Miscellaneous

From Comcoa, Inc. v. Coe,  587 So. 2d 474, 477 (Fla. App 3 Dist. 1991):

Of primary importance in this determination is the conclusion that, in a statute such as this one, the term ?may,? which indeed ordinarily implies the exercise of choice or discretion, simply does not do so, and must, in contrast, be given a definition equivalent to the mandatory ?shall.? It is well-settled that, according to the context and surrounding circumstances, a statutory ?shall? is to be read as ?may? and vice versa.

Hat tip to West?s headnote du jour.