Cases from cite.case.law:

NIKOOIE, v. JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N. A., 183 So. 3d 424 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . See, e.g., § 201.17, Fla. Stat. Glenn Wright Homes v. . . .

WPIX, INC. WNET. ORG, CBS CBS CW NBC NBC LLC, LLC, NBC MLB L. P. TV, L. L. C. WGBH v. IVI, INC., 691 F.3d 275 (2d Cir. 2012)

. . . . § 201.17); see also Oman, 17 F.3d at 346. . . .

BYES, v. J. ASTRUE,, 687 F.3d 913 (8th Cir. 2012)

. . . work and had recognized his borderline-age situation, Byes was eligible for benefits under grid rule 201.17 . . .

WPIX, INC. WNET. CBS CBS CW NBC NBC LLC, LLC, NBC MLB L. P. TV, L. L. C. WGBJ v. IVI, INC., 765 F. Supp. 2d 594 (S.D.N.Y. 2011)

. . . . § 201.17(Z)). . . . (quoting 37 C.F.R. 201.17(b)) that its regulation does not affirmatively allow industries which have . . .

NEJAT, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,, 359 F. App'x 574 (6th Cir. 2009)

. . . App.2, Table 1, Rule 201.17. . . .

GLENN WRIGHT HOMES DELRAY LLC B. Jr. v. A. LOWY,, 18 So. 3d 693 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2009)

. . . See, e.g., § 201.17, Fla. Stat. . . .

MONTGOMERY, v. WYETH, f k a AHP f k a f k a, 540 F. Supp. 2d 933 (E.D. Tenn. 2008)

. . . expiration dates were three years from the date of manufacture (Court File No. 84-4 p. 2); 21 C.F.R 201.17 . . .

CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS VI, LLC, d b a v. ELEAZER,, 412 F. Supp. 2d 588 (S.D.W. Va. 2006)

. . . . §§ 201.17(f)(2), (3). . . .

SANTIAGO v. Jo B. BARNHART,, 367 F. Supp. 2d 728 (E.D. Pa. 2005)

. . . The ALJ Did Not Err by Failing to Apply Rule 201.17 of the Grid to Find Plaintiff Disabled Plaintiff . . . contends the ALJ should have applied Rule 201.17 of the Medical-Vocational Guidelines, 20 C.F.R. . . . The criteria in Rule 201.17 coincide with plaintiffs vocational characteristics, except that Rule 201.17 . . .

SAVAGE, v. Jo B. BARNHART,, 372 F. Supp. 2d 922 (S.D. Tex. 2005)

. . . found Savage to be illiterate, Medical-Vocational Guideline, commonly referred to a the “grid rules,” 201.17 . . .

BARILLARO, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,, 216 F. Supp. 2d 121 (E.D.N.Y. 2002)

. . . Plaintiff claims she should have applied Rule 201.17, which is for individuals aged 45-49, who are illiterate . . . P, App. 2, Table 1, Rule 201.17. . . . Thus, in order to fall under Rule 201.17, plaintiff must establish that his prior work experience was . . . Therefore, ALJ Hoppenfeld should have applied Rule 201.17, leading to a finding of total disability. . . .

TOBEAY, v. A. HALTER,, 21 F. App'x 309 (6th Cir. 2001)

. . . Tobeay argues that the Commissioner erred by not finding that he was disabled pursuant to Rule 201.17 . . . Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 2, Rule 201.17, he should have been found disabled by the Commissioner. . . . As Tobeay has a limited ability to communicate in English, Rule 201.17 is not applicable to his case. . . .

D. HIGGINS, v. S. APFEL,, 222 F.3d 504 (8th Cir. 2000)

. . . the Guidelines mandate a determination of disability. 20 C.F.R. 404 Subpart P, App.2, Table 1 (Rule 201.17 . . . this court, Higgins argued that the ALJ should have found her disabled under the provisions of Rule 201.17 . . .

D. BEECH, v. S. APFEL,, 100 F. Supp. 2d 1323 (S.D. Ala. 2000)

. . . Plaintiff raised the following arguments in her Statement of Issues. (1) The ALJ failed to apply Rule 201.17 . . . an individual approaching advanced age (age fifty-six), legally blind in her left eye and that Rule 201.17 . . . Rule 201.17 applies to a younger individual between the ages of eighteen and forty-nine who is illiterate . . .

