The 2023 Florida Statutes (including Special Session C)

Title XLI
STATUTE OF FRAUDS, FRAUDULENT TRANSFERS, AND GENERAL ASSIGNMENTS

Chapter 725
UNENFORCEABLE CONTRACTS

View Entire Chapter

CHAPTER 725

TITLE XLI

STATUTE OF FRAUDS, FRAUDULENT TRANSFERS, AND
GENERAL ASSIGNMENTS

CHAPTER 725

UNENFORCEABLE CONTRACTS

725.01 Promise to pay another’s debt, etc.

725.03 Newspaper subscription.

725.04 Voluntary payment; pleading.

725.05 Satisfaction for less than amount due.

725.06 Construction contracts; limitation on indemnification.

725.07 Discrimination on basis of sex, marital status, or race forbidden.

725.08 Design professional contracts; limitation in indemnification.

725.01 Promise to pay another’s debt, etc.—No action shall be brought whereby to charge any executor or administrator upon any special promise to answer or pay any debt or damages out of her or his own estate, or whereby to charge the defendant upon any special promise to answer for the debt, default or miscarriage of another person or to charge any person upon any agreement made upon consideration of marriage, or upon any contract for the sale of lands, tenements or hereditaments, or of any uncertain interest in or concerning them, or for any lease thereof for a period longer than 1 year, or upon any agreement that is not to be performed within the space of 1 year from the making thereof, or whereby to charge any health care provider upon any guarantee, warranty, or assurance as to the results of any medical, surgical, or diagnostic procedure performed by any physician licensed under chapter 458, osteopathic physician licensed under chapter 459, chiropractic physician licensed under chapter 460, podiatric physician licensed under chapter 461, or dentist licensed under chapter 466, unless the agreement or promise upon which such action shall be brought, or some note or memorandum thereof shall be in writing and signed by the party to be charged therewith or by some other person by her or him thereunto lawfully authorized.

History.—s. 10, Nov. 15, 1828; RS 1995; GS 2517; RGS 3872; CGL 5779; s. 10, ch. 75-9; s. 933, ch. 97-102; s. 60, ch. 97-264; ss. 227, 294, ch. 98-166.

725.03 Newspaper subscription.—No person shall be liable to pay for any newspaper, periodical or other like matter, unless the person shall subscribe for or order the same in writing.

History.—s. 1, ch. 379, 1851; RS 1997; GS 2519; RGS 3874; CGL 5781; s. 934, ch. 97-102.

725.04 Voluntary payment; pleading.—When a suit is instituted by a party to a contract to recover a payment made pursuant to the contract and by the terms of the contract there was no enforceable obligation to make the payment or the making of the payment was excused, the defense of voluntary payment may not be interposed by the person receiving payment to defeat recovery of the payment.

History.—ss. 1, 2, ch. 21902, 1943; s. 1, ch. 29737, 1955; s. 41, ch. 67-254.

Note.—Former s. 52.24.

725.05 Satisfaction for less than amount due.—When the amount of any debt or obligation is liquidated, the parties may satisfy the debt by a written instrument other than by endorsement on a check for less than the full amount due.

History.—s. 1, ch. 71-94.

725.06 Construction contracts; limitation on indemnification.—

(1) Any portion of any agreement or contract for or in connection with, or any guarantee of or in connection with, any construction, alteration, repair, or demolition of a building, structure, appurtenance, or appliance, including moving and excavating associated therewith, between an owner of real property and an architect, engineer, general contractor, subcontractor, sub-subcontractor, or materialman or any combination thereof wherein any party referred to herein promises to indemnify or hold harmless the other party to the agreement, contract, or guarantee for liability for damages to persons or property caused in whole or in part by any act, omission, or default of the indemnitee arising from the contract or its performance, shall be void and unenforceable unless the contract contains a monetary limitation on the extent of the indemnification that bears a reasonable commercial relationship to the contract and is part of the project specifications or bid documents, if any. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the monetary limitation on the extent of the indemnification provided to the owner of real property by any party in privity of contract with such owner shall not be less than $1 million per occurrence, unless otherwise agreed by the parties. Indemnification provisions in any such agreements, contracts, or guarantees may not require that the indemnitor indemnify the indemnitee for damages to persons or property caused in whole or in part by any act, omission, or default of a party other than:

(a) The indemnitor;

(b) Any of the indemnitor’s contractors, subcontractors, sub-subcontractors, materialmen, or agents of any tier or their respective employees; or

(c) The indemnitee or its officers, directors, agents, or employees. However, such indemnification shall not include claims of, or damages resulting from, gross negligence, or willful, wanton or intentional misconduct of the indemnitee or its officers, directors, agents or employees, or for statutory violation or punitive damages except and to the extent the statutory violation or punitive damages are caused by or result from the acts or omissions of the indemnitor or any of the indemnitor’s contractors, subcontractors, sub-subcontractors, materialmen, or agents of any tier or their respective employees.

