The 2024 Florida Statutes
|
||||||
|
. . . House Districts 29 and 31 contain 35.02% and 30.58% of the population of the city of Durham, respectively . . .
. . . not a recurring claim; (4) a $17.25 debt to a library was for an isolated purchase of a book; (5) $35.02 . . .
. . . T.O., 684 So.2d 814 (Fla.1996); § 35.02, Fla. Stat. (2015). . . .
. . . Plaintiff alleges that Section 35.02 of the lease pertaining to the Ronkonkoma Site (the “Lease”) provides . . .
. . . . § 35.02. . . .
. . . . §§31.02 (West 1994), 31.03, 35.02 (West Supp. 2003) ($20,000); but see, e.g., §32.31 (credit card or . . .
. . . (a) or § 35.02(b), and Martinez’s contention that the loss amount should be $5,733.68. . . . At the time of Martinez’s conviction, Texas Penal Code § 35.02 delineated two different offenses. . . . Thus, Martinez’s argument that § 35.02(b) might not involve fraud or deceit is without merit. . . . (a) prior to determining whether any subsection of § 35.02 did not necessarily entail, or have as an . . . Tex Pen.Code Ann. §§ 35.02(a) & (b) (Vernon 2003). . See James, 464 F.3d at 508. . . . .
. . . Larson, Employment Discrimination § 35.02, at 35-15 (2d ed.2001). . . .
. . . she is found inadmissible on seeking reentry.” 3 Gordon and Mailman, Immigration Law and Procedure, § 35.02 . . . Id. at § 35.02[3]. Moin cites Saxbe v. . . .
. . . ); Tolle, 1 Ill.Dec. at 439, 356 N.E.2d at 627; see also Illinois Pattern Jury Instructions (Civil) 35.02 . . . 330 N.E.2d at 512 (principal must authorize the doing and manner of the agent’s act); see also IPI 35.02 . . .
. . . 0) (a)-(f) (k) (D (a)-(l) (m) (n) (a)-(n) (o) $38.64 $1.36 $39.25 $.75 $40.00 $39.25 .75 34.10 5.20 35.02 . . .
. . . 50.60% 68.24% 31.76% 1986 49.31 50.69 68.02 31.98 1987 47.93 52.07 66.74 33.26 1988 46.29 53.71 64.98 35.02 . . .
. . . than county policy; state statutes embody state, not county, policy); Tex.Code Crim.Proc.Ann. art. 35.02 . . . Ann. arts. 19.34 (grand jurors), 35.02 (venire), 35.22 (impaneled jurors); Tex.R.Civ.P. 226 (venire), . . .
. . . . § 35.02, Fla.Stat. (1989). . . .
. . . Mertens, Law of Federal Income Taxation, sec. 35.02 (1988). . . .
. . . Federal Practice and Procedure: Criminal 2d Section 586; 8A Moore’s Federal Practice 2d, paragraph 35.02 . . .
. . . Moore, Moore’s Federal Practice ¶ 35.02[3] at 35-34 (2d ed. 1986); 3 C. . . .
. . . December 31, 1981 Report of Condition of Bank (call report), Mulally figured the book value to be $35.02 . . . its expert witness was that the book value, as derived from the December 31, 1981 call report, was $35.02 . . .
. . . United States, 279 F.2d 872, 872 (6th Cir.1960); 8A MooRe’s Federal Practice ¶ 35.02[3][b][v], at 35- . . .
. . . . §§ 35.02-.063 (1984), and the Attorney General of Minnesota. . . .
. . . Moore, Moore’s Federal Practice II 35.02, at 35-4 n. 4 (2d ed. 1968)), cert. denied sub nom. . . .
. . . See also, 5 vonKalinowski, Antitrust Laws and Trade Regulation § 35.02 (1983). . . .
. . . any other under the Rules, with the exception of the sentence itself.” 8A Moore’s Federal Practice ¶ 35.02 . . .
. . . indefinitely suspended arrearage payments upon the condition that petitioner make weekly support payments of $35.02 . . .
. . . Dansker, 581 F.2d at 73 (quoting 8A Moore’s Federal Practice f 35.02, at 35-4 n.4 (2d ed. 1968)). . . .
. . . Accord vonKalinowski, supra at § 35.02 (“services and facilities” clearly refers to any form of advertising . . . See also 5 vonKalinowski, supra at 35.02. . . .
. . . Census tracts 35.02, 35.03, 35.04, 36, 40.01, 40.04, 40.08, 40.09, 40.10, 40.11 and 40.-14. . . . Census tracts 28, 29.01, 29.03, 29.04, 30.01, 30.02, 31.01, 31.02, 32, 33.01, 33.02, 34, 35.01, 35.02 . . .
. . . Census Tract 32 1,059 Census Tract 33 1,543 Census Tract 34 3,956 Census Tract 35.01 1,723 Census Tract 35.02 . . .
. . . See 8A Moore’s Federal Practice— Criminal Rules j| 35.02[1], n.4 (1980 ed.) . . .
. . . . § 35.02[a] at page 35-4: It should be noted that the period is not defined as the time within which . . .
