Cases from cite.case.law:

WILLIAMS v. GELT FINANCIAL CORPORATION, 237 B.R. 590 (E.D. Pa. 1999)

. . . According, we subtract $592.00 from $842.32 for a total finance charge of $250.32. . . .

R. DEES, v. CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, HAYWARD,, 33 F. Supp. 2d 1190 (N.D. Cal. 1998)

. . . . § 60-250.20 to § 60-250.32, 41 C.F.R. § 60-741.20 to § 60-741.32. . . .

UNITED STATES v. FERRANTI,, 928 F. Supp. 206 (E.D.N.Y. 1996)

. . . Shortly after the fire, defendant mailed an insurance claim falsely asserting that $55,-250.32 in merchandise . . .

P. BARRON, v. NIGHTINGALE ROOFING, INC., 842 F.2d 20 (1st Cir. 1988)

. . . Section 60-250.32 provides that “[t]he procedures set forth in the regulations in this part govern all . . . In fact, this is made clear by § 60-250.32’s statement that the regulations govern all disputes” concerning . . .

FIDELITY FINANCIAL SERVICES, v. SCHWEITZER,, 16 B.R. 476 (W.D. Ky. 1981)

. . . Successive garnishments by FFS realized $250.32. . . .

In SCHWEITZER,, 17 B.R. 39 (Bankr. W.D. Ky. 1981)

. . . garnished in the amounts of $58.56, $64.95, $63.03, and $63.78, respectively, for a total amount of $250.32 . . . It is evident from the facts of this case that the garnishments in the total amount of $250.32 meet all . . . WHEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that debtor’s motion to compel the return of $250.32 transferred . . .