(2) A construction contract for a public agency or in connection with a public agency’s project may require a party to that contract to indemnify and hold harmless the other party to the contract, their officers and employees, from liabilities, damages, losses and costs, including, but not limited to, reasonable attorney’s fees, to the extent caused by the negligence, recklessness, or intentional wrongful misconduct of the indemnifying party and persons employed or utilized by the indemnifying party in the performance of the construction contract.

(3) Except as specifically provided in subsection (2), a construction contract for a public agency or in connection with a public agency’s project may not require one party to indemnify, defend, or hold harmless the other party, its employees, officers, directors, or agents from any liability, damage, loss, claim, action, or proceeding, and any such contract provision is void as against public policy of this state.

(4) This section does not affect any contracts, agreements, or guarantees entered into before the effective date of this section or any renewals thereof.

History.—s. 1, ch. 72-52; s. 935, ch. 97-102; s. 31, ch. 2000-372; s. 10, ch. 2001-211.

Note.—Former s. 768.085.

725.07 Discrimination on basis of sex, marital status, or race forbidden.—

(1) No person, as defined in s. 1.01(3) shall discriminate against any person based on sex, marital status, or race in the areas of loaning money, granting credit, or providing equal pay for equal services performed.

(2) Any violation of this section may be brought in the courts of this state by the individual upon whom the discrimination has been perpetrated in a civil action, and said individual shall be entitled to collect, not only compensatory damages, but, in addition thereto, punitive damages and reasonable attorney fees for a violation of this section.

History.—ss. 1, 2, ch. 73-251.

725.08 Design professional contracts; limitation in indemnification.—

(1) Notwithstanding the provisions of s. 725.06, if a design professional provides professional services to or for a public agency, the agency may require in a professional services contract with the design professional that the design professional indemnify and hold harmless the agency, and its officers and employees, from liabilities, damages, losses, and costs, including, but not limited to, reasonable attorneys’ fees, to the extent caused by the negligence, recklessness, or intentionally wrongful conduct of the design professional and other persons employed or utilized by the design professional in the performance of the contract.

(2) Except as specifically provided in subsection (1), a professional services contract entered into with a public agency may not require that the design professional defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the agency, its employees, officers, directors, or agents from any liability, damage, loss, claim, action, or proceeding, and any such contract provision shall be void as against the public policy of this state.

(3) “Professional services contract” means a written or oral agreement relating to the planning, design, construction, administration, study, evaluation, consulting, or other professional and technical support services furnished in connection with any actual or proposed construction, improvement, alteration, repair, maintenance, operation, management, relocation, demolition, excavation, or other facility, land, air, water, or utility development or improvement.

(4) “Design professional” means an individual or entity licensed by the state who holds a current certificate of registration or is qualified under chapter 481 to practice architecture or landscape architecture, under chapter 472 to practice land surveying and mapping, or under chapter 471 to practice engineering, and who enters into a professional services contract.

(5) This section does not affect contracts or agreements entered into before the effective date of this section.

History.—s. 1, ch. 2000-162; s. 11, ch. 2001-211; s. 83, ch. 2020-160.

F.S. 725 on Google Scholar

F.S. 725 on Casetext

Amendments to 725

Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 725

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

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 725.

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases from cite.case.law:

J. TRUMP, v. MAZARS USA, LLP, J. v. AG,, 140 S. Ct. 2019 (U.S. 2020)

. . . Nixon , 498 F.2d 725 (CADC 1974) (en banc)). . . . See Nixon , 418 U.S. 683, 94 S.Ct. 3090, 41 L.Ed.2d 1039 ; Senate Select Committee , 498 F.2d 725. . . . concerns still linger in the air," and therefore it did not afford deference to the House. 940 F.3d at 725 . . .

J. TRUMP, v. R. VANCE, Jr., 140 S. Ct. 2412 (U.S. 2020)

. . . Nixon , 498 F.2d 725, 730-731 (CADC 1974) (en banc) (similar standard for congressional subpoenas to . . . Nixon , 498 F.2d 725, 731 (1974). . . .

LITTLE SISTERS OF THE POOR SAINTS PETER AND PAUL HOME, v. PENNSYLVANIA, J. v., 140 S. Ct. 2367 (U.S. 2020)

. . . Id. , at 724-725. . . . is " 'narrow' ": " 'to determine' whether the line drawn reflects 'an honest conviction.' " Id. , at 725 . . . , "it is not for us to say that their religious beliefs are mistaken or insubstantial." 573 U.S. at 725 . . .

