The 2023 Florida Statutes (including Special Session C)

Title X
PUBLIC OFFICERS, EMPLOYEES, AND RECORDS

Chapter 112
PUBLIC OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES: GENERAL PROVISIONS

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 112.10

112.10 Deduction and payment of premiums.—Upon the request in writing of any officer or employee, the proper officials of each and every county, school board, governmental unit, department, board or bureau of the state, are hereby authorized and empowered to deduct from the wages of such officer or employee, periodically, the amount of the premium which such officer or employee has agreed to pay for such insurance, and to pay or remit the same directly to the insurance company issuing such group insurance.

History.—s. 3, ch. 20852, 1941; s. 1, ch. 69-300; s. 2, ch. 72-338.

F.S. 112.10 on Google Scholar

F.S. 112.10 on Casetext

Amendments to 112.10

Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 112.10

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

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 112.10.

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases from cite.case.law:

IN RE ACTOS PIOGLITAZONE PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION., 274 F. Supp. 3d 485 (W.D. La. 2017)

. . . Warriner and his firm accumulated 112.10 hours of audited Common Benefit time. Mr. . . . Warriner and his firm accumulated 112.10 hours of audited Common Benefit time.- Mr. . . .

WILSON o b o J. D. a v. COLVIN,, 48 F. Supp. 3d 1140 (N.D. Ill. 2014)

. . . Each of those listings contains a two-pronged test, parts A and B (App’x 1, Listings 112.02 and 112.10 . . . (b) “cognitive/communicative function” or (c) “social function” (App’x 1, Listings 112.02(B)(1) and 112.10 . . . delay, a one-third delay in any two of those areas suffices (App’x 1, Listings 112.02(B)(1)(d) and 112.10 . . .

In A. KENDALL,, 712 F.3d 814 (3d Cir. 2013)

. . . LAR 112.10(a) (“If a petition for writ of certiorari is granted, ... the case shall proceed as other . . .

IN RE THE HONORABLE LEON A. KENDALL,, 58 V.I. 718 (3d Cir. 2013)

. . . LAR 112.10(a) (“If a petition for writ of certiorari is granted,... the case shall proceed as other appeals . . .

ELLINGTON, C. K. S. v. J. ASTRUE,, 927 F. Supp. 2d 1257 (M.D. Ala. 2013)

. . . not resolve inconsistencies and fully develop the record to determine whether C.K.S. meets Listing 112.10 . . . Listing 112.10 imposes the following requirements: Characterized by qualitative deficits in the development . . . P, App. 1, Listing of Impairment 112.10. . . . the ALJ must further develop the record concerning whether C.K.S. meets or medically equals Listing 112.10 . . .

M. G. a v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,, 861 F. Supp. 2d 846 (E.D. Mich. 2012)

. . . P, app. 1, Listing 112.10. . . . P, app. 1, Listings 112.02, 112.10. . . . Regarding the “A” criteria of Listing 112.10, both the Oakland Schools multi-disciplinary team and the . . . P, app. 1, Listing 112.10. . . . P, app. 1, Listing 112.10. Turning to the “B” criteria, the Commissioner concedes (Defs Mot. Summ. . . .

BAUER, v. J. ASTRUE,, 730 F. Supp. 2d 884 (N.D. Ill. 2010)

. . . ALJ erred in failing to consider whether Sean meets, medically equals or functionally equals Listing 112.10 . . . As that disorder is also covered by Listing 112.10, Commissioner should consider that listing on remand . . . , taking into account the treating physician’s opinion as appropriate and considering both Listings 112.10 . . .

LOPEZ, L. L. v. SAN FRANCISCO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT,, 385 F. Supp. 2d 981 (N.D. Cal. 2005)

. . . that plaintiffs are not entitled to recover costs incurred by Pearl and reduces plaintiffs’ costs by $112.10 . . . Costs $1,116,166.99 Total Costs Requested: ($ 112.10) Richard Pearl’s Costs: ($ 41,546.44) Undocumented . . .

S. R. R. R. A v. Jo B. BARNHART,, 371 F. Supp. 2d 796 (W.D. Va. 2005)

. . . To meet listed impairment § 112.10, the pervasive developmental disorder listing, a claimant must show . . . B § 112.10. . . . “A” criteria), and (2) a marked impairment in at least two of the same “B” criteria listed under § 112.10 . . . Accordingly, I conclude the ALJ’s determination that R.R.’s impairments do not “meet” § 112.10 and § . . . Accordingly, I conclude the ALJ’s determination that R.R.’s impairments do not “equal” § 112.10 and § . . .

