Cases from cite.case.law:

BRINK, v. RAYMOND JAMES ASSOCIATES, INC., 341 F. Supp. 3d 1314 (S.D. Fla. 2018)

. . . . § 725.04 bars the application of the defense in this case. . . . Stat. § 725.04. In Taylor, Bean & Whitaker Mortg. Corp. v. GMAC Mortg. . . . Any other interpretation would make § 725.04 meaningless and there would have been no reason for the . . . Fla. 2008) ] (holding that § 725.04 barred application of voluntary payment defense where additional . . . Stat. § 725.04 is inapplicable because that statute only bars the defense where the contract between . . .

CROSS, v. POINT AND PAY, LLC,, 274 F. Supp. 3d 1289 (M.D. Fla. 2017)

. . . Plaintiff argues that the exception to the voluntary payment doctrine set forth in section 725.04, Florida . . .

SCHOJAN, v. PAPA JOHN S INTERNATIONAL INC. s USA,, 34 F. Supp. 3d 1206 (M.D. Fla. 2014)

. . . Plaintiffs cite to Florida Statute § 725.04, which provides: When a suit is instituted by a party to . . .

SUNDANCE APARTMENTS I, INC. a v. GENERAL ELECTRIC CAPITAL CORPORATION, a L. P. a N. A. a, 581 F. Supp. 2d 1215 (S.D. Fla. 2008)

. . . Despite the voluntary nature of its payment, Sundance contends that Section 725.04, Florida Statutes, . . . Section 725.04 provides that: When a suit is instituted by a party to a contract to recover a payment . . . Stat. § 725.04. . . . Wells Fargo argues, however, that Section 725.04 does not apply to Sundance’s prepayment of the Loan . . . Stat. § 725.04. . . .

SENSORMATIC SECURITY CORPORATION v. SENSORMATIC ELECTRONICS CORPORATION,, 249 F. Supp. 2d 703 (D. Md. 2003)

. . . A statute, Section 725.04, Florida Statutes, abrogates the voluntary payment doctrine in some circumstances . . . FLA STAT. ch. 725.04. As interpreted by the court in Hall v. . . .

SAGLIO, Jr. L. L. E. v. CHRYSLER FIRST COMMERCIAL CORPORATION, v. LIGHTHOUSE POINT MARINE CENTER, INC. L. L. E., 839 F. Supp. 830 (M.D. Fla. 1993)

. . . However, Florida Statute, section 725.04 governs voluntary payments made pursuant to contracts, and provides . . . Fla.Stat. § 725.04 (1991) (emphasis added). . . . The Court finds section 725.04 precludes the application of the voluntary payment defense, and thus denies . . .

DANIEL J. HARTWIG ASSOCIATES, INC. v. KANNER,, 913 F.2d 1213 (7th Cir. 1990)

. . . evidence, the district judge directed a verdict in favor of Hart-wig in the amount of $44,225.04 — $40,-725.04 . . .