ESPINOZA, v. MONTANA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,, 140 S. Ct. 2246 (U.S. 2020)

. . . Id. , at 725, 124 S.Ct. 1307. . . . Simmons-Harris , 536 U.S. 639, 725, 122 S.Ct. 2460, 153 L.Ed.2d 604 (2002) (BREYER, J., dissenting). . . . Locke , 540 U.S. at 725, 124 S.Ct. 1307 ; see, e.g. , Nyquist , 413 U.S. at 794-798, 93 S.Ct. 2955 ; . . . Locke , 540 U.S. at 725, 124 S.Ct. 1307. . . . Locke , 540 U.S. at 725, 124 S.Ct. 1307. . . . Locke , 540 U.S. at 724-725, 124 S.Ct. 1307. . . . invoked a "historic and substantial" state interest in not funding the training of clergy, 540 U.S. at 725 . . .

JUNE MEDICAL SERVICES L. L. C. v. RUSSO, v. LLC., 140 S. Ct. 2103 (U.S. 2020)

. . . supposedly told him that he should apply for "some kind of a nonstaff caregiver type" position, App. 725 . . .

SEILA LAW LLC, v. CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU, 140 S. Ct. 2183 (U.S. 2020)

. . . swept" Humphrey's Executor "into the dustbin of repudiated constitutional principles." 487 U.S., at 725 . . . Synar , 478 U.S. 714, 725, 106 S.Ct. 3181, 92 L.Ed.2d 583 (1986) ; see Morrison , 487 U.S., at 686, 108 . . .

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, v. REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, J. v., 140 S. Ct. 1891 (U.S. 2020)

. . . exclusive authority and absolute discretion to decide whether to prosecute a case"); In re Aiken County , 725 . . .

BARTON, v. P. BARR,, 140 S. Ct. 1442 (U.S. 2020)

. . . BARR, Attorney General No. 18-725 Supreme Court of the United States. . . .

ATLANTIC RICHFIELD COMPANY, v. A. CHRISTIAN,, 140 S. Ct. 1335 (U.S. 2020)

. . . Chapman, Williams & Connolly LLP, 725 Twelfth St., NW, Washington, DC, for Petitioner. Monte D. . . .

THRYV, INC. v. CLICK- TO- CALL TECHNOLOGIES, LP,, 140 S. Ct. 1367 (U.S. 2020)

. . . Court for Northern Dist. of Cal. , 426 U.S. 394, 402, 96 S.Ct. 2119, 48 L.Ed.2d 725 (1976). . . .

RAMOS, v. LOUISIANA, 140 S. Ct. 1390 (U.S. 2020)

. . . Stat., ch. 725, § 5/111-2(a) (West 2018); Ind. Code § 35-34-1-1(a) (2019) ; Iowa Ct. . . .

DAVIS v. UNITED STATES, 140 S. Ct. 1060 (U.S. 2020)

. . . Olano , 507 U.S. 725, 113 S.Ct. 1770, 123 L.Ed.2d 508 (1993). . . .

GUY, v. O. LAMPERT,, 140 S. Ct. 1295 (U.S. 2020)

. . . No. 19-725 Supreme Court of the United States. . . .

HOLGUIN- HERNANDEZ, v. UNITED STATES, 140 S. Ct. 762 (U.S. 2020)

. . . Olano , 507 U.S. 725, 732-736, 113 S.Ct. 1770, 123 L.Ed.2d 508 (1993). . . .

INTEL CORPORATION INVESTMENT POLICY COMMITTEE, v. M. SULYMA, 140 S. Ct. 768 (U.S. 2020)

. . . accord, Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary 691 (2005) (same); see also American Heritage Dictionary 725 . . .

MCKINNEY, v. ARIZONA, 140 S. Ct. 702 (U.S. 2020)

. . . Mississippi , 494 U.S. 738, 110 S.Ct. 1441, 108 L.Ed.2d 725 (1990). . . . in part on an invalid aggravating circumstance." 494 U.S. 738, 744, 752, 110 S.Ct. 1441, 108 L.Ed.2d 725 . . .

MONASKY, v. TAGLIERI, 140 S. Ct. 719 (U.S. 2020)

. . . only in emphasis, in the standards they use to locate a child's habitual residence, see supra , at 725 . . . See also supra , at 725 - 726 (noting a Circuit split). . . . Court states that we "granted certiorari to clarify the standard for habitual residence," ante , at 725 . . .

IN RE ROTH, v. LLC,, 935 F.3d 1270 (11th Cir. 2019)

. . . Ct. 2293, 198 L.Ed.2d 725 (2017). . . .

G. STEPHENS v. UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY, a, 935 F.3d 852 (9th Cir. 2019)

. . . Grace Co. , 115 Idaho 1087, 772 P.2d 725, 728 (Ct. App. 1989). . . .

