Florida/Georgia Personal Injury & Workers Compensation

841(a)(1) and Title 18, United States Code, Section 2. 4 .In this opinion, for convenience

Chemerinsky, Federal Jurisdiction § 2.4.3 (3d ed.1999) (noting that "[t]he interaction of

...McSwain contends that his vision impairment met or equalled an impairment in the Secretary’s listing of impairments in 20 C.F.R. Pt. 404, Subpt. P, App. 1, §§ 2.01-.04. Specifically, McSwain asserts that the Secretary failed to consider whether he met the standard for statutory blindness under § 2.04 of the listing of impairments, which is a percentage of overall loss of visual efficiency....

...isting of impairments. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520 (d) (1986). The claimant bears the burden of proving that he is disabled or blind. Id. § 404.1512(a). McSwain failed to present medical evidence that his loss of visual efficiency met the requirements of § 2.04 of the listing of impairments....

in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 242 and 18 U.S.C. § 2; (4) Simon, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c), knowingly

safety and assuring an element of punishment." Id. § 2(4) (emphasis added). Probation is the noncustodial

...Marion County, 353 P.2d 257 (Or. 1960); Barry and Barry, Inc. v. State of Washington Dept. of Motor Vehicles, 81 Wash.2d 155, 500 P.2d 540 (1972); Schmidt v. Dept. of Resource Development, 39 Wis.2d 46, 158 N.W.2d 306 (1968); K. Davis, Administrative Law of the Seventies, § 2.04, at 30 (1976)....

safety and assuring an element of punishment." Id. § 2(4) (emphasis added). Probation is the noncustodial

law enforcement problem.” Pub. Law No. 106-172, § 2(4) (2000). In addition, Congress added GBL to

agency conducts an investigation. Id. § 2^4(a). If any of these investigations reveals that

window signs and flags in residential districts. Id. § 2-4. The only provision challenged by Tanner in the

7212(a) and Title 18, United States Code, Section 2. 4 Count III charged that Martin

§§ 841(a)(1), (b)(l)(A)(ii) and 18 U.S.C. § 2. 4 .The sentences were based on three alternatives:

U.S.C. §§ 952(a), 960(a)(1), (b); 18 U.S.C. § 2. 4 . 21 U.S.C. § 846. 5

Erwin Chemerinsky, Federal Jurisdiction § 2.4.1 (1989). When determining ripeness, a court asks

C. § 46306(c)(2) and (c)(3)7 and 18 U.S.C. § 2. 4 (...continued) with intent to manufacture

Animal Welfare, 32 Fed.Reg. 3270 (Feb. 24, 1967). Section 2.4 was titled “Issuance of licenses,” and USDA could

permit” by the Building Official. Id. § 2.4. A provision in the zoning ordinance, captioned

and Title 18, United States Code, Section 2. 4 Count 2, conspiracy to possess

Chemerinsky, Federal Jurisdiction § 2.4.1 (3d ed.1999) (internal footnote omitted).

. 18 U.S.C.A. § 113(a) and 18 U.S.C.A. § 2. 4 . 18 U.S.C.A. § 1111 and 18 U.S.C.A

was a distribution). Under 18 U.S.C. Section 2, 4 however, appellants are responsible

violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and 18 U.S.C. § 2. 4 . Appellant Carlos Arango does not challenge

...The special act repeals Chapter 61-1646, and when the 1969 law expires by its own terms on June 30, 1970, the earlier statute will not be reactivated for the reason that no express reference to its revival is made in the new law as required by Florida Statutes, section 2.04 (1967), F.S.A....

...He too stated that he was not advised of his right to court-appointed counsel prior to trial. The maximum punishment under Florida Statutes, section 775.07 (1967), F.S.A., is two hundred dollars or ninety days, or both. Furthermore, Florida Statutes, section 922.04 (1967), F.S.A., provides that release is available to an indigent after sixty days incarceration solely for inability to pay a fine of three hundred dollars or less....

...Had an attorney been present, plaintiff Goodale could have benefitted from the assistance of counsel. He was incarcerated under this conviction at the time this suit was filed, and was later released under state habeas corpus proceedings brought under section 922.04....

