS, a, 198 F.3d 633 (7th Cir. 1999)

. . . increased the athletic participation of women to 51.72% and decreased the athletic participation of men to 48.29% . . .

SUTOR, v. COCHRAN,, 687 So. 2d 897 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1997)

. . . See § 48.021(2)(a), § 48.29(1). . . . While our supreme court has not approved a form for return of service, subsection 48.29(6)(b) of the . . .

UNITED STATES v. TURNER, UNITED STATES v. TURNER,, 102 F.3d 1350 (4th Cir. 1996)

. . . . §§ 48.9, 48.29. . . . certify on MSHA form 5000-23 that the miner has received the specified training.” 30 C.F.R. §§ 48.9, 48.29 . . . given shall be punishable under section 820(a) and (f)....” 30 U.S.C. § 825(e); 30 C.F.R. §§ 48.9(b), 48.29 . . . are not legally proper under the requirements set forth in 30 U.S.C. § 825(c) and 30 C.F.R. §§ 48.9, 48.29 . . . Since this court holds that MSHA form 5000-23 does meet the requirements of §§ 48.9 and 48.29, which . . .

UNITED STATES v. TURNER, 895 F. Supp. 110 (W.D. Va. 1995)

. . . . § 48.29 or the statutory language in 30 U.S.C. § 820(f) and 30 U.S.C. § 825 and, thus, the form is . . . Pursuant to the statute calling for a form approved by the Secretary, 30 C.F.R. § 48.29 was approved . . . basis of this conviction is not a proper 5000-23 form as called for by the Secretary in 30 C.F.R. § 48.29 . . . The Defendant admits that the Secretary properly promulgated 30 C.F.R. § 48.29, (Def.’s Reply Mem. to . . . Since this Court has already held that the 5000-23 forms do meet the requirements of § 48.29, which was . . .

ABBATE, v. PROVIDENT NATIONAL BANK, a, 631 So. 2d 312 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)

. . . the names of those natural persons who have met the requirements for certification provided for in s. 48.29 . . . list of persons who meet the requirements for certification as a process server as set out in section 48.29 . . . Section 48.29(3)(a)-(h) contains basic qualifications for certified process servers. . . . .

QUILTER, v. V. VOINOVICH,, 794 F. Supp. 695 (N.D. Ohio 1992)

. . . -26 Franklin 31" = 46.80% 21 - 55.92% 21 - 50.60% 53.85% 1990 Pop — 106,606 29 - 38.50% 22 - 44.31% 48.29% . . .

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, v. FIRST CITY FINANCIAL CORPORATION, LTD., 688 F. Supp. 705 (D.D.C. 1988)

. . . Cost to Defendants March 20 205.500 46.02 9,457,110 March 24 205.500 46.71 9,598,905 March 25 377,900 48.29 . . .

SIERRA CLUB, v. M. MULLEN, Jr. NATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR REFORM OF MARIJUANA LAWS NORML v. UNITED STATES DRUG ENFORCEMENT ADMINISTRATION DEA, 619 F. Supp. 1244 (D.D.C. 1985)

. . . The Multiplier Finally, NORML seeks a multiplier of 48.29 percent to reflect a cost-of-living increase . . .

NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL SAND ASSOCIATION, a v. F. MARSHALL, B. COUNCIL OF SOUTHERN MOUNTAINS, INC. v. F. MARSHALL,, 601 F.2d 689 (3d Cir. 1979)

. . . . §§ 48.9, 48.29. . Id. §§ 48.10, 48.30. . . . .

v., 66 T.C. 879 (T.C. 1976)

. . . Respondent concedes that petitioner may claim deductions for 1971 of $48.29 in addition to those business . . .

L. SCOTT, v. LIBERTY FINANCE CO., 380 F. Supp. 475 (D. Neb. 1974)

. . . 44.84 251.59 260.00 20 52.00 6.04 45.96 195.63 208.00 21 52.00 4.89 47.11 148.52 156.00 22 52.00 3.71 48.29 . . .

MARSHALL v. HOLMES, 365 F. Supp. 613 (N.D. Fla. 1973)

. . . record of this ease to which plaintiffs stipulate as true, reflects for instance in the year 1972, that 48.29% . . .

BALDWIN, v. LEWIS,, 300 F. Supp. 1220 (E.D. Wis. 1969)

. . . A detention hearing held pursuant to § 48.29 is, by its very nature, a proceeding which may result in . . . such further proceedings, or that would justify further detention under any criteria set forth in § 48.29 . . . The Wisconsin Children’s Code, specifically § 48.29, requires that a juvenile shall be released to the . . . Section 48.29, Wis.Stats. (1967), provides as follows: “(1) When a child is taken into custody as provided . . . See text of § 48.29, Wis.Stats.(1967), cited in footnote 9, supra. . . .

L. STOUT v. D. BOTTORFF, GRILLS, v. D. BRANIGIN,, 249 F. Supp. 488 (S.D. Ind. 1965)

. . . Under Senate Plan A, the percentage is 48.29%. . . . of the House of Representatives under House Plan C is 48.72%, as compared with a like percentage of 48.29% . . .

C. S. v., 46 Cust. Ct. 707 (Cust. Ct. 1961)

. . . Presdwood 3Ae"-_ 83.86 Tempered Presdwood %"- _i_ 98.39 Tempered Presdwood 6/io_ _127.11 Panelwood_ _ 48.29 . . .

v., 46 Cust. Ct. 669 (Cust. Ct. 1961)

. . . Schedule A Cost of Cost of Product production Product production Standard Presdwood %"-$44.23 Panelwood_$48.29 . . .

v., 45 Cust. Ct. 425 (Cust. Ct. 1960)

. . . 51.72 Tempered Presdwood %e" 83.86 Tempered Presdwood %" 98.39 Tempered Presdwood %e" 127.11 Panelwood 48.29 . . .

SHUMAKER, v. UTEX EXPLORATION COMPANY, a A. S. W. R., 157 F. Supp. 68 (D. Utah 1957)

. . . Plaintiff Roselie Shumaker is the owner of 48.29% of the capital stock of Utex Exploration Company, a . . .

AMERICAN EAGLE FIRE INS. CO. v. JORDAN, 67 F. Supp. 76 (D.D.C. 1946)

. . . The companies contend that 48.29% of the earned premiums is the ratio that should have been adopted for . . . It is admitted that 48.29%—the figure advanced by the companies,—represents the average expense ratio . . . reached by the following calculation: if all companies with a higher expense ratio than the average of 48.29% . . . are credited with only 48.29%. and a re-computation is made on this basis, the average expense ratio . . . estimated, actual expenses of all of the companies, calculated on the basis of an expense ratio of 48.29% . . .

ORIENT PETROLEUM CO. v. WICHITA STATE BANK TRUST CO., 16 F.2d 417 (5th Cir. 1926)

. . . correct, an overpayment of $116.09 was made, and there was properly chargeable only $851.71, leaving $48.29 . . .

SOUTHERN PACIFIC CO. v. THE UNITED STATES, 60 Ct. Cl. 662 (Ct. Cl. 1925)

. . . The difference between the amount originally claimed and the amount paid in settlement is $48.29, which . . .

MATTIE W. JACKSON, WIDOW, ET AL. v. THE UNITED STATES, 47 Ct. Cl. 579 (Ct. Cl. 1912)

. . . 33.94 1890. 48.80 47.72 41.05 49.05 45.15 48.6 48.6 1891. 46.21 44.70 41.00 48.10 43.80 46.5 45.5 1892. 48.29 . . .