IN RE JUAREZ, v., 603 B.R. 610 (B.A.P. 9th Cir. 2019)

. . . City of Papillion (In re Papio Keno Club, Inc.) , 262 F.3d 725, 729 (8th Cir. 2001) (citation omitted . . . Leonard (In re AVI, Inc.) , 389 B.R. 721, 725 n.2 (9th Cir. BAP 2008). . . .

ZUNIGA, v. P. BARR,, 934 F.3d 1083 (9th Cir. 2019)

. . . Dep't of Commerce , 878 F.3d 725, 733 (9th Cir. 2017) (quotation marks omitted); see also Auer v. . . .

B. VANZANT v. HILL S PET NUTRITION, INC., 934 F.3d 730 (7th Cir. 2019)

. . . Co. , 877 F.3d 725, 741 (7th Cir. 2017). . . .

UNITED STATES v. A. HOPPER,, 934 F.3d 740 (7th Cir. 2019)

. . . Olano , 507 U.S. 725, 736, 113 S.Ct. 1770, 123 L.Ed.2d 508 (1993), superseded on other grounds by rule . . .

BURKE, v. REGALADO, v., 935 F.3d 960 (10th Cir. 2019)

. . . Camden , 705 F.2d 759, 765 (5th Cir. 1983), on rehearing 725 F.2d 1003 (5th Cir. 1984) (en banc). 2) . . . should be awarded because there was no joint liability between the settling and nonsettling defendants. 725 . . .

UNITED STATES v. CUEVAS- LOPEZ,, 934 F.3d 1056 (9th Cir. 2019)

. . . Gomez , 725 F.3d 1121, 1125 (9th Cir. 2013) ("If the defendant fails to object, we review for plain error . . .

UNITED STATES v. MERRITT,, 934 F.3d 809 (8th Cir. 2019)

. . . Olano, 507 U.S. 725, 732, 113 S.Ct. 1770, 123 L.Ed.2d 508 (1993) ). . . .

ZEHENTBAUER FAMILY LAND, LP LP v. CHESAPEAKE EXPLORATION, L. L. C. L. L. C. E P USA,, 935 F.3d 496 (6th Cir. 2019)

. . . XTO Energy, Inc. , 725 F.3d 1213 (10th Cir. 2013), where the Tenth Circuit similarly vacated the district . . . its constituent products) in marketable condition," in violation of Kansas's marketable-product rule. 725 . . .

UNITED STATES v. CLARK,, 935 F.3d 558 (7th Cir. 2019)

. . . Olano , 507 U.S. 725, 733, 113 S.Ct. 1770, 123 L.Ed.2d 508 (1993). . . .

UNITED STATES v. POPE,, 934 F.3d 770 (8th Cir. 2019)

. . . Olano , 507 U.S. 725, 735-36, 113 S.Ct. 1770, 123 L.Ed.2d 508 (1993). . . .

UNITED STATES v. HERNANDEZ- MARTINEZ, v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v., 933 F.3d 1126 (9th Cir. 2019)

. . . Plainbull , 957 F.2d 724, 725 (9th Cir. 1992) ). . . .

ANIMAL LEGAL DEFENSE FUND, v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, 933 F.3d 1088 (9th Cir. 2019)

. . . United States , 859 F.2d 717, 725 (9th Cir. 1988) (internal quotation marks omitted). . . .

IRIDESCENT NETWORKS, INC. v. AT T MOBILITY, LLC,, 933 F.3d 1345 (Fed. Cir. 2019)

. . . Tredegar Corp. , 725 F.3d 1315 (Fed. Cir. 2013), is misplaced. . . . clear disavowal, "the ordinary and customary meaning of the claim term will be given its full effect." 725 . . .

UNITED STATES v. BRAZIER,, 933 F.3d 796 (7th Cir. 2019)

. . . Olano , 507 U.S. 725, 732-38, 113 S.Ct. 1770, 123 L.Ed.2d 508 (1993). . . .

UNITED STATES v. JONES,, 935 F.3d 266 (5th Cir. 2019)

. . . Olano , 507 U.S. 725, 734, 736, 113 S.Ct. 1770, 123 L.Ed.2d 508 (1993) ). . . .

LIVADITIS, v. DAVIS,, 933 F.3d 1036 (9th Cir. 2019)

. . . Ayers , 725 F.3d 1057, 1069 (9th Cir. 2013) ("staggering" aggravating evidence weighed against a conclusion . . .

UNITED STATES v. JOBE,, 933 F.3d 1074 (9th Cir. 2019)

. . . Underwood , 725 F.3d 1076, 1085 (9th Cir. 2013). . . .