...No opposition to this relief was expressed at the hearing or in the pleadings. It was admitted that he did not have counsel made available to him. Because plaintiff Goodale served the maximum time required under the sentence, as it was limited by operation of Florida Statutes, section 922.04, by which he was released after sixty days, no leave is granted to the State to rearrest, rearraign and retry plaintiff....

because he was a judge of a small claims court. § 2(4). 3 . Gunby has continued to argue

...nd espoused by Kenneth Culp Davis that "the danger of arbitrary or capricious administrative action is best met through procedural due process in the administrative process." Askew, 372 So.2d at 923. See K. Davis, Administrative Law of the Seventies § 2.04 at 30 (1976)....

tariff. The parties have further stipulated that Section 2.4.8 of Tariff No. 260 specifically provides for

above, the “Permitted Pavement Conditions”). Section 2.4 Subordinated Debt Standstill Provisions. Until

responsibility for, inter alia, keeping records, see § 2.4 ("Records"), preparing and distributing periodic

...." Under the provisions of section 679.403(2), however, appellee can have priority despite taking delivery of the collateral after appellant perfected its security interest. See 1 W. Williams, Florida Law of Secured Transactions in Personal Property § 2.04 (1980); Zaretsky, Lapse of Perfection in Secured Transactions: A Search For a Consistent Approach, 27 B.C.L....

...Campaign Committee of Dade County, Inc., and Dade County Young Republican Club, Inc., intervening appellees. TERRELL, Chief Justice. Appellees filed complaint for declaratory decree in the appropriate court challenging the constitutional validity of §§ 2.03 and 2.04, Home Rule Charter, hereinafter referred to as the Charter, which provide for the non-partisan election of county commissioners of Dade County....

...issues made by the complaint and answer of Dade County, its Board of County Commissioners and Supervisor of Registration. At the conclusion of the trial the Chancellor entered an identical final decree in both cases wherein he decreed §§ 2.03 and 2.04 of the Charter to be unconstitutional and permanently enjoined Dade County and its Board of County Commissioners and Supervisor of Registration from holding or conducting any non-partisan election of county commissioners and from enforcing or attempting to enforce any of the provisions of §§ 2.03 and 2.04 of the Charter....

...The final decree also decreed all other provisions of the Charter to be valid. Dade County, its Supervisor of Registration and its Board of County Commissioners have appealed from the final decree. The point for determination is whether or not the Chancellor committed error in decreeing §§ 2.03 and 2.04 of the Charter to be unconstitutional and of no force and effect. In addition to paragraphs 2.03 and 2.04 of the Charter, the answer to this question involves consideration of Section 11, Article VIII, Constitution of Florida, better known as Dade County Home Rule Amendment, which provides: "(1) The electors of Dade County, Florida, are granted powe...

...This charter: "(a) Shall fix the boundaries of each county commission district, provide a method for changing them from time to time, and fix the number, terms and compensation of the commissioners, and their method of election." Sections 2.03 and 2.04 of the Charter provide: " Section 2.03 Non-Partisan Elections....

..."All elections for the Board shall be non-partisan and no ballot shall show the party designation of any candidate. No candidate for the office of County Commissioner shall be required to pay any party assessment or state the party of which he is a member or the manner in which he voted or will vote in any election. " Section 2.04 Qualifications and Filing Fee....

...he voted in the past or will vote in the future? Unquestionably the scope given the words, "method of election," concludes the question with which we are confronted. The Chancellor held that the non-partisan provisions of the Charter, §§ 2.03 and 2.04, were invalid and unconstitutional and enjoined the holding of any election under them....

...It is accordingly our view that the Charter expressly authorized the electors of Dade County to select their county commissioners by non-partisan ballot; that the portion of the final decree declaring the non-partisan ballot invalid is reversed and that said provisions, §§ 2.03 and 2.04, are declared to be valid but that in all other respects the final decree is affirmed....

section 2 violations of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C.A. § 2.4 The allegations were: conspiracy to monopolize in

...ts. The trial court refused to give the requested instruction, finding that to do so would be to comment on the evidence. Instead, the judge gave the standard jury instruction on expert witnesses, Florida Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases § 2.04(a)....