PANTOJAS, v. S. APFEL,, 87 F. Supp. 2d 334 (S.D.N.Y. 2000)

. . . . § 201(h) and Rule 201.17. . See 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). . Id. . Tirado v. . . .

SILVEIRA, v. S. APFEL, v. S., 204 F.3d 1257 (9th Cir. 2000)

. . . On appeal, Silveira argues that the Commissioner should have applied Rule 201.17, which requires a finding . . . P, app. 2, table 1, rule 201.17. . . . . Rule 201.17 dictates a disability finding for claimants who are limited to sedentary work, who are 45 . . . P, app. 2, table 1, rule 201.17. . . . Thus, Rule 201.17 applies to a claimant who is restricted to sedentary work, who is 45-49 years old, . . .

AMERICAN FIRST FEDERAL, INC. a v. LAKE FOREST PARK, INC. a B., 198 F.3d 1259 (11th Cir. 1999)

. . . A penalty for late payment is provided for separately in Section 201.17(2). . . . Section 201.17(2) of the Florida Statutes provides that "[i]f any document, instrument, or paper upon . . . Ann. § 201.17(2) (West 1999). . . . .

ORTIZ, v. S. CHATER,, 986 F. Supp. 479 (N.D. Ill. 1997)

. . . acquired any skills that could be transferred to sedentary work, the ALJ opined that neither Grid Rule 201.17 . . . Grid Rule 201.17, the application of which would have achieved Plaintiff's desired results, would have . . .

TORO, v. S. CHATER,, 937 F. Supp. 1083 (S.D.N.Y. 1996)

. . . Ill, Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 2, Rule 201.17. . . .

COLUMBIA PICTURES INDUSTRIES, INC. v. LIBERTY CABLE, INC., 919 F. Supp. 685 (S.D.N.Y. 1996)

. . . . § 201.17(b)(2) (1995). . . . Further, pursuant to the definition of a cable system in both 17 U.S.C. § 111(f) and 37 C.F.R. § 201.17 . . .

LUGO, v. S. CHATER,, 932 F. Supp. 497 (S.D.N.Y. 1996)

. . . In this case, the evidence strongly suggests that Rule 201.17, which applies to individuals who are “ . . .

ROSADO, v. E. SHALALA,, 868 F. Supp. 471 (E.D.N.Y. 1994)

. . . Plaintiff contends that he was limited to sedentary work, and thus should be found disabled under Rule 201.17 . . .

SATELLITE BROADCASTING AND COMMUNICATIONS ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA, v. OMAN,, 17 F.3d 344 (11th Cir. 1994)

. . . . § 201.17(k)). . . . The Copyright Office added to 37 C.F.R. § 201.17 paragraph (k), which provides: Satellite carriers and . . .

MOTION PICTURE ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA, INC. v. OMAN,, 969 F.2d 1154 (D.C. Cir. 1992)

. . . MPAA attached a “Proposed Rule,” which was headed “Substance of New § 201.17(l).” . . . It attached its “Proposed Rule,” a “New § 201.17(l).” . . . the final “rule” in the Federal Register. 5 U.S.C. § 553(d); see 54 Fed.Reg. at 14,221; 37 C.F.R. § 201.17 . . .

RIVERA, v. W. SULLIVAN, M. D., 771 F. Supp. 1339 (S.D.N.Y. 1991)

. . . P, App. 2, Table 1, Rule 201.17, which would mandate a finding of disability if plaintiff were 45 years . . . Such an analysis would require application of Rule 201.17, and would result in a finding of disability . . .

BURRIS, v. FIRST FINANCIAL CORPORATION,, 928 F.2d 797 (8th Cir. 1991)

. . . . § 201.17 (emphasis added). . . . acquisition fee is not a prepayment penalty, but rather, a “handling charge” as contemplated by 24 C.F.R. § 201.17 . . .

MOTION PICTURE ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA, INC. v. OMAN,, 750 F. Supp. 3 (D.C. Cir. 1990)

. . . . § 201.17(i) (1989). . . . The method for calculating the fee, found generally at 37 C.F.R. § 201.17 (1989), depends on the number . . .