UNITED STATES v. C. HODGE, 933 F.3d 468 (5th Cir. 2019)

. . . Olano , 507 U.S. 725, 733, 113 S.Ct. 1770, 123 L.Ed.2d 508 (1993) ). . . .

HAIDAK, v. UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS- AMHERST, 933 F.3d 56 (1st Cir. 2019)

. . . Lopez, 419 U.S. 565, 574, 95 S.Ct. 729, 42 L.Ed.2d 725 (1975) ; see also Gorman v. . . .

KODIAK OIL GAS USA INC. HRC LLC v. BURR S. EOG S., 932 F.3d 1125 (8th Cir. 2019)

. . . Laducer , 725 F.3d 877, 882 (8th Cir. 2013), we conclude the balance of the factors favors them. . . .

O. CAMPOS, v. COOK COUNTY,, 932 F.3d 972 (7th Cir. 2019)

. . . Parole Comm'n , 916 F.2d 725, 726 (D.C. Cir. 1990). III. . . .

UNITED STATES v. PRADO,, 933 F.3d 121 (2nd Cir. 2019)

. . . Hotaling , 634 F.3d 725, 728 (2d Cir. 2011). . . .

UNITED STATES v. LEAL,, 933 F.3d 426 (5th Cir. 2019)

. . . Baymon , 312 F.3d 725, 727 (5th Cir. 2002). . . . Olano , 507 U.S. 725, 113 S.Ct. 1770, 123 L.Ed.2d 508 (1993) ). . . .

IN RE DOBOS, s v., 603 B.R. 31 (B.A.P. 9th Cir. 2019)

. . . Leonard (In re AVI, Inc.) , 389 B.R. 721, 725 n.2 (9th Cir. BAP 2008). . . .

UNITED STATES v. P. MAZZULLA, 932 F.3d 1091 (8th Cir. 2019)

. . . Arnold, 725 F.3d 896, 898 (8th Cir. 2013) ). . . .

D. TORRY, Q. I. v. CITY OF CHICAGO,, 932 F.3d 579 (7th Cir. 2019)

. . . Lenoir , 318 F.3d 725, 729 (7th Cir. 2003) ("[P]olice observation of an individual, fitting a police . . .

SPORTFUEL, INC. v. PEPSICO, INC., 932 F.3d 589 (7th Cir. 2019)

. . . Sorensen , 792 F.3d at 725. . . . Sorensen , 792 F.3d at 725. . . .

UNITED STATES v. D. RIVERA- CARRASQUILLO, a k a KX, a k a a k a a k a n V a k a, 933 F.3d 33 (1st Cir. 2019)

. . . Olano, 507 U.S. 725, 733, 113 S.Ct. 1770, 123 L.Ed.2d 508 (1993) (noting that "waiver is the intentional . . .

DIALYSIS ACCESS CENTER, LLC Tr M. D. v. RMS LIFELINE, INC., 932 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2019)

. . . García-Vélez, 725 F.3d 27, 31 (1st Cir. 2013). . . . Corp., 725 F.3d at 31. But there is more. . . .

UNITED STATES v. PORTER,, 933 F.3d 226 (3rd Cir. 2019)

. . . Olano , 507 U.S. 725, 733, 113 S.Ct. 1770, 123 L.Ed.2d 508 (1993) (quoting Johnson v. . . .

UNITED STATES v. BOSYK,, 933 F.3d 319 (4th Cir. 2019)

. . . Underwood , 725 F.3d 1076, 1082-83 (9th Cir. 2013) (concluding that a trio of facts-a detective's observation . . .

UNITED STATES v. THOMAS, v., 933 F.3d 685 (7th Cir. 2019)

. . . Olano , 507 U.S. 725, 732-38, 113 S.Ct. 1770, 123 L.Ed.2d 508 (1993) ; United States v. . . .

BONNER, v. Ms. SIPPLE,, 392 F. Supp. 3d 594 (E.D. Pa. 2019)

. . . App'x 725, 728 (3d Cir. 2012) (per curiam) (affirming dismissal of complaint where "even if the prison . . .

UNITED STATES v. MATHIS, a k a a k a a k a D- v. a k a a k a v. a k a a k a a k a v. a k a a k a K. a k a a k a v. a k a a k a a k a v. a k a a k a a k a a k a, 932 F.3d 242 (4th Cir. 2019)

. . . Lespier , 725 F.3d 437, 445-46, 449-51 (4th Cir. 2013) (holding that the invited error doctrine applies . . . Lespier , 725 F.3d 437, 450-51 (4th Cir. 2013). . . .

BRAKEBILL v. JAEGER,, 932 F.3d 671 (8th Cir. 2019)

. . . Dawson, 725 F.3d 885, 893 (8th Cir. 2013) ). . . . long as it stays within that range and is not influenced by any mistake of law.' " Novus Franchising, 725 . . .

UNITED STATES v. BUCHANAN,, 933 F.3d 501 (6th Cir. 2019)

. . . Olano , 507 U.S. 725, 733, 113 S.Ct. 1770, 123 L.Ed.2d 508 (1993) ("Whereas forfeiture is the failure . . .

DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE, v. RUSSIAN FEDERATION, 392 F. Supp. 3d 410 (S.D.N.Y. 2019)

. . . App'x 722, 725 (2d Cir. 2010), or when mail fraud is necessary to induce the sale or lease of environmentally . . .

JOHNSON O v. DUXBURY, MASSACHUSETTS, 931 F.3d 102 (1st Cir. 2019)

. . . Ortega, 480 U.S. 709, 725-26, 107 S.Ct. 1492, 94 L.Ed.2d 714 (1987) (plurality opinion), and, alternatively . . . Quon, 560 U.S. at 756, 130 S.Ct. 2619 (quoting O'Connor, 480 U.S. at 725, 107 S.Ct. 1492 ). . . .

UNITED STATES v. MOODY,, 931 F.3d 366 (4th Cir. 2019)

. . . Olano, 507 U.S. 725, 732, 113 S.Ct. 1770, 123 L.Ed.2d 508 (1993) (noting that reversal under this standard . . .

UNITED STATES v. DEL CARPIO FRESCAS,, 932 F.3d 324 (5th Cir. 2019)

. . . Olano , 507 U.S. 725, 113 S.Ct. 1770, 123 L.Ed.2d 508 (1993). . . . Hurlburt , 835 F.3d 715, 725-26 (7th Cir. 2016) (en banc) (finding error affected substantial rights . . .

DINE CITIZENS AGAINST RUINING OUR ENVIRONMENT v. BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS U. S. LLC,, 932 F.3d 843 (9th Cir. 2019)

. . . AVI Casino Enters., Inc ., 548 F.3d 718, 725 (9th Cir. 2008) (citation omitted). . . .

UNITED STATES v. BONIN,, 932 F.3d 523 (7th Cir. 2019)

. . . restriction was not "the least restrictive means among available, effective alternatives." 567 U.S. at 725 . . .

MARAMBO v. P. BARR,, 932 F.3d 650 (8th Cir. 2019)

. . . Holder, 725 F.3d 785, 788 (7th Cir. 2013), and that our Court has consistently recognized the preference . . .

UNITED STATES v. VARGAS- MOLINA,, 392 F. Supp. 3d 809 (E.D. Mich. 2019)

. . . INS , 208 F.3d 725, 728 (9th Cir. 2000) ). . . .

UNITED STATES v. SANCHEZ- HERNANDEZ,, 931 F.3d 408 (5th Cir. 2019)

. . . Olano , 507 U.S. 725, 733, 113 S.Ct. 1770, 123 L.Ed.2d 508 (1993). . . .

FACIANE, v. SUN LIFE ASSURANCE COMPANY OF CANADA,, 931 F.3d 412 (5th Cir. 2019)

. . . Co. , 872 F.3d 721, 725 (5th Cir. 2017) (quotation omitted). . . .

PETERSON, v. HEYMES,, 931 F.3d 546 (6th Cir. 2019)

. . . City of Louisville , 444 F.3d 725, 742 (6th Cir. 2006) ). . . .

STATE BY AND THROUGH TENNESSEE GENERAL ASSEMBLY, v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF STATE,, 931 F.3d 499 (6th Cir. 2019)

. . . Id. at 725. . . .

EAST BAY SANCTUARY COVENANT, v. BARR,, 385 F. Supp. 3d 922 (N.D. Cal. 2019)

. . . Dep't of Commerce , 878 F.3d 725, 732 (9th Cir. 2017) (quoting State Farm , 463 U.S. at 43, 103 S.Ct. . . . Autoliv, Inc. , 175 F.3d 716, 725 (9th Cir. 1999) ). . . .

UNITED STATES v. JENNINGS, Sr., 930 F.3d 1024 (8th Cir. 2019)

. . . Olano, 507 U.S. 725, 732, 113 S.Ct. 1770, 123 L.Ed.2d 508 (1993) (quoting United States v. . . .

L. JACKSON, v. BARTOW,, 930 F.3d 930 (7th Cir. 2019)

. . . Hinsley, 377 F.3d 719, 725-26 (7th Cir. 2004). . . . Ward, 377 F.3d at 725-26 ; United States v. . . .

HARTMAN v. THOMPSON, 931 F.3d 471 (6th Cir. 2019)

. . . Kokinda , 497 U.S. 720, 725-26, 110 S.Ct. 3115, 111 L.Ed.2d 571 (1990) ("The Government, even when acting . . .