. . . count would run concurrently one with the other. . . . ” . 8A Moore’s Federal Practice, paragraphs 35.02 . . .
. . . Moore, Federal Practice Par. 35.02 at 35-4 n. 4 (2d ed. 1968). . In Addonizio v. . . .
. . . Moore, Federal Practice ¶ 35.02[1] at 35-4 n. 5 (2d ed. 1974); cf. United States v. . . .
. . . a leading authority, James William Moore, in Moore’s Federal Practice (2d ed., 1965) Vol. 8A, par. 35.02 . . . Moore, Federal Practice 35.02(2), at 35-36. . . . Moore, Federal Practice 35.02[a] (2d ed. 1965) (“The present language of the Rule should be rephrased . . .
. . . Accord, 8A Moore, Federal Practice 35.02[2] (1975). . In Martin v. . . .
. . . United States, 102 U.S.App.D.C. 71, 250 F.2d 396, 401 (1957); 8 Moore’s Federal Practice ¶ 35.02[1] at . . . Professor Robert Cipes, as author of Volume 8A, Moore’s Federal Practice, ¶ 35.02[2] observes: [T]he . . .
. . . Moore, Federal Practice, 1f 35.02(2) at 35-6; cf. United States v. . . .
. . . Crim.P. 35; 8A Moore, Federal Practice K 35.02[2]. . . .
. . . Moore, Federal Practice 11 35.02 [1] at 35-4 n. 5 (2d ed. 1974); cf. United States v. . . .
. . . Federal Practice and Procedure (Criminal), § 587 at p. 573; 8 A Moore’s Federal Practice (2d ed.), If 35.02 . . .
. . . Moore, Federal Practice H 35.02 [2] (2d ed. 1969). . . . In United States v. . . .
. . . Moore, Federal Practice ¶ 35.02 [2], pp. 35-6, n. 10.1 (2d ed. 1973). . . .
. . . See Article 1, Section 4, of the Texas Constitution, Vernon’s Ann.St. and Articles 19.34, 35.02, and . . .
. . . appellant in Craig argued the oaths required of grand jurors, witnesses, and jurors by articles 19.34, 35.02 . . . I, § 4; Vernon’s Ann.Tex.Code Crim.Proc. art. 19.34, art. 35.02, art. 35.22 (1965). . . .
. . . pools, and to joint ventures, the taxation of the income of which had proved troublesome.” 6 Mertens § 35.02 . . .
. . . Moore, Federal Practice ¶ 35.02 [2] (2d ed. 1969). See also United States v. . . .
. . . . § 35.02(4) states: “Since the motion for reduction of sentence is a plea for leniency, decision on . . .
. . . Moore, Federal Practice § 35.02[2] (2d ed. 1969). . . . Moore’s Federal Practice § 35.02 [2] (2d ed. 1968). . . .
. . . See also 8-A Moore’s Federal Practice, 2d ed., S. 35.02, page 35-6; 2 Federal Practice and Procedure, . . .
. . . Moore, Federal Practice, U 35.02 [1] at 35-3 (1972). . . .
. . . that the 12'0-day period provided by the Rule is jurisdictional (see 8A Moore’s Federal Practice, ¶[ 35.02 . . .
. . . See 8A Moore’s Federal Practice j[ 35.02 [4] (2d ed. 1970); 2 Wright, Federal Practice and Procedure . . .
. . . Mertens, Law of Federal Income Taxation, Vol. 6, Sec. 35.02, Vol. 7, Sec. 38.02. . . .
. . . We disagree. 8A Moore, Federal Practice j[35.02 [1] p. 35-3 (1970). . . .
. . . Moore, Federal Practice 1f1T 32.09, 35.02 (1970, Supp. 1970). . E. g., United States ex rel. . . .
. . . Moore, Federal Practice IT 35.02[2] (2d ed. 1969). See also United States v. . . .
. . . United States, 235 F.2d 459, 461 (5 Cir. 1956); see 8 Moore’s Federal Practice ff 35.02[2], at 35-4 ( . . .
. . . United States, 102 U.S.App.D.C. 71, 250 F.2d 396, 401 (1957); 8 Moore’s Federal Practice IT 35.02 [1] . . .
. . . In 8 Moore’s Federal Practice, 2d ed., § 35.02 [a], at page 35-4, it is said: “It should be noted that . . .
. . . It first improved for burial purposes 35.02 acres out of the original tract, which .it designated as . . .
. . . $35.05 per thousand, and, if the tax period be extended to May 31, 1935, the average selling price was $35.02 . . . Deducting the latter figure from the former would leave a net average sales price of $35.02 which tallies . . . government’s accountants and the plaintiff’s, as indicated by the fact that both witnesses agreed on $35.02 . . .
. . . in income taxes for the years 1920 to 1923, inclusive, in the amounts of $8.90, $25.81, $40.05 and $35.02 . . .
. . . losses, it appears that the creditors of this closed bank had received liquidating dividends aggregating 35.02 . . .
. . . Merritt & Chapman’s bill 4,022.89 y2 Commercial Lighterage Company’s bill G2.8S y2 Expenses of rehandling 35.02 . . .