...to be given that opinion testimony. We find Florida's standard jury instruction on expert witnesses to be a sufficient explanation of the weight to be given to the testimony of a polygraph expert. Florida Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases § 2.04(a)....

...s. Accordingly, we approve the en banc opinion of the district court, with the exception that the trial judge is not required to give any instruction concerning the polygraph examination other than Florida Standard Jury Instruction in Criminal Cases 2.04(a)....

...EHRLICH, Justice, concurring. While I concur with the majority, I am of the view that it would be helpful to the jury to be given the following instruction from State v. Griggs, 33 Wash. App. 496, 499, 656 P.2d 529, 531 (1982) in addition to Standard Jury Instruction 2.04(a) EXPERT WITNESSES: *575 By agreement of the parties, the court has admitted the testimony of the polygraph examination of the defendant....

...cate whether or not at the time of the examination the defendant was telling the truth. It is for you, the jury, to determine the corroborative weight and effect such testimony should be given. BARKETT, J., concurs. NOTES [*] That instruction reads: 2.04(a) EXPERT WITNESSES Expert witnesses are like other witnesses, with one exception — the law permits an expert witness to give his opinion....

...However, an expert's opinion is only reliable when given on a subject about which you believe him to be an expert. Like other witnesses, you may believe or disbelieve all or any part of an expert's testimony. Florida Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases § 2.04(a).

1966), 186 So.2d 786. [3] 12 A.L.R.2d 789, 790, § 2. [4] Marten v. Credit Adjustment Service, Inc., Okl

Standards Relating to Post-Conviction Remedies, § 2.4, page 48 (tentative draft)." 269 F. Supp. at 992

(discriminatory purge of voters from polls violated Section 2) 4 ; Welch v. McKenzie, 765

...However, the 1984 version of the Model Act (not adopted in Florida) contains no clear statement on de facto corporations, and the comment states that the newer rule provides a "slightly more flexible or relaxed standard." Model Business Corporation Act Annotated § 2.04, at 131 (3d ed....

..."continued to rely on common law concepts of de facto corporations, de jure corporations, and corporations by estoppel that provide uncertain protection against liability for preincorporation transactions." 1 Model Business Corporation Act Annotated § 2.04 official comment, at 131 (3d ed. 1987). They concluded that it was "appropriate to impose liability only on those persons who act as or on behalf of corporations `knowing' that no corporation exists," Id. at 133, and the section of the Act (renumbered as 2.04) was accordingly amended in 1984 to read, "All persons purporting to act as or on behalf of a corporation, knowing that there was no incorporation under this Act, are jointly and severally liable for all liabilities created while so acting" (emphasis supplied)....

Philip J. Padovano, Florida Appellate Practice § 2.4, at 38 (2d ed.1997) (footnote omitted); see also

...For example, the standard jury instructions continue to recognize that a trial judge retains the right to instruct the jury that it "should use great caution in relying on the testimony of a witness who claims to have helped the defendant commit a crime[.]" Florida Standard Jury instruction (Criminal) 2.04(b)....

...[1] Notice of this determination was provided to the parties by order of the court dated March 25, 1985. [2] Pendelton v. State, 348 So.2d 1206 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977); Hicks v. State, 388 So.2d 357 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980); and Williamson v. State, 338 So.2d 873 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976). [3] Section 2.04, Florida Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases, 2d Ed....

court, except [for those listed in this section 2 4 ] . . . . *1055

each $600 of funds loaned to the partnership. Section 2.4 of the agreement also established a hierarchy

...Furthermore, even if section 687.11(4) were construed to repeal subsections 687.11(1) and (2) as to loans in excess of $500,000, such would not revive the formerly repealed provision of section 687.04 dealing with double interest penalties as to corporate borrowers. Section 2.04, Florida Statutes (1975), provides: *295 No statute of this state which has been repealed shall ever be revived by implication; that is to say, if a statute be passed repealing a former statute, and a third statute be passed repealing th...

