Home
Menu
Call attorney Graham Syfert at 904-383-7448
Personal Injury Lawyer
Florida Statute 320.67 | Lawyer Caselaw & Research
F.S. 320.67 Case Law from Google Scholar
Statute is currently reporting as:
Link to State of Florida Official Statute Google Search for Amendments to 320.67

The 2023 Florida Statutes (including Special Session C)

Title XXIII
MOTOR VEHICLES
Chapter 320
MOTOR VEHICLE LICENSES
View Entire Chapter
F.S. 320.67
320.67 Violations by dealers; complaint; conduct of inquiry; inspection of records; penalties.
(1) The department shall conduct an inquiry of a licensee relating to any written complaint alleging a violation of any provision of ss. 320.61-320.70 against such licensee made by a motor vehicle dealer with a current franchise agreement issued by the licensee, or a motor vehicle dealer association with at least one member with a current franchise agreement issued by the licensee.
(2) In the exercise of its duties under this section, the department is granted and authorized to exercise the power of subpoena for the purposes of compelling production of and inspecting pertinent books, records, letters, and contracts of a licensee and compelling the attendance of witnesses at deposition. The inquiry required by this section must be commenced within 30 days after receipt of the written complaint. The department may allow the licensee that is the subject of the complaint no more than 60 days after commencement of the inquiry to provide a written response. Within 30 days after the deadline for a written response by the licensee, the department must provide a written response to the complainant stating whether the department intends to take action against the licensee under subsection (3) and, if so, what action the department intends to take. Any information obtained may not be used against the licensee as the basis for a criminal prosecution under the laws of this state.
(3) If, as the result of an inquiry conducted under this section, the department determines that a licensee has violated any provision of ss. 320.61-320.70, the department must take appropriate action against the licensee, which may include license suspension or revocation; denial of a license renewal application; assessment, imposition, levy, and collection of an appropriate civil fine; or instituting a civil action for issuance of an injunction pursuant to s. 320.695.
(4) This section does not alter or affect the rights of a motor vehicle dealer to bring a claim or action against a licensee pursuant to any other provision of ss. 320.60-320.70.
History.s. 8, ch. 20236, 1941; s. 6, ch. 65-190; ss. 24, 35, ch. 69-106; s. 12, ch. 70-424; s. 1, ch. 70-439; s. 3, ch. 76-168; s. 1, ch. 77-457; ss. 16, 17, ch. 80-217; ss. 2, 3, ch. 81-318; ss. 20, 21, ch. 88-395; s. 4, ch. 91-429; s. 3, ch. 2017-187; s. 6, ch. 2023-233.

F.S. 320.67 on Google Scholar

F.S. 320.67 on Casetext

Amendments to 320.67


Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 320.67
Level: Degree
Misdemeanor/Felony: First/Second/Third

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 320.67.



Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases from cite.case.law:

In JONES, v., 445 B.R. 677 (Bankr. N.D. Tex. 2011)

. . . believes that this Sibley report shows, by a preponderance of the evidence, that at least $1, 713, 320.67 . . .

In EDWARDS, 421 B.R. 757 (Bankr. N.D. Miss. 2009)

. . . Chapter 13 plan, the debtors propose to pay to the Chapter 13 trustee the sum of $74.00 per week or $320.67 . . .

In ZAPORSKI,, 366 B.R. 758 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 2007)

. . . consist of a monthly contribution of $346.67 to Zaporski’s 401(k) plan and a monthly repayment of $320.67 . . . reduction for Zaporski’s contribution of $346.67 per month to his 401(k) plan and for his repayment of $320.67 . . . Although Zaporski’s testimony was not clear on the precise allocation of the $320.67 per month payment . . . between these two loans, what is clear is that as of February, 2009, Zaporski will have an extra $320.67 . . . i.e., February, 2009 through April, 2012), Za-porski would no longer have the obligation of paying $320.67 . . .