VARGAS, v. W. SULLIVAN, M. D., 898 F.2d 293 (2d Cir. 1990)

. . . Id., Rule 201.17. . . .

L. SORENSON, v. R. BOWEN, M. D., 888 F.2d 706 (10th Cir. 1989)

. . . Sorenson complained that the AU should have applied table 1, rule 201.17 of the grids because Sorenson . . . P, app. 2, table 1, rule 201.17 (1988), is applicable to Soren-son. . . . P, app. 2, table 1, rule 201.17 (1988), we do not address the issue of whether or not the requisite level . . . This regulation is part of the explanation and definitions section illuminating table 1, in which rule 201.17 . . .

WELCHANCE v. R. BOWEN,, 731 F. Supp. 806 (M.D. Tenn. 1989)

. . . The plaintiff, on the other hand, argues that 201.19 is inapplicable and that 201.17 should have been . . . Not surprisingly, rule 201.17 dictates a conclusion of “disabled.” . . . RULES 201.18 AND 201.17 It could be that the AU was actually debating between 201.18 and 201.19. . . . This would only be true if the debate was between 201.17 and 201.18. . . . Instead, rule 201.17 must be applied to the time period after the plaintiff reached age 45. . . .

TAMEZ, v. W. SULLIVAN, M. D., 888 F.2d 334 (5th Cir. 1989)

. . . Tamez states that the AU erroneously found he was capable of light work, and that under Rule 201.17 of . . .

L. STARKS, v. R. BOWEN,, 873 F.2d 187 (8th Cir. 1989)

. . . Under Rule 201.17 of the Guidelines, a person of Starks’s residual functional capacity, age, and work . . . Starks claims that he is illiterate and that Rule 201.17 therefore directs a finding of “disabled.” . . .

C. L. TURNER, v. BOWEN,, 862 F.2d 708 (8th Cir. 1988)

. . . corrected to reflect the record, Turner would be automatically eligible for disability pursuant to Rule 201.17 . . .

CRAWFORD, v. R. BOWEN,, 687 F. Supp. 99 (S.D.N.Y. 1988)

. . . Plaintiff argues that even if the guidelines were applicable, a finding of disability is mandated by § 201.17 . . . Section 201.17 applies, however, to a claimant who is “illiterate or unable to communicate in English . . . P, App. 2 at § 201.17. . . .

CABLEVISION SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT COMPANY v. MOTION PICTURE ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA, INC. U. S., 836 F.2d 599 (D.C. Cir. 1988)

. . . . § 201.17(b)(1) (1987) — as inconsistent with congressional intent and endorsed instead the position . . . include one or more secondary transmissions of television or radio broadcast signals.” 37 C.F.R. § 201.17 . . .

SCOTT, v. R. BOWEN,, 652 F. Supp. 1477 (N.D. Ind. 1987)

. . . Having reviewed Rules 202.16 and 201.17 Section 404.1569 Regulation 4, Appendix 2, Subpart P, the AU . . .

BAUZO, v. R. BOWEN,, 803 F.2d 917 (7th Cir. 1986)

. . . The AU then applied Rule 201.17 of the “Grid”, 20 C.F.R. . . .

COX CABLE TUCSON, INC. v. LADD,, 795 F.2d 1479 (9th Cir. 1986)

. . . . § 201.17(h)(9) (hereinafter the Regulation), is void as contrary to law. . . . the CRT’s rate adjustments, the Copyright Office issued the Regulation challenged here. 37 C.F.R. § 201.17 . . . television market quota for importation of network and nonspecialty independent stations. 37 C.F.R. § 201.17 . . .

CABLEVISION COMPANY, v. MOTION PICTURE ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA, INC. NATIONAL CABLE TELEVISION ASSOCIATION, INC. v. COLUMBIA PICTURES INDUSTRIES, INC., 641 F. Supp. 1154 (D.D.C. 1986)

. . . . § 201.17(b)(1) (April 2, 1984). B. . . . television or radio broadcast signals, for additional set fees, and for converter fees.” 37 C.F.R. § 201.17 . . . Copyright Office and its Register to amend their definition of “gross receipts” contained in 37 C.F.R. § 201.17 . . .