$10 million additional payment set forth in Section 2.4.1 We affirm. I. BACKGROUND The Federal Communications

period. See W. Meyer, Life & Health Insurance Law § 2:4 (1971) (noting the rule with respect to insurance

following the stock purchase. In particular, section 2.4 of the Agreement stated that if the ACOI for

responsibility for, inter alia, keeping records, see § 2.4 (“Records”), preparing and distributing periodic

shall be deemed guilty of a felony." 15 U.S.C. § 2. [4] The analysis of antitrust injury for a section

158 (1926). [3] 14 Am.Jur.2d 779, Certiorari, § 2. [4] Art. V, § 7(3), Constitution of Florida. [5]

632 (Ala. 1992); LaFave, 1 Search & Seizure 2d § 2.4 (1987). [9] Compare Kirsch v. State, 10 Md. App

2d 402, 404. [3] 23 Fla.Jur. 374 — New Trial, § 2. [4] 6A Moore's Federal Practice 3707, § 59.02 (2d

...number of contributions, consisting of separate and independent works in themselves, are assembled into a collective whole. 17 U.S.C.A. § 101 , quoted in Boorstyn, Copyright Law, § 2:19 at 57 (1981) (footnotes omitted). See 1 Nimmer on Copyright, § 2.04[B] at 2-41 (1984)....

...esulting compilation of a protectible literary work. Although some may question whether catalogs, directories and the like should be regarded as works of authorship subject to copyright protection, such protection has long been recognized. 1 Nimmer, § 2.04[B] 2-41 to 2-42 n....

" AR 1009, Group Disability Income Policy, Section 2. [4] Independent Medical Examination [5] These

Commissioners." Palm Beach County, Fla., Charter art. II, § 2.4. Pursuant to the Palm Beach County Code, the County

extended pursuant to the provisions of § 2.4." Pursuant to section 2.4, Hot Developers extended the closing

...§ 2.03. When an agent acts with either type of authority, the principal may be contractually bound by the agent's dealings. Id. §§ 6.01-.03. Respondeat superior is a doctrine that dictates when the principal is liable for its agent's torts. See id. §§ 2.04, 7.03, 7.07.08. Specifically, "[a]n employer is subject to liability for torts committed by employees while acting within the scope of their employment." Id. § 2.04....

...However, earlier case law is necessary to put the holding of Bransford in perspective. As explained above, the common law rule of respondeat superior applied so that a principal is vicariously liable for the acts of its "employees," or "servants," within the scope of their employment. E.g., Restatement (Third) of Agency §§ 2.04, 7.03, 7.07-.08....

harm. See Erwin Chemerinsky, Federal Jurisdiction § 2.4.1 (1989). When determining ripeness, a court asks

commerce among the several States...." 15 U.S.C. § 2. [4] Of course, under § 1 (as opposed to § 2), it

B. Nimmer & David Nimmer, 2 Nimmer on Copyright § 2.04[C] (2008). The 1980 amendments to the Copyright

violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and 18 U.S.C. § 2. 4. DEA computerized records show that five forfeiture

see also ERWIN CHEMERINSKI, FEDERAL JURISDICTION § 2.4 (4th ed.2003). Also derived from Article III's case-or-controversy

P. 3.712; §§ 921.231(1)(i), 948.015(9), Fla. Stat. (2)-(4) [No change] (e)-(i) [No change] Committee

Borrowing to the Administrative Agent. [Cr. Agr. § 2.4(a)]. Upon receipt of the Notice of Borrowing, the

by law and the Charter of the city. (Code 1958, § 2-4.)" [Emphasis supplied by appellant] The question

open fields. Wayne R. LaFave, Search and Seizure § 2.4(a) (3d ed.1996).

at ¶ 33); (Avenue Compl. at ¶ 119); (Cr. Agmt. § 2.4(a)). Upon receipt of each Notice of Borrowing, the

...Plaintiffs sued Defendant Pinellas County for injunctive and declaratory relief only. Defendant Pinellas County claims that the Eleventh Amendment should bar the suit brought by Plaintiffs because the County is acting in stead of the State in the regulation of charitable solicitations pursuant to Section 2.04(o), Pinellas County Charter, Laws of Florida, Chapter 88-458, § 1, Resolution No....

