The 2023 Florida Statutes (including Special Session C)

. . . explained that the District of Columbia’s Comprehensive Merit Personnel Act (“CMPA”), D.C.Code §§ 1-601.01 . . . name” because the District of Columbia's Comprehensive Merit Personnel Act ("CMPA”), D.C.Code §§ 1-601.01 . . .

BARRYMAN- TURNER, v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,, 115 F. Supp. 3d 126 (D.D.C. 2015)

. . . Code §§ 1-601.01, et seq., and received those benefits from March 3, 1996 until May 16, 1998. . . .

YOUNGER, v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA PUBLIC SCHOOLS,, 60 F. Supp. 3d 130 (D.D.C. 2014)

. . . Younger’s claim is preempted by the Comprehensive Merit Personnel Act (CMPA), D.C.Code §§ 1-601.01 et . . . representation and collective bargaining under the Comprehensive Merit Personnel Act (CMPA), D.C.Code §§ 1-601.01 . . .

McCORMICK, Jr. v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,, 752 F.3d 980 (D.C. Cir. 2014)

. . . the district court held that the District of Columbia Comprehensive Merit Personnel Act, D.C.Code § 1-601.01 . . .

JOHNSON, v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,, 947 F. Supp. 2d 123 (D.D.C. 2013)

. . . The District also argues that the Comprehensive Merit Personnel Act (“CMPA”), D.C.Code § 1-601.01, et . . .

BAUMANN, v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,, 933 F. Supp. 2d 19 (D.D.C. 2013)

. . . Code § 1-601.01 et seq., established the PERB, which decides “whether unfair labor practices have been . . .

DURANT, Jr. v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,, 932 F. Supp. 2d 53 (D.D.C. 2013)

. . . that the District of Columbia Government Comprehensive Merit Personnel Act (“CMPA”), D.C.Code §§ 1-601.01 . . .

L. DAVIS, v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,, 949 F. Supp. 2d 1 (D.D.C. 2013)

. . . The District also argues that the Comprehensive Merit Personnel Act (“CMPA”), D.C.Code § 1-601.01, et . . .

BADGETT, v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,, 925 F. Supp. 2d 23 (D.D.C. 2013)

. . . administrative process prescribed by the Comprehensive Merit Protection Act (“CMPA”), D.C.Code §§ 1-601.01 . . .

M. WINDER, v. ERSTE,, 905 F. Supp. 2d 19 (D.D.C. 2012)

. . . Comprehensive Merit Personnel Act (“CMPA”), D.C.Code 1-601.01 et seq. . . .

STEINBERG, v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,, 901 F. Supp. 2d 63 (D.D.C. 2012)

. . . Br. at 10 (citing D.C.Code §§ 1-601.01 through 1-635.01). True as this may be, it misses the point. . . .

McCORMICK, Jr. v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,, 899 F. Supp. 2d 59 (D.D.C. 2012)

. . . Code § 1-601.01 et seq. (2001), such common law claims are preempted.” Lewis v. . . .

G. ROWE, v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,, 892 F. Supp. 2d 174 (D.D.C. 2012)

. . . her termination, it is probable that the Comprehensive Merit Personnel Act ("CMPA”), see D.C.Code § 1-601.01 . . .

LEWIS, v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,, 885 F. Supp. 2d 421 (D.D.C. 2012)

. . . District of Columbia, 598 F.Supp.2d 30, 34 (D.D.C.2009); see D.C.Code § 1-601.01 et seq. . . .

OWENS, v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,, 875 F. Supp. 2d 75 (D.D.C. 2012)

. . . privileges under the District of Columbia Comprehensive Merit Personnel Act (“CMPA”), D.C.Code § 1-601.01 . . . privileges under the District of Columbia Comprehensive Merit Personnel Act (“CMPA”), D.C.Code § 1-601.01 . . . D.C.Code §§ 1-601.01, et seq., The CMPA establishes procedures governing employees of the District of . . .

AMVETS POST v. RUTTER,, 863 F. Supp. 2d 670 (N.D. Ohio 2012)

. . . . § 36-601.01; Haw.Rev.Stat. § 328J-1 et seq.; N.Y. Pub. Health Law § 1399-0. . . .

SAINT- JEAN, v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,, 846 F. Supp. 2d 247 (D.D.C. 2012)

. . . Comprehensive Merit Personnel Act (“CMPA”), D.C.Code § 1-601.01, et seq. (2001) under which the plaintiffs . . .

SAINT- JEAN, v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,, 844 F. Supp. 2d 16 (D.C. Cir. 2012)

. . . second amended complaint are preempted by the Comprehensive Merit Personnel Act ("CMPA”), D.C.Code § 1-601.01 . . .