MONTEIRO, v. M. HECKLER,, 641 F. Supp. 363 (S.D.N.Y. 1986)

. . . P, App. 2, Rule 201.17. . . .

FOSTER, v. M. HECKLER,, 780 F.2d 1125 (4th Cir. 1986)

. . . Ill, App. 2, Rule 201.17, (1983). . . .

RODRIGUEZ, v. M. HECKLER,, 621 F. Supp. 194 (S.D.N.Y. 1985)

. . . Subpart P, App. 2, § 201.17. . . .

STAMPS, v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES,, 633 F. Supp. 101 (E.D. Mich. 1985)

. . . court relied on Gory in evaluating a case strikingly similar to the case before this Court: Under Rule 201.17 . . .

ASSOCIATES COMMERCIAL CORPORATION, v. SEL- O- RAK CORPORATION,, 746 F.2d 1441 (11th Cir. 1984)

. . . . § 201.17 (1988). . . .

ASSOCIATES COMMERCIAL CORPORATION, v. SEL- O- RAK CORPORATION,, 746 F.2d 1441 (11th Cir. 1984)

. . . . § 201.17 (1983). . . .

REYES, v. M. HECKLER,, 601 F. Supp. 34 (S.D. Fla. 1984)

. . . Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 2, Rule 201.17), the AU’s decision must be reversed. . . . Rule 201.17 applies to Mr. . . . Reyes were able to perform a full range of sedentary work, Rule 201.17 would be applicable and would . . .

VEGA, v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES,, 582 F. Supp. 1579 (D.P.R. 1984)

. . . Applying Rule 201.17, Table 1 of Appendix 2, Subpart P, of the Social Security Administration Regulations . . . Rule 201.17, Table 1, Appendix 2, Sub-part P of the Regulations mandates a finding of disability for . . .

MILLNER, v. S. SCHWEIKER,, 725 F.2d 243 (4th Cir. 1984)

. . . sedentary work, the exertional category below light work. 20 C.F.R. part 404, subpart P, appendix 2, Rule 201.17 . . .

A. BAILEY, v. M. HECKLER,, 576 F. Supp. 621 (D.D.C. 1984)

. . . that the facts mandate a finding that he is “illiterate” which would require that the AU apply Rule 201.17 . . .

In LJP, INC. d b a S. ROEMELMEYER, v. ROYAL CROWN BOTTLING CO. OF FLORIDA,, 34 B.R. 39 (Bankr. S.D. Fla. 1983)

. . . . § 201.17. Statutes imposing taxes must be construed strictly in favor of the taxpayer. . . .

ASSOCIATES COMMERCIAL CORPORATION, v. SEL- O- RAK CORPORATION,, 33 B.R. 394 (S.D. Fla. 1983)

. . . See § 201.17(1) Fla.Stat. (1981). . . . T.C.A. § 67-4102, Item S(b), with § 201.17(1), Fla.Stat. (1981). . . . .

FORD, v. HECKLER,, 572 F. Supp. 992 (E.D.N.C. 1983)

. . . Under Rule 201.17, Table 1, Appendix 2, a younger individual between ages 45 and 49 who is illiterate . . .

E. KEENEY v. M. HECKLER,, 568 F. Supp. 1145 (D. Md. 1983)

. . . He then applied the grids, Rule 201.17, which assumes the following factors: advanced age, high school . . .

R. ZAYAS, v. M. HECKLER,, 577 F. Supp. 121 (S.D.N.Y. 1983)

. . . capacity, plaintiff stated in his letter that he met the criteria to be considered “disabled” under Rule 201.17 . . . Rule 201.17, Table 1, directs a conclusion of “disabled” for a person who is 45-49 years old, unskilled . . . It is clear that the term “illiteracy" in Rule 201.17 means illiteracy in English, not illiteracy in . . . Plaintiff’s illiteracy in English, therefore, places him squarely within Rule 201.17, which directs the . . .

HOLLIDAY, v. SCHWEIKER,, 563 F. Supp. 1272 (N.D. Ill. 1983)

. . . regulations, finds the appropriate combination of factors listed on one of the rows (such as Rules 201.17 . . . of Holliday’s previous work experience and his level of education are also relevant to whether Rule 201.17 . . . Rule 201.17 provides that a claimant who is 45 to 49 years of age, is illiterate or unable to communicate . . .