1994); Erwin Chemerinsky, Federal Jurisdiction § 2.4.1 (3d ed.1999), quoted in Alabama Power Co., 307

consultation with the Education Department (see Section 2.4.5) and evidence is documented that the inmate

mathematical preciseness." 1972 Laws of Florida, SJR 1305, § 2(4). Since our apportionment decision, the United States

citizens of different States.” U.S. Const. art. III, § 2. 4 But despite the oft-repeated invocations

[subsequently set forth], the required findings of Section 2.4.5(E), and other applicable standards of the Comprehensive

privileges and immunities clause of Article IV, Section 2; (4) appellant’s guarantee of the pursuit of hap

letter then states: In accordance with 45 C.F.R. § 2.4, we disagree that the information sought is unavailable

PHILIP J. PADOVANO, FLORIDA APPELLATE PRACTICE, § 2.4 (2005). The Landowner's argument that the Board's

character_” Fla. Sup.Ct. Bar Admiss. Rule, art. Ill, § 2.4 Therefore, it is the applicant’s burden to satisfy

Philip J. Padovano, Florida Appellate Practice § 2:4 (2009). She contends that her notice of appeal has

parties." Philip J. Padovano, Florida Civil Practice § 2:4 (2010); see 56 Fla. Jur.2d Venue § 67 (2010). "[T]he

Valdes appeals. The jury instructions from Section 2.04[1] and 3.9[2] differ in only one respect with

approximately at the locations indicated." (Ex. 23 at 10, § 2-4.) The standard specification further stated that

violations of chapter 791 within twelve months. Id. at § 2(4). Apparently, at all relevant times, the County

” Def. Ex. 1, art. I, § 4, subsec. (B). 11. Section 2.04 (B) of the Policy Manual states the “APA will

102-385 (Code 1964, § 25-86.1; Ord. No. 2012-3756, § 2, 4-U-12) Secs. 74-2 — 74-35. Reserved. ORDINANCE

1978 Plan Doc. § 2.6 [EK00007]; 1997 Plan Doc. § 2.04(b) [EK00062]. See also Benefits Application (1979)

regulation of charitable solicitations, pursuant to Section 2.04(o), Pinellas County Charter, Laws of Florida

“tailoring stage.” Dan B. Dobbs, Law of Remedies § 2.4(6), at 113–14 (2d ed. 1993). The fundamental principle

further defined herein. [3] 1962 Amendment at Section 2. [4] The Court notes that Ms. Vreeland and Lori

legal recogni- tion to an unborn child.” H.B. 481 § 2(4). That “legitimate interest[] provide[s] a rational

Fla. Admin. Code R. 33-22.012, § 2-4, presently R. 33-601.314, § 2-4, which is the rule against fighting

Philip J. Padovano, Florida Appellate Practice § 2.4 (2007-08 ed.) ("If the untimely rehearing motion

lighting within these establishments. See id. at § 2(4). Presumably to ease in monitoring and enforcement

Enforcement Officer’s approval, as provided in Section 2.4 of this Exhibit B, Scope of Work, of the Notice

S. airport duty-free stores in violation of Section 2.4 Both § 1 and § 2 conspiracy claims “require the

quotation of the following portion of Chapter 69-1152, § 2.-4: “The money required to meet all obligations of

