The 2024 Florida Statutes
|
||||||
|
. . . See Cohen's Handbook, supra note 8, § 15.09 at 1053. . . . Cohen's Handbook, supra note 8, § 15.09 at 1053. . . .
. . . per-unit rate (when it should have calculated the ad valorem rate) and that the correct dumping margin was 15.09% . . .
. . . . § 15.09. . . .
. . . Clair, Jefferson, and Blount Counties, was overpopulated by 15.09 percent. . . .
. . . Haskell's regular hourly rate was $15.09. (Friederichs Aff. Ex. III.) . . . .
. . . Galligan, Jr., Louisiana Tort Law § 15.09 (2004 ed.), at 15-17 to 15-18. . . .
. . . Barkley and Barbara Clark, 2 The Law of Secured Transactions Under the Uniform Commercial Code, ¶ 15.09 . . .
. . . project called “Brewery Creek Center” in Elmwood Township, Leelanau County, Michigan, on approximately 15.09 . . .
. . . 15.67% Amortized OID 0 6 5.10 4.34 3.68 3.13 2.66 2.36 Unamortized OID 40 34 28.90 24.57 20.88 17.75 15.09 . . . 15% 15% Amortized OID 0 6 5.10 4.34 3.68 3.13 2.66 2.26 Unamortized OID 40 34 28.90 24.57 20.88 17.75 15.09 . . .
. . . Stanmore, 636 F.2d 986, 990 (5th Cir.1981); Seagraves, 629 F.2d at 390; 3 Moore et al., supra, ¶ 15.09 . . .
. . . Commerce calculated amended dumping margins of 15.09% for Ziyang, 19.68% for FHTK, 14.20% for Harmoni . . .
. . . Commerce calculated amended dumping margins of 15.09% for Ziyang, 19.68% for FHTK, 14.20% for Harmoni . . .
. . . Galligan, Jr., Louisiana Tort Law § 15.09 (Release No. 4, 2nd ed.2007). . La. . . .
. . . Under the settlement, those class members who did not opt out of the class will each receive $15.09, . . . calculations, this means that each class member who did not opt out of the settlement is entitled to receive $15.09 . . .
. . . Article 15.09, in turn, allowed Chesterfield to record a "Notice or Memorandum of Lease” in the registry . . .
. . . The patent also reports an erroneous Hexose value for the CHO derived EPO product (15.09) compared to . . .
. . . In window 20, black pipe fitters make up 7.39% of the workforce but received 15.09% of the job referrals . . .
. . . The district court, in determining that Pirre was responsible for 15.09 kilograms of cocaine, relied . . .
. . . on possession of more than 15 kilograms of cocaine, when chemist estimated that the offense involved 15.09 . . .
. . . independent user of a term, this is evidence that distinctiveness is lacking. 2 McCarthy On Trademarks § 15.09 . . .
. . . Guide (MB) ¶ 15.09[3], at 15-27. . . .
. . . Guide (MB) ¶ 15.09[3], at 15-27. . . .
. . . Nov. 4, 1993) (nonprecedential) ($360/unit contract price awarded despite $15.09/unit cost for excess . . .
. . . Nov. 4, 1993) (nonpreeedential) ($360/unit contract price awarded despite $15.09/unit cost for excess . . .
. . . He appealed, contending that the estimated weight of 15.09 kilograms was so close to the 15 kilogram . . . that the government had proved, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the weight of the cocaine was 15.09 . . .
. . . . § 15.09 (1988), copies of Standard’s unsolicited proposals were marked with the appropriate proprietary . . .
. . . the presen-tence report’s assignment of a base offense level of 34, based on an alleged net weight of 15.09 . . . After the hearing, the district court found that the government had proved the weight of the cocaine as 15.09 . . . DISCUSSION Pirre contends that because the estimated weight of 15.09 kilograms was so close to the 15 . . . any possibility of an over-estimate by dropping the tenths of a gram and rounding the figure down to 15.09 . . . In his view, the estimated total of 15.09 kilograms was a minimum figure, derived from a conservative . . .
. . . See generally 3 Moore’s Federal Practice 15.09 (2d ed. 1980). . . .
. . . Alternatively, taking a price of $15.09 per share as a hypothetical premium value for the control of . . .
. . . hours worked $9.00 per hour =$ 769.5012 (2) Total Sunday and Night premium =$ 170.10 (3) 74.5 hours at $15.09 . . . per hour =$1,124.55 ($15.09 = one and one-half regular rate) Total pay entitlement: =$2,064.15 The key . . .
. . . of Florida Manual on Traffic Control and Safe Practices (MTCSP) which was incorporated into Rule 14-15.09 . . .
. . . See Moore, supra, ¶ 15.09, at 15-102. . . .
. . . See 2A Moore’s Federal Practice, supra, ¶ 8.07[1]; 3 Moore’s Federal Practice, supra, HU 15.09 and 15 . . . See 3 Moore’s Federal Practice and Procedure, supra, ¶ 15.09 (leave to amend should be denied if such . . .
. . . Moore, Moore's Federal Practice ¶~f 15.09, 15.11 (1985). . . . .
. . . Moore’s Federal Practice, ¶ 15.09 (2d Ed.1985), citing Wallace v. . . .
. . . Moore, Moore’s Federal Practice IT 15.09 (2d ed. 1985). . . . Moore, supra, ¶ 15.09; 13B C. Wright, A. Miller & E. Cooper, supra, § 3611. . . .