NEEDLE, v. LOWENBERG,, 421 So. 2d 678 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1982)

. . . . § 201.17, Fla.Stat. (1976). . . .

In SEL- O- RAK CORPORATION, ASSOCIATES COMMERCIAL CORPORATION, v. SEL- O- RAK CORPORATION,, 26 B.R. 223 (Bankr. S.D. Fla. 1982)

. . . Sec. 201.17(1). Additionally, F.S.A. . . . Sec. 201.17(2)(b) provides for the payment of a penalty to the Florida Department of Revenue for failure . . .

NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF BROADCASTERS, v. COPYRIGHT ROYALTY TRIBUNAL, NATIONAL PUBLIC RADIO, v. COPYRIGHT ROYALTY TRIBUNAL, MAJOR LEAGUE BASEBALL, v. COPYRIGHT ROYALTY TRIBUNAL CANADIAN BROADCASTING CORPORATION, v. COPYRIGHT ROYALTY TRIBUNAL, AMERICAN SOCIETY OF COMPOSERS, AUTHORS AND PUBLISHERS, v. COPYRIGHT ROYALTY TRIBUNAL,, 675 F.2d 367 (D.C. Cir. 1982)

. . . . §§ 201.11, 201.17, most systems apparently do not comply. Tr. 5/5/80, J. . . .

THOMAS, v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES,, 659 F.2d 8 (1st Cir. 1981)

. . . Under Rules 201.03 and 201.17 of the Table, appellant must be determined to be not disabled, once the . . .

STEADMAN v. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, 450 U.S. 91 (U.S. 1981)

. . . . §§ 201.17 (g) (2), 201.21. Section 17 (a) of the Securities Act of 1933, 15 U. S. . . .

VEGA, v. HARRIS,, 636 F.2d 900 (2d Cir. 1981)

. . . medical-vocational guidelines mandate a determination of disability, 20 C.F.R. 404 Subpart P, App. 2, Table 1 (Rule 201.17 . . . ); 416 Subpart I, App. 2, Table 1 (Rule 201.17) (1980). . . .

VEGA, v. A. CALIFANO, Jr., 491 F. Supp. 974 (S.D.N.Y. 1980)

. . . Rule 201.17, upon which plaintiff would rely, provides that a claimant between the ages of 45 to 49, . . . plaintiff would not be considered illiterate and accordingly not considered disabled pursuant to Rule 201.17 . . .

ANDEAN INVESTMENT COMPANY, v. STATE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,, 370 So. 2d 377 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1978)

. . . Zuckerman-Vernon Corporation, supra, is controlled by Section 201.17(2), Florida Statutes (1975) as it . . .

BERKLEY LAND AND INVESTMENT CORPORATION S. v. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION,, 575 F.2d 77 (4th Cir. 1978)

. . . . § 201.17(d), which provides, in pertinent part: (d) Review by the Commission pursuant to Petition for . . . Rule 17(e), 17 C.F.R. § 201.17(e), indicates that where summary affirmance occurs, briefs are not filed . . .

WIN- SAN BUILDING CORPORATION, v. STATE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,, 358 So. 2d 112 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1978)

. . . tax, and that a 100% penalty was owed for failure to apply such tax stamps under Sections 201.02 and 201.17 . . . By the terms of Section 201.17, Florida Statutes (1975) one who makes or receives a document or instrument . . . inherent power of the courts to reduce or modify a documentary tax penalty imposed pursuant to Section 201.17 . . . Ch. 77-281, amending Section 201.17 (1975) was held not to operate retroactively. . . .

R. RAINEY, C. J. v. STATE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,, 353 So. 2d 207 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1977)

. . . documentary stamp tax alleged to be due under F.S. 201.08 plus a penalty of like amount pursuant to F.S. 201.17 . . .

