The 2023 Florida Statutes (including Special Session C)

Title IX
ELECTORS AND ELECTIONS

Chapter 101
VOTING METHODS AND PROCEDURE

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 101.75

101.75 Municipal elections; change of dates for cause.—

(1) In any municipality, when the date of the municipal election falls on the same date as any statewide or county election and the voting devices of the voting system used in the county are not available for both elections, the municipality may provide that the municipal election may be held within 30 days prior to or subsequent to the statewide or county election.

(2) The date of the municipal election shall be set by the municipality by ordinance.

(3) Notwithstanding any provision of local law or municipal charter, the governing body of a municipality may, by ordinance, move the date of any municipal election to a date concurrent with any statewide or countywide election. The dates for qualifying for the election moved by the passage of such ordinance shall be specifically provided for in the ordinance. The term of office for any elected municipal official shall commence as provided by the relevant municipal charter or ordinance.

History.—ss. 1, 2, ch. 59-493; s. 1, ch. 76-68; s. 24, ch. 77-175; s. 5, ch. 92-16; s. 26, ch. 2001-40; s. 4, ch. 2007-30; s. 23, ch. 2008-95; s. 42, ch. 2011-40.

Note.—Former s. 104.451.

F.S. 101.75 on Google Scholar

F.S. 101.75 on Casetext

Amendments to 101.75

Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 101.75

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

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 101.75.

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases from cite.case.law:

KROMMENHOCK, v. POST FOODS, LLC,, 255 F. Supp. 3d 938 (N.D. Cal. 2017)

. . . . § 101.75(c)(2)(E) and 21 C.F.R. § 101.77(c)(2)(F). FAC ¶299⅛)-⅛), 303-304. . . .

J. MARTIN v. TROTT LAW, P. C. A., 198 F. Supp. 3d 794 (E.D. Mich. 2016)

. . . is: Principal Balance $143,059.85 Unpaid Interest $ 6,035.95 Late Charge $45.45 Corporate Advance $101.75 . . . In particular, the Exhibit A letter includes as part of the stated debt $101.75 categorized as “corporate . . .

STARR a v. CHICAGO CUT STEAKHOUSE, LLC,, 75 F. Supp. 3d 859 (N.D. Ill. 2014)

. . . The daily cash report shows each server paying $101.75 into the tipshare column, for a total of $407, . . .

M. WHITAKER, v. G. THOMPSON, U. S., 353 F.3d 947 (D.C. Cir. 2004)

. . . . § 101.75(e)(3). . . .

M. WHITAKER, M. D. v. G. THOMPSON,, 239 F. Supp. 2d 43 (D.D.C. 2003)

. . . cholesterol... may lower blood cholesterol levels and may reduce the risk of heart disease.” 21 C.F.R 101.75 . . .

S. HARRIS, v. NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, 202 F. Supp. 2d 143 (S.D.N.Y. 2002)

. . . 325 U.S. 561, 566-67, 65 S.Ct. 1307, 89 L.Ed. 1795 (1945)); see also 15 Moore’s Federal Practice § 101.75 . . .

L. BARFIELD, v. STATE, 792 So. 2d 706 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)

. . . According to the State, defendant’s guideline range under the 1994 guidelines was 61.05 months to 101.75 . . .

STATE v. HUGHES,, 756 So. 2d 1061 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

. . . sentencing guidelines scoresheet prepared for appellee reflected a sentencing range of 61.05 months to 101.75 . . .

In RICKEL HOME CENTERS, INC. L. R. S. C. Co. v., 209 F.3d 291 (3d Cir. 2000)

. . . Moore et al., Moore’s Federal Practice § 101.75, at 101-152 (Matthew Bender 3d ed.1999). . . .

In RICKEL HOME CENTERS, INC. L. R. S. C. Co. v., 209 F.3d 291 (3d Cir. 2000)

. . . Moore et al., Moore’s Federal Practice § 101.75, at 101-152 (Matthew Bender 3d ed.1999). . . .

In AMOSKEAG BANK SHARES, INC. v. Sr., 239 B.R. 653 (D.N.H. 1998)

. . . See Moore, supra, § 101.75. . . .

In LORD, a k a v. R. a, 270 B.R. 787 (Bankr. M.D. Ga. 1998)

. . . 17,1996 115.43 August 31,1996 105.57 September 14, 1996 98.23 September 28, 1996 89.06 October 12,1996 101.75 . . .