Common Utility Facilities referred to in Section 2.4) for the benefit of the Office Parcel

imposition of the fire service fees. See § 2.04, Fla. Stat. (2014). Therefore, while Ordinance

require the approval of the Board of Regents." Section 2, 4.1 Board of Regents Operating Manual. It is axiomatic

conclusive and binding upon all persons." (Doc. #43-2, § 2.4.) The Administrator also has the duty and discretion

passage disproves the appellants’ assertion. Section 2.4.2(iv) of the agreement provides: (iv) the approval

misdemeanors, which arise in Pinellas County”. Section 2(4), Ch. 65-720. Thus that Court lacks jurisdiction

misdemeanors, which arise in Pinellas County”. § 2(4) Ch. 65-720. The instant case being a prosecution

budget accounts and records falls to him or her. Section 2(4), Ch. 82-202, Laws of Florida. Therefore, pending

of such personnel, equipment or facilities. 3 Section 2(4)(g), Ch. 82-375, Laws of Florida. Compare, s

rehearing was untimely. See Padovano, supra, at § 2:4 (“A motion can suspend rendition only if it is directed

against fighting in Fla. Admin. Code R. 33-601.314, § 2-4 was not unconstitutionally vague or overbroad);

law enforcement problem.” Pub. Law No. 106-172, § 2 (4) (2000). 8 The DEA’s Final Rule

sewage, water, and lighting[.]"4 In addition, section 2.4(h) of the district's enabling legislation authorizes

following the stock purchase. In particular, section 2.4 of the Agreement stated that if the ACOI for

harm. See Erwin Chemerinsky, Federal Jurisdiction § 2.4.1 (1989). When determining ripeness, a court asks

however, has been changed by statute in Florida. Section 2.04, F. S., provides: No statute of this state

B. Nimmer & David Nimmer, 2 Nimmer on Copyright § 2.04[C] (2008). The 1980 amendments to the Copyright

7 years at H&M Builders for 1 month Part Two Section 2/4 Monthly gross wages, salary, and Monthly gross

was patently erroneous and in fact contrary to Section 2.04 of the Florida Standard Jury Instructions in

misdemeanors, which arise in Pinellas County.” Section 2(4), Ch. 65-720, 1965 Laws of Florida. Although

legal recogni- tion to an unborn child.” H.B. 481 § 2(4). That “legitimate interest[] provide[s] a rational

“tailoring stage.” Dan B. Dobbs, Law of Remedies § 2.4(6), at 113–14 (2d ed. 1993). The fundamental principle

Commission on Homeowners’ requested extension. See § 2.4.7(E), DELRAY BEACH, LAND DEV. REGULS. (2019).

Section 2.0b. of this Agreement. [[Image here]] Section 2.04 Liabilities Assumed. On the Closing Date, subject

for within the agreement itself: Harseo bought Section 2.04’s fourteen pages of representations. Unlike

officers and employees of the utilities authority. Section 2(4) of Ch. 69-1215 merely provides that `[e]ach

equipment from moisture and dampness. For example, Section 2.4 of the manual states in part: "An indoor switchgear

Admin. Code. R. 33-601.314, § 2-4 (formerly Fla. Admin. Code R. 33-22.012, § 2-4) (the fighting rule). A

J. Padovano, 2 Fla. Prac., Appellate Practice § 2:4 (2019 ed.) (“A motion can suspend rendition of an

4. TO WHAT DO THE WORDS "SAID SUM" RELATE IN SECTION 2(4)(a) OF CH. 83-115 — THE $50,000.00 CASH BENEFIT

Cfm. 2 See s. 2(1), Ch. 86-392, Laws of Fla. 3 Section 2 (4) (h), (i), and (j), Ch. 86-392 and Ch. 2010-268

(citing Erwin Chemerinsky, Federal Jurisdiction, § 2.4, p. 115 (1994))). In a facial challenge grounded

responsibility for, inter alia, keeping records, see § 2.4 (“Records”), preparing and distributing periodic

State of Florida. 1992 Fla. Laws ch. 92-85, § 2. 4 . In light of the Florida Supreme Court’s

functions or services which the act authorizes. Section 2(4)(a)-(g) and (i)-(k), Ch. 82-375, Laws of Florida

Liabilities (Section 2.03), and Excluded Liabilities (Section 2.04). Under Section 2.01(c) of the Asset Purchase

therein. 2 Fla. Prac., Appellate Practice § 2:4 (2016 ed.)

court decree; or (h) on the date specified in Section 2.4. The term "irreconcilable difference" used in