STATE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, v. ZUCKERMAN- VERNON CORPORATION, ZUCKERMAN- VERNON CORPORATION, v. STATE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,, 354 So. 2d 353 (Fla. 1977)

. . . DCA 1976), upon the issues of: (1) whether imposition of the 100% penalty assessment under Section 201.17 . . . If the amount of the penalty assessed pursuant to § 201.17(2), F.S., is a matter generally within the . . . The taxpayer alternatively suggests that Ch. 77-281, Laws of Florida, rather than Section 201.17(2), . . . Under Section 201.17(2), Florida Statutes (1975), the percentage penalty is the same in each case- — . . . Subsections (2) and (3) of section 201.17, Florida Statutes, 1976 Supplement, are amended to read: “201.17 . . .

A. LEWIS, v. CREATIVE DEVELOPERS, LTD. a, 350 So. 2d 828 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1977)

. . . (appellee herein) does not have to pay the interest penalty set forth in Section 201.17(2)(c), Florida . . . Section 201.17, Florida Statutes, states as follows: (1) Whoever makes, signs, issues, or accepts, or . . . While the matter was stayed Section 201.17(2)(c) of the Florida Statutes was enacted providing for interest . . . The lower court addressed the issue of whether or not Section 201.17(2)(c), Florida Statutes, was applicable . . . was stayed by this Court pending the outcome of an appellate case dealing with similar facts, Section 201.17 . . .

ZUCKERMAN- VERNON CORP. v. STATE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,, 339 So. 2d 685 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1976)

. . . If the amount of the penalty assessed pursuant to § 201.17(2), F.S., is a matter generally within the . . .

FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, v. A. DE MARIA,, 338 So. 2d 838 (Fla. 1976)

. . . petitioner, from attempting to collect the documentary stamp tax and penalty pursuant to Sections 201.02 and 201.17 . . .

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, v. S. CRISP A., 337 So. 2d 404 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1976)

. . . . § 201.02 and § 201.17 are not applicable to the subject matter of the conveyance upon which the Department . . . Stat. § 201.17 violates the equal protection and due process clauses of the constitutions of Florida . . .

ASSOCIATED DRY GOODS CORPORATION, a d b a s v. DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,, 335 So. 2d 832 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1976)

. . . penalty imposed by the Department of Revenue (Department) pursuant to the provisions of Florida Statute 201.17 . . . tax in the sum of $17,925.00 (Florida Statute 201.08[2]) and a penalty in a like sum (Florida Statute 201.17 . . . assessment of documentary tax (F.S. 201.08[2]) and rejected the applicability of the penalty (F.S. 201.17 . . . correctly asserts that the sole statutory authority for imposition of same is found in Florida Statute 201.17 . . . As pointed out by the Department, Florida Statute 201.17(2) provides that “[a]ny document, instrument . . .

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE v. BROOKWOOD ASSOCIATES, LIMITED,, 324 So. 2d 184 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1975)

. . . to F.S. 201.021 and that in addition a penalty assessment in a like amount was made pursuant to F.S. 201.17 . . .

DOMINION LAND AND TITLE CORPORATION, v. DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,, 320 So. 2d 815 (Fla. 1975)

. . . consider a direct appeal from an order of the Circuit Court of Dade County holding constitutional Section 201.17 . . . Suit was filed in the Circuit Court alleging estoppel and challenging the constitutionality of Section 201.17 . . . It is our view, and we so hold, that Section 201.17(2), Florida Statutes, is constitutional. . . . collecting delinquent documentary stamp taxes, we do not feel that the penalty assessed by Section 201.17 . . . Article V, Section 3(b)(1), Florida Constitution. . “201.17 Penalties for failure to pay tax required . . .

NORTH PORT BANK, v. STATE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,, 313 So. 2d 683 (Fla. 1975)

. . . transactions; that these additional taxes were improper and illegal; that the penalties assessed under Section 201.17 . . .

INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS, LOCAL v. H. BOLDT,, 388 F. Supp. 491 (S.D. Ohio 1975)

. . . . § 201.17. . . .

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION v. AMERICAN TELEPHONE AND TELEGRAPH COMPANY, 365 F. Supp. 1105 (E.D. Pa. 1973)

. . . . § 201.17 pursuant to the Economic Stabilization Act of 1970, as amended, Pub.L. . . .

v., 412 U.S. 958 (U.S. 1973)

. . . . § 201.17 (c), which provided that it shall be a violation of Pay Board regulations to “[i]n-duce, solicit . . . of a wage and salary increase not authorized by such regulations or Pay Board decision . . . 6 CFR §201.17 . . .