P. ATHRIDGE P. Jr. v. AETNA CASUALTY SURETY CO., 351 F.3d 1166 (D.C. Cir. 2003)

. . . See generally Eric Mills Holmes, Holmes’s Appleman on Insurance 2d § 112.10, at 339 (2d ed. 2000). . . .

CLACKAMAS GASTROENTEROLOGY ASSOCIATES, P. C. v. WELLS, 538 U.S. 440 (U.S. 2003)

. . . Fletcher, Cyclopedia of the Law of Private Corporations §112.10 (rev. ed. 1997-2002). . . .

J. v., 118 T.C. 155 (T.C. 2002)

. . . Additions to tax Year Deficiency Sec. 6651(a)(1) Sec. 6651(a)(2) Sec. 6654 1995 $2,747 $533.75 N/A $112.10 . . .

LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, v. EMPLOYEE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT, INC. Jr. E. III T., 176 F. Supp. 2d 510 (D.S.C. 2001)

. . . Howell Morrison $175.00/hr 112.10 $ 19,617.50 Danny H. . . .

HAMEED, v. S. PUNDT, S. C. Jr., 964 F. Supp. 836 (S.D.N.Y. 1997)

. . . was charged with Possession of Escape Items (charge number 108.13), Causing Miscount (charge number 112.10 . . .

FAYETTEVILLE INVESTORS, v. COMMERCIAL BUILDERS, INCORPORATED, 936 F.2d 1462 (4th Cir. 1991)

. . . material “for the purpose of testing the sufficiency of a pleading,” 2A Moore’s Federal Practice, ¶112.10 . . .

In VITELLI a k a VITELLI a k a v. CHELTENHAM FEDERAL SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATION,, 93 B.R. 889 (Bankr. E.D. Pa. 1988)

. . . We shall therefore allow the Mortgagee the amounts of $112.10 and $161.09, respectively, for these items . . . follows: Principal Amount $23,364.04 TILA recoupment (-) 1,000.00 Filing One Foreclosure Complaint (+) 112.10 . . .

In A. REBEOR, a, 93 B.R. 16 (Bankr. N.D.N.Y. 1988)

. . . at 1011-8 (citing to Bankr.R. 1011 advisory committee’s notes (1983)); BANKRUPTCY LAW MANUAL, supra, 112.10 . . .

ROTHFARB, v. R. HAMBRECHT, B. GAUSS, v. MAGNUSON COMPUTER SYSTEMS, INC., 649 F. Supp. 183 (N.D. Cal. 1986)

. . . Because he was new to the case, 112.10 of his hours were spent reviewing the complaint, prospectus, deposition . . .

R. OURISMAN v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE,, 760 F.2d 541 (4th Cir. 1985)

. . . Eustice, Federal Income Taxation of Corporations and Shareholders, 112.10 at 2-28 (4th ed. 1979). . . .

MISSOURI PACIFIC CORPORATION v. UNITED STATES, 5 Cl. Ct. 296 (Cl. Ct. 1984)

. . . Bowhay, Income Taxation of Natural Resources, at 112.10 states: Acquisition by Investment. . . .

MICHAEL CARCHIA, JR. RECEIVER FOR DORCHESTER EQUIPMENT CO. INC. THE AETNA CASUALTY AND SURETY COMPANY, INTERVENOR v. THE UNITED STATES, 202 Ct. Cl. 723 (Ct. Cl. 1973)

. . . costs for labor, equipment and materials to do this work, is the sum of $256.80, to which is added $112.10 . . .

DEPARTMENT OF WATER AND POWER OF CITY OF LOS ANGELES v. UNITED STATES, 62 F. Supp. 938 (Ct. Cl. 1945)

. . . Sept. 1-30, 1932, incl.. 565,200 427.64 284.10 143.54 Oct. 1-31, 1932, incl... 408,000 317.60 205.50 112.10 . . .

v. Co., 27 C.C.P.A. 289 (C.C.P.A. 1940)

. . . On the basis of the 1988 domestic price for wire rods amounting to RM 112.10 per ton of 1,000 kg, free . . . G. is dated March 25, 1911, and provides for a base price of K.M. 112.10 per 1,000 kilos. . . .

v. Co., 2 Cust. Ct. 874 (Cust. Ct. 1939)

. . . On the basis of the 1933 domestic price for wire rods amounting to RM 112.10 per ton of 1,000 kg, free . . .