PAYNE, v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,, 808 F. Supp. 2d 164 (D.D.C. 2011)

. . . claims pursuant to the District of Columbia Comprehensive Merit Personnel Act (“CMPA”), D.C.Code §§ 1-601.01 . . .

KONE, v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,, 808 F. Supp. 2d 80 (D.D.C. 2011)

. . . retirement falls under the District’s Comprehensive Merit Personnel Act (“CMPA”), see D.C.Code § 1-601.01 . . .

DICKERSON, v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,, 806 F. Supp. 2d 116 (D.D.C. 2011)

. . . their exclusive remedies provided under the Comprehensive Merit Personnel Act (“CMPA”), D.C.Code § 1-601.01 . . .

AMERICAN FEDERATION OF STATE, COUNTY, MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES LOCAL v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,, 796 F. Supp. 2d 136 (D.D.C. 2011)

. . . of the District government created by the Comprehensive Merit Personnel Act (“CMPA”), D.C.Code § 1-601.01 . . .

SHARMA, v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,, 791 F. Supp. 2d 207 (D.D.C. 2011)

. . . Comprehensive Merit Personnel Act (“CMPA”), D.C.Code § 1-601.01 et seq. A. . . .

W. PAYNE, v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,, 773 F. Supp. 2d 89 (D.D.C. 2011)

. . . distress (“IIED”) claim is preempted by the Comprehensive Merit Personnel Act (“CMPA”), D.C.Code § 1-601.01 . . .

LIGHTFOOT, v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,, 273 F.R.D. 314 (D.D.C. 2011)

. . . compensation benefits pursuant to the Comprehensive Merit Personnel Act of 1978 (the “CMPA”), D.C.Code § 1-601.01 . . .

MILLS, v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA DEPARTMENT OF MENTAL HEALTH SAINT ELIZABETHS HOSPITAL MANAGERS, 756 F. Supp. 2d 55 (D.D.C. 2010)

. . . Code §§ 1-601.01 et seq., seems misplaced. . . .

ROSENBLATT, v. FENTY,, 734 F. Supp. 2d 21 (D.C. Cir. 2010)

. . . failure to exhaust her administrative remedies under the Comprehensive Merit Personnel Act, D.C.Code § 1-601.01 . . .

OSEKRE, v. GAGE,, 698 F. Supp. 2d 209 (D.D.C. 2010)

. . . employee, the defendant asserts that the Comprehensive Merit Personnel Act (“CMPA”), see D.C.Code §§ 1-601.01 . . .

In STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTIONS IN CIVIL CASES- REPORT NO. In No. In No. In No. In No. s In No. In No. In No. In No., 35 So. 3d 666 (Fla. 2010)

. . . (Proceed to 601.01 et seq. and balance of instructions for the completion of the jury instructions.) . . . (Proceed, to 601.01 et seq. and balance of instructions for the completion of the jury instructions.) . . .

WASHINGTON v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, 680 F. Supp. 2d 183 (D.D.C. 2010)

. . . Pursuant to the procedures established in the Comprehensive Merit Personnel Act (“CMPA”), D.C.Code §§ 1-601.01 . . .

MATTHEWS v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, 675 F. Supp. 2d 180 (D.D.C. 2009)

. . . conduct as an employer lies exclusively the Comprehensive Merit Personnel Act (“CMPA”), D.C.Code §§ 1-601.01 . . .

E. CHISHOLM, v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,, 666 F. Supp. 2d 96 (D.D.C. 2009)

. . . remedies” under the District of Columbia’s Comprehensive Merit Personnel Act (“CMPA”), D.C.Code §§ 1-601.01 . . . Personnel Act), D.C.Code §§ 1-601.01-1-607.08. Def.’s Reply at 7-8. 1. . . .

SCOTT, v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,, 598 F. Supp. 2d 30 (D.D.C. 2009)

. . . Comprehensive Merit Protection Act (“CMPA”), D.C.Code §§ 1-601.01 et seq., provides an exclusive remedy . . . to failure to exhaust administrative remedies because they are governed by the CMPA, D.C.Code §§ 1-601.01 . . .

PAYNE, v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,, 592 F. Supp. 2d 29 (D.D.C. 2008)

. . . the provisions of the District of Columbia Comprehensive Merit Personnel Act (“CMPA”), D.C.Code §§ 1-601.01 . . .

L. JOHNSON, v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,, 552 F.3d 806 (D.C. Cir. 2008)

. . . administrative remedies as required by the District Comprehensive Merit Personnel Act (CMPA), D.C.Code §§ 1-601.01 . . .

E. DESCHAMPS, v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, 582 F. Supp. 2d 14 (D.D.C. 2008)

. . . exclusively under the District of Columbia Comprehensive Merit Personnel Act (“CMPA”), D.C.Code §§ 1-601.01 . . .

LYDALL THERMAL ACOUSTICAL, INC. v. FEDERAL MOGUL CORPