Cases from cite.case.law:

C. FORMAN, v. TAY,, 180 So. 3d 1221 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . Because the trial court properly interpreted the language of section 903.31(1), Florida Statutes (2014 . . . Surety moved to set aside the bond forfeiture and to exonerate the bond, arguing that under section 903.31 . . . Analysis Section 903.31(1) states: Within 10 business days after the conditions of a bond have been satisfied . . . This construction of section 903.31 is consistent with the “[Iliberal interpretation of such statutes . . .

AMERICAN BANKERS INSURANCE COMPANY, v. STATE f u b o OSCEOLA COUNTY CLERK,, 45 So. 3d 540 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2010)

. . . See § 903.31(2), Fla. . . .

ELLIS v. HUNTER,, 3 So. 3d 373 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2009)

. . . the bond is section 903.286, Florida Statutes, which provides: Notwithstanding the provisions of s. 903.31 . . .

ALLEGHENY CASUALTY COMPANY, v. ROCHE SURETY, INC., 885 So. 2d 1016 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004)

. . . First, section 903.31(1) affects substantive rights because it affects the counties’ rights in forfeitable . . .

BUSH, v. INTERNATIONAL FIDELITY INS. CO., 834 So. 2d 212 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

. . . The provisions of section 903.31 stating that the bond shall be can-celled when the forfeiture is discharged . . . We do not construe the phrase “forfeiture discharged or remitted” in section 903.31 to encompass an order . . .

BROWARD COUNTY, v. B B BAIL BONDS,, 790 So. 2d 1224 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)

. . . Section 903.31(1), Florida Statutes (2000), provides that “[a]n adjudication of guilt or innocence of . . . By its terms, section 903.31(1) does not apply to this case because the bond was forfeited as a result . . .

ROSENBERG BAIL BONDS, v. ORANGE COUNTY,, 663 So. 2d 1389 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)

. . . Rosenberg claims that his responsibility was discharged pursuant to section 903.31, Florida Statutes . . . (1993): 903.31 Cancelling the bond. . . . The 1970 version of section 903.31 read as follows: When the conditions of a bond have been satisfied . . . Perhaps in response to Accredited Surety, in 1980 the legislature inartfully amended section 903.31 as . . . We hold that section 903.31 reheves a surety’s obligation upon a defendant’s admission to a pretrial . . .

H. MINASIAN, v. STATE, 655 So. 2d 1143 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)

. . . Section 903.31 requires that a bond be cancelled within 10 business days after all conditions have been . . .

POLAKOFF BAIL BONDS, v. ORANGE COUNTY,, 634 So. 2d 1083 (Fla. 1994)

. . . Court of Appeal certified the following question as being of great public importance: UNDER SECTION 903.31 . . . The Fifth-District .affirmed, rejecting Pola-koffs contention that under section 903.31 and the terms . . . Polakoff first argues that according to the plain meaning of section 903.31, Florida Statutes (1991), . . . However, we disagree with Pola-koffs reading of section 903.31. . . . The second sentence of section 903.31 makes clear that the conditions of the bond shall be satisfied . . .

POLAKOFF BAIL BONDS, v. ORANGE COUNTY,, 617 So. 2d 378 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)

. . . Appellants contend that under section 903.31, Florida Statutes (1991), and under the terms of the appearance . . . a matter of great public importance, a similar question to the Florida Supreme Court: UNDER SECTION 903.31 . . . Section 903.31 provides: Within 10 business days after the conditions of a bond have been satisfied or . . . attendance at educational or rehabilitation facilities the court otherwise provides in the judgment. § 903.31 . . .

AAA BAIL BONDS, INC. v. STATE, 611 So. 2d 612 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)

. . . This single issue appeal poses the question whether, under section 903.31, Florida Statutes (1989), the . . . The Battles court explained its holding as follows: In 1986 the legislature amended § 903.31 to provide . . . State, 410 So.2d 627 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982) ] retain their vitality under the current version of § 903.31 . . .