UNITED STATES v. LINDSAY,, 931 F.3d 852 (9th Cir. 2019)

. . . Olano , 507 U.S. 725, 734, 113 S.Ct. 1770, 123 L.Ed.2d 508 (1993) ). . . .

UNITED STATES v. MCKOWN,, 930 F.3d 721 (5th Cir. 2019)

. . . See Jackson , 406 U.S. at 725, 92 S.Ct. 1845 ("Were the State's factual premise that [the defendant's . . .

BIGSBY, Jr. v. BARCLAYS CAPITAL REAL ESTATE, INC., 391 F. Supp. 3d 336 (S.D.N.Y. 2019)

. . . Supp. 3d at 725-26. The statute expired by the end of 2013. . . .

IN RE LICKING RIVER MINING, LLC, v. LLC,, 603 B.R. 336 (Bankr. E.D. Ky. 2019)

. . . . § 506 ; § 725. . . .

K. NARKIEWICZ- LAINE, v. C. DOYLE,, 930 F.3d 897 (7th Cir. 2019)

. . . City of Chicago , 725 F.3d 702, 707 (7th Cir. 2013). . . .

EBBE, v. CONCORDE INVESTMENT SERVICES, LLC G. M. a k a M., 392 F. Supp. 3d 228 (D. Mass. 2019)

. . . García-Vélez, 725 F.3d 27, 32 (1st Cir. 2013). . . . Corp., 725 F.3d at 31-32 (subsuming the fair hearing requirement under 9 U.S.C. § 10(a)(3), at least . . .

GIBSON, Ca v. SCE GROUP, INC. d b a d b a s,, 391 F. Supp. 3d 228 (S.D.N.Y. 2019)

. . . Smith, 177 N.Y. 366, 69 N.E. 725, 727 (1904) (finding that it was a false statement to use a woman's . . .

MANNING v. CALDWELL, s FOR CITY OF ROANOKE s, 930 F.3d 264 (4th Cir. 2019)

. . . Olano , 507 U.S. 725, 733, 113 S.Ct. 1770, 123 L.Ed.2d 508 (1993). . . . Olano , 507 U.S. 725, 733, 113 S.Ct. 1770, 123 L.Ed.2d 508 (1993) ("Waiver is different from forfeiture . . .

WESTERN WATERSHEDS PROJECT, v. BERNHARDT,, 392 F. Supp. 3d 1225 (D. Or. 2019)

. . . Dreyfus , 697 F.3d 706, 725 (9th Cir. 2012). B. . . . Connell , 725 F.3d 988, 994 (9th Cir. 2013) (FLPMA). . . .

ALARM DETECTION SYSTEMS, INCORPORATED, v. VILLAGE OF SCHAUMBURG, a, 930 F.3d 812 (7th Cir. 2019)

. . . Kopp , 725 F.3d 681, 686 (7th Cir. 2013) ; Flying J Inc. v. . . .

RIOS, v. JENKINS,, 390 F. Supp. 3d 714 (W.D. Va. 2019)

. . . Frederick County Board of Commissioners, 725 F.3d. 451 (4th Cir. 2013). . . . See Santos, 725 F.3d at 466 (observing that Arizona "makes clear that under Section 1357(g)(10) local . . . rights by seizing and arresting her based on an outstanding civil warrant for removal issued by ICE. 725 . . . Santos, 725 F.3d at 466 (emphasis in original); see also City of El Cenizo, 890 F.3d at 189 (observing . . . See Santos, 725 F.3d at 468 (emphasizing that the right at issue "must have been clearly established . . . Bd. of Comm'rs, 725 F.3d 451, 463 (4th Cir. 2013) (quoting Arizona, 567 U.S. at 410, 132 S.Ct. 2492 ) . . . Santos, 725 F.3d at 464 (quoting 8 U.S.C. § 1357(g)(10)(B) ). . . . Santos, 725 F.3d at 466. . . .

INC. v. INTERNATIONAL GAME TECHNOLOGY, IGT, DOUBLEDOWN INTERACTIVE LLC,, 391 F. Supp. 3d 828 (N.D. Ill. 2019)

. . . City of Chicago , 725 F.3d 702, 715 (7th Cir. 2013) ("An evidentiary error warrants a new trial 'only . . .

UNITED STATES v. A. GREEN,, 929 F.3d 989 (8th Cir. 2019)

. . . Long , 906 F.3d 720, 725 (8th Cir. 2018), petition for cert. filed , No. 18-9801 (U.S. . . . Id . at 725. . . .

PENNSYLVANIA v. PRESIDENT UNITED STATES D. C., 930 F.3d 543 (3rd Cir. 2019)

. . . Co., 725 F.3d 406, 414 (3d Cir. 2013) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). . . .