REA EXPRESS, INC. v. BROTHERHOOD OF RAILWAY, AIRLINE AND STEAMSHIP CLERKS, FREIGHT HANDLERS, EXPRESS AND STATION EMPLOYEES, AFL- CIO,, 358 F. Supp. 760 (S.D.N.Y. 1973)

. . . . § 201.17 (1972) (“[lit shall not be a violation to bargain for ... or agree to (as contrasted with . . .

JENNINGS v. P. SHULTZ,, 355 F. Supp. 1198 (D.D.C. 1973)

. . . . § 201.17 (1972). . . .

McGUIRE SHAFT AND TUNNEL CORPORATION, a v. LOCAL UNION NO. UNITED MINE WORKERS OF AMERICA OLD BEN COAL CORPORATION, a v. LOCAL UNION NO. OF UNITED MINE WORKERS OF AMERICA SOUTHWESTERN ILLINOIS COAL CORPORATION, a v. LOCAL UNION NO. OF UNITED MINE WORKERS OF AMERICA ROBERTS AND SCHAEFER COMPANY, INC. a v. LOCAL NO. UNITED MINE WORKERS, 475 F.2d 1209 (Temp. Emer. Ct. App. 1973)

. . . . § 201.17 and for violating the arbitration provisions of collective bargaining agreements between the . . . Pay Board Reg. § 201.17 declared it “a violation of the Pay Board regulations, subject to the sanctions . . . § 201.10 without material change (37 F.R. 24960). . 37 F.R. 4899, March 7, 1972; the substance of § 201.17 . . .

UNITED STATES v. INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS, LOCAL NO., 475 F.2d 1204 (Temp. Emer. Ct. App. 1973)

. . . the wage increase, as demanded by appellant, was a violation of Pay Board Ruling No. 34 and 6 C.F.R. 201.17 . . . The Pay Board issued Regulations on March 7, 1972, 6 C.F.R. 201.17 (37 F.R. 4899), providing in part . . . This resulted in the violation of 6 C.F.R. 201.17 (6 C.F.R. 201.41). . . . Issue: Would it constitute a violation of Economic Stabilization Regulations, 6 CFR 201.17, 37 F.R. 4899 . . . Section 201.17, among other things, prohibits the payment or receipt of any portion of a wage and salary . . .

LOCAL OF AMALGAMATED MEAT CUTTERS AND BUTCHER WORKMEN OF NORTH AMERICA v. UNITED STATES, 468 F.2d 946 (Temp. Emer. Ct. App. 1972)

. . . Accord, Reg. 201.17, 36 F.R. 25427. . . .

PLUMBERS LOCAL UNION NO. v. CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY STABILIZATION COMMITTEE T., 350 F. Supp. 6 (S.D. Fla. 1972)

. . . It is implicit in both Pay Board Ruling 34 and Section 201.17 of the Pay Board Regulations that payments . . .

INTERNATIONAL LONGSHOREMEN S AND WAREHOUSEMEN S UNION, v. PAY BOARD B., 55 F.R.D. 5 (N.D. Cal. 1972)

. . . . § 201.17, as most recently amended by 37 Fed.Reg. 4899 (March 7, 1972), which would bar such negotiations . . .

DAVIS, NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, v. SERVIS EQUIPMENT COMPANY,, 341 F. Supp. 1298 (N.D. Tex. 1972)

. . . Sec. 201.17. 11. . . .

W. HANLY, C. Jr. v. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION,, 415 F.2d 589 (2d Cir. 1969)

. . . . § 201.17(g) (2), “On review the Commission may affirm, reverse, modify, set aside or remand for further . . .

UNITED STATES BIO- GENICS CORP. v. K. CHRISTENBERRY,, 173 F. Supp. 645 (S.D.N.Y. 1959)

. . . . §§ 201.17, 201.29(g) (Supp. 1959). . . .

BORG- JOHNSON ELECTRONICS, INC. v. K. CHRISTENBERRY, N. Y., 169 F. Supp. 746 (S.D.N.Y. 1959)

. . . Section'201.17 of the Rules provides: “Judicial Officer. . . .