. . . Commerce initiated an investigation and found weighted-average dumping margins of 15.09% for plaintiff . . .
. . . Commerce initiated an investigation and found weighted-average dumping margins of 15.09% for plaintiff . . .
. . . Harris, 629 F.2d 385, 390 (5th Cir.1980); 3 Moore’s Federal Practice ¶ 15.09 (2d ed. 1983). . . .
. . . Moore, Moore’s Federal Practice ¶ 15.09 (2d ed. 1983), states the rule with respect to amendments to . . .
. . . Moore, Moore’s Federal Practice § 15.09 (2d ed. 1982). . . .
. . . See generally 3 Moore’s Federal Practice f 15.09 (2d ed. 1980). . . .
. . . See 3 Moore’s Federal Practice ¶ 15.09 at 15-130-31 (2d Ed.1978). . . .
. . . . § 15.09. . . .
. . . and Black-mar’s Federal Jury Practice and Instructions (Third Edition), at Section 15.12 and Section 15.09 . . .
. . . Section 15.09 of the Pennsylvania Rules of Racing provides, inter alia: “. . . and every person who is . . . Although there is no statute specifically authorizing the search, Rule 15.09 of the Commission clearly . . .
. . . , 313 U.S. 559, 61 S.Ct. 835, 85 L.Ed. 1520 (1941); 3 Moore, Federal Practice, § 15.08[2] at 878, § 15.09 . . .
. . . See 3 Moore’s Federal Practice ¶ 15.09. . . .
. . . Moore $ 15.09 2) Cost of copy of deposition of Dr. . . .
. . . C-71, Sections 15.09 and 15.10). 32. MELCO, in its answers to interrogatories (App. . . .
. . . Wright & Miller, Federal Practice and Procedure, Civil § 1685; 3 Moore’s Federal Practice ¶[ 15.09. . . . Rule 21, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.; 3 Moore’s Federal Practice (2d ed.), Sections 15.09 . . .
. . . Donnelly Garment Company, 121 F.2d 561, 563 (8th Cir. 1941); 3 Moore’s Federal Practice ff 15.09, at . . .
. . . (See 3 Moore’s Federal Practice § 15.09). . . .
. . . See also 3 Moore’s Fed.Prac. para. 15.09, and cases there cited. . . .
. . . .2d 501 (1967), invalidated a Florida plan of apportionment with maximum percentage deviations from 15.09% . . .
. . . Moore, Federal Practice ¶ 15.09 (2nd ed. 1968); 6 C. Wright and A. . . .
. . . The population variances ranged from 15.09% overrepresentation to 10.56% underrepresentation in the Senate . . .
. . . . ¶ 15.09 at 945. . . .
. . . See 3 Moore, Federal Practice § 15.09, p. 947, and cases cited therein. . . . .
. . . above estate, showed the following payments: March 22, 1967, to Tampa Electric Company, the sum of $15.09 . . . every instance, to insist upon the filing of a formal written claim in order to pay such claims as $15.09 . . .
. . . See, e.g., 3 Moore’s Federal Practice ¶ 15.09. . . .
. . . See generally 3 Moore, Federal Practice ¶ 15.09 (2d ed. 1968). . . .
. . . Subsection 6 adds an additional §15.09 to article 15. . . .
. . . dropped, if they are not indispensible, and thereby perfect jurisdiction.” 3 Moore’s Federal Practice, ¶ 15.09 . . .
. . . complaint to allege properly the existence of federal question jurisdiction. 3 Moore’s Federal Practice, ¶ 15.09 . . .
. . . constitutionally valid although the senate districts ranged in population from 87,-595 to 114,053 or from 15.09% . . .
. . . The senate districts range from 87,595 to 114,053 in population per senator, or from 15.09% overrepresented . . .
. . . , we find that the senate districts range from 87,595 to 114,053 in population per senator, or from 15.09% . . .
. . . Fed.R.Civ.P. 15; see 3 Moore, Federal Practice, § 15.09 (1963). . . .
. . . 2.65 3.45 Madison . 37,245 3.50 4.87 3.69 Sullivan. 55,712 3.00 4.07 5.57 Hamilton. 131,971 6.00 6.00 15.09 . . .
. . . 7,798.84 709.89 $306.09 2,765.73 $747.73 9,802.49 449.91 $201.90 2,646.80 76.59 Oil tanks. 192.67 55.87 15.09 . . .
. . . And in 3 Moore’s Federal Practice 837-838 (Para. 15.09), it is said that, “The new section does not eliminate . . .
. . . . § 1653; 3 Moore, Federal Practice, § 15.09 (2d ed. 1949). . . . .
. . . .; 3 Moore’s Federal Practice (2d ed.), Sections 15.09 and 15.15, pp. 836, et seq., and 850, et seq. . . .
. . . See. 15.09, p. 836. . . .
. . . consideration received by both groups for 113,144 shares sold pursuant to the contract was $1,707,713.28, or $15.09 . . . in the plan had participated in the sale on an equal basis, the minority group would have received $15.09 . . .
. . . . $75,000 Still to be paid and’divided... 15.09?’ . . .
. . . .); extreme draft, 4.6 m. (15.09 ft.); displacement, 1,159 tons; H. . . .
. . . He is entitled to $11.09 wages, and $4 received by the vessel for his boots; in all, $15.09. . . . Decree for libellant for $15.09, without costs to either party. . . .
. . . . — Face of coupons. 174,545 00 15.09 premium. 27,752 66 - 202,297 66 1874. — Face of coupons. 173,250 . . .