I. BATTLES, d b a v. STATE, 595 So. 2d 183 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)

. . . provision relied upon by Battles, as amended by the Chapter 86-151, Laws of Florida, reads as follows: 903.31 . . . In 1986 the legislature amended § 903.31 to provide that the original appearance bond shall not be construed . . . that Accredited Surety and American Druggists’ retain their vitality under the current version of § 903.31 . . . We therefore certify the following question to the Florida Supreme Court: UNDER SECTION 903.31, FLORIDA . . . Section 903.31, Florida Statutes (Supp.1986), clearly states “original appearance bonds shall not be . . .

STATE v. M. FISHER,, 578 So. 2d 746 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)

. . . .2d 554 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975), had been rendered inapplicable by amendments in 1980 and 1986 to section 903.31 . . . both American Druggists’ and Accredited Surety are both still applicable interpretations of section 903.31 . . . motion for rehearing, the bond estreature was set aside by the trial judge who determined that section 903.31 . . .

ACCREDITED SURETY CASUALTY CO. v. PUTNAM COUNTY,, 561 So. 2d 1243 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1990)

. . . See § 903.31, Fla.Stat. (1989). . . .

WILEY, II, F. v. STATE, 451 So. 2d 916 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1984)

. . . .-26(l)(b), Florida Statutes (1979), operated as a matter of law, by virtue of section 903.31, to cancel . . . In addition to the above provisions, section 903.31, Florida Statutes (1979), which was in effect in . . . This argument is based primarily on the language in section 903.31 providing that when a forfeiture has . . . However, because Resolute I expressly declined to reach the applicability and meaning of section 903.31 . . . and neither Bailey nor Caivano discusses section 903.31 or gives any reason for ordering that the bond . . .

AMERICAN DRUGGISTS INSURANCE COMPANY, v. STATE, 410 So. 2d 627 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1982)

. . . At the time of the proceedings below, section 903.31, Florida Statutes (1979), read as follows: When . . . satisfaction of all bond conditions or restrictions other than those specifically approved in section 903.31 . . .

ALLEGHENY MUTUAL INSURANCE CO. v. STATE, 376 So. 2d 290 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1979)

. . . enforced by forfeiting the bond, the condition of the bond is satisfied within the contemplation of 903.31 . . .

P. WEAVER, v. STATE, 370 So. 2d 1236 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1979)

. . . Appellant moved for rehearing upon the ground that Section 903.31, Florida Statutes (1977), mandated . . . The forfeiture shall be paid within 30 days. 903.31 Canceling the bond. . . . to a discharge or remission of the forfeiture which required the bond to be canceled under Section 903.31 . . .

ACCREDITED SURETY AND CASUALTY COMPANY, INC. v. STATE, 318 So. 2d 554 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1975)

. . . Appellant points out that § 903.31, Florida Statutes, sets forth the conditions under which an order . . . conviction necessarily includes an adjudication of guilt, the appellant contends that as used in § 903.31 . . . Reverting back to the intent of § 903.31, supra, as to the meaning of the term “conviction” in the context . . .

RESOLUTE INSURANCE COMPANY, a v. STATE DADE COUNTY,, 269 So. 2d 770 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1972)

. . . order vacating judgment and order of dismissal resulted in the cancelling of the bond pursuant to § 903.31 . . .

BOEING, Jr. R. As W. E. v. UNITED STATES, 168 F. Supp. 762 (Ct. Cl. 1958)

. . . At the time of the transfer $164,-903.31 had been expended in developing the Blue Ridge tract, exclusive . . . At the time the Blue Ridge Land Company had terminated its operations in 1932, $164,-903.31 had been . . .

STATE v. MAXIE, 66 So. 2d 670 (Fla. 1953)

. . . the movant was entitled to some form of relief, either under the provisions of sections 903.30 and 903.31 . . .