SOLER, v. G U, INC. d b a LIVAS, v. BIERSTINE FARMS, INC. GONZALEZ, v. CEDAR VALLEY GROWERS, INC. VALENTIN, v. MYRUSKI, ENCARNACION, v. W. K. W. FARMS, INC., 658 F. Supp. 1093 (S.D.N.Y. 1987)

. . . The total hours claimed are: Harnett 321.50 Reilly 1074.20 Rosenthal 60.75 Smith 101.75 In order to evaluate . . . Percent Reduction Harnett 273.28 321.50 15 Reilly 1020.49 1074.20 5 Rosenthal 48.60 60.75 20 Smith 86.49 101.75 . . .

AKRON CENTER FOR REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH, v. CITY OF AKRON, M. D., 604 F. Supp. 1275 (N.D. Ohio 1985)

. . . SC 101.75 150 15,262.50 9. Lipton, Lois SC 100 100 10,000.00 10. . . . 527.05 368.9 125 46,112. (-0-) Stavile 83.25 58.2 80 4,656. (-0-) Law 27.7 19.7 125 2,462. (1.2) Hunter 101.75 . . .

In CHICKEN ANTITRUST LITIGATION, 560 F. Supp. 963 (N.D. Ga. 1980)

. . . that a total of 15,923.25 hours, 8,645.5 hours of attorney time, 7,176 hours spent by paralegals, and 101.75 . . . The law clerks and summer associates spent a total of 101.75 hours on this litigation, most of which . . .

ZENITH RADIO CORPORATION v. MATSUSHITA ELECTRIC INDUSTRIAL CO. LTD. NATIONAL UNION ELECTRIC CORPORATION v. MATSUSHITA ELECTRIC INDUSTRIAL CO. LTD. In JAPANESE ELECTRONIC PRODUCTS ANTITRUST LITIGATION, 494 F. Supp. 1190 (E.D. Pa. 1980)

. . . Picture None 91.25 Mhz 1 - Sound None 95.75 Mhz 2 - Picture 55.25 Mhz 97.25 Mhz 2 - Sound 59.75 Mhz 101.75 . . .

BULLOCK, v. ADMINISTRATOR OF ESTATE OF P. KIRCHER, B. W. H. J. G. Jr. L. K. W. Jr. E. H. G. Jr. J. Jr. F., 84 F.R.D. 1 (D.N.J. 1979)

. . . GREENFIELD 125 101.75 12,718.75 22,893.75 R. FRUTKIN 75 30.50 2,287.50 4,117.50 P. . . .

HADDOCK, v. A. ROBINSON, 289 So. 2d 449 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1974)

. . . Appellant contends that this figure is grossly inadequate for the reason that it is $101.75 less than . . .

E. BLAIR, v. M V BLUE SPRUCE,, 329 F. Supp. 178 (D. Mass. 1971)

. . . Gloucester Harbor on December 30, 1969, computed at a rate of $9.25 per foot of draft, are $129.50 and $101.75 . . .

s v., 35 T.C. 78 (T.C. 1960)

. . . cent_ 87,188. 39 Tentative credit- 1,187,188.39 Less: Reduction on account of inadmissible assets_ 101.75 . . .

P. MITCHELL, v. STEWART BROTHERS CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, a A. T., 184 F. Supp. 886 (D. Neb. 1960)

. . . the order of the Court that the defendants be ordered to pay to the Secretary of Labor the sum of $101.75 . . . regular time at wages of $1.85 per hour and 10 hours of time and a half for overtime, or a total of $101.75 . . .

M. ELMORE, v. UNITED STATES, 267 F.2d 595 (4th Cir. 1959)

. . . also applied for and received a purchase order as a farmer for 61 cwt. of grain and used it to buy 101.75 . . .

OTIS CO. v. PENNSYLVANIA R. CO., 61 F. Supp. 905 (E.D. Pa. 1945)

. . . The bonds were offered to the public at 101.75, a spread of 1.75. . . .

MARSHBURN v. WILLIAMS, 15 F.2d 589 (E.D.N.C. 1926)

. . . $1,558.80, and $11,-583.31, against which there were withdrawals of $10,000, $10,000, $15,000, $1,000, and $101.75 . . .

KAITCHUCK PRINTING CO. v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE,, 4 B.T.A. 996 (B.T.A. 1926)

. . . Triggs- 33. 50 Visor Sales Co_ 101.75 Women’s Betterment Assn_ 8, 512. 01 12,323.12 Throughout the year . . .

SUGAR PRODUCTS CO. v. MOBILE GULF NAV. CO., 268 F. 815 (5th Cir. 1920)

. . . The per diem allowance to the Hossack was at the rate of $101.75, and to the Boyce was at the rate of . . .