UNITED STATES v. GURULE,, 929 F.3d 1214 (10th Cir. 2019)

. . . Esquivel-Rios, 725 F.3d 1231, 1236 (10th Cir. 2013)). . . .

UNITED STATES v. OSMAN, 929 F.3d 962 (8th Cir. 2019)

. . . Olano , 507 U.S. 725, 732-36, 113 S.Ct. 1770, 123 L.Ed.2d 508 (1993). . . .

UNITED STATES v. GURULE,, 935 F.3d 878 (10th Cir. 2019)

. . . Esquivel-Rios , 725 F.3d 1231, 1236 (10th Cir. 2013) ). . . .

CARDIONET, LLC, v. SCOTTCARE CORPORATION,, 388 F. Supp. 3d 442 (E.D. Pa. 2019)

. . . In particular, weighted comparison705 varies linearly between points715, 720, 725, 730, 735. . . . The values of points715, 720, 725, 730, 735 are given in Table 1. . . . TABLE 1 Point Comparison DRR(n) Weight Comparison 715 0 0 720 0.0206 0.0417 725 0.0642 0.9178 730 0.1427 . . . DRR(n) can be determined by linear interpolation between the weighted comparisons of points715, 720, 725 . . . be interpolated in any of a number of different ways such as a cubic spline between points715, 720, 725 . . .

IN RE YOUNESSI, LP, v., 601 B.R. 815 (B.A.P. 9th Cir. 2019)

. . . Leonard (In re AVI, Inc.) , 389 B.R. 721, 725 n.2 (9th Cir. BAP 2008). . . .

UNITED STATES v. PAYANO,, 930 F.3d 186 (3rd Cir. 2019)

. . . Olano , 507 U.S. 725, 732, 113 S.Ct. 1770, 123 L.Ed.2d 508 (1993) (alteration in original); Fed. R. . . .

IN RE MCCANN, LLC, LLC, F LLC, LLC, SMC LLC, v., 601 B.R. 813 (B.A.P. 8th Cir. 2019)

. . . Unterreiner (In re Unterreiner ), 459 B.R. 725, 730 (8th Cir. BAP 2011). . . .

UNITED STATES v. BRIONES, Jr., 929 F.3d 1057 (9th Cir. 2019)

. . . Ct. at 725-26 (petitioner shot and killed a deputy sheriff). . . .

LORENZO, v. P. BARR,, 929 F.3d 379 (6th Cir. 2019)

. . . immigration status for one year after learning that the BIA dismissed her appeal, see Barry, 524 F.3d at 725 . . . See Barry, 524 F.3d at 725; Ly, 436 F. App'x at 465; Hermiz, 86 F. App'x at 45. . . .

UNITED STATES v. WILLIAMS,, 930 F.3d 44 (2nd Cir. 2019)

. . . Olano , 507 U.S. 725, 731-34, 113 S.Ct. 1770, 123 L.Ed.2d 508 (1993) ). . . .

UNITED STATES v. FIGUEROA- FIGUEROA,, 388 F. Supp. 3d 70 (D. P.R. 2019)

. . . United States, 362 U.S. 257, 271, 80 S.Ct. 725, 736, 4 L.Ed.2d 697 (1960) ). . . . Ayres, 725 F.2d 806 (1st Cir. 1984) ; United States v. Young, 105 F.3d at 6 (same). . . .

UNITED STATES v. BLEAU, J., 930 F.3d 35 (2nd Cir. 2019)

. . . Hotaling , 634 F.3d 725, 731 (2d Cir. 2011) (defining as "sadistic" conduct that includes the "likely . . .

ROSARIO, v. UNITED STATES,, 389 F. Supp. 3d 122 (D. Mass. 2019)

. . . Paula , 725 F.2d 801, 803 (1st Cir. 1984) ("After the expiration of a term of imprisonment, parole, or . . .

BOARD OF TRUSTEES, SHEET METAL WORKERS NATIONAL PENSION FUND, v. FOUR- C- AIRE, INC., 929 F.3d 135 (4th Cir. 2019)

. . . Gray & Co., 467 U.S. 717, 725, 104 S.Ct. 2709, 81 L.Ed.2d 601 (1984) (citing 29 U.S.C. §§ 1381, 1391 . . . Corp. , 467 U.S. at 725, 104 S.Ct. 2709 (internal quotation marks omitted); see 29 U.S.C. §§ 1381, 1391 . . .

UNITED STATES v. B. LEDBETTER A. A. L., 929 F.3d 338 (6th Cir. 2019)

. . . Lane , 474 U.S. 438, 449, 106 S.Ct. 725, 88 L.Ed.2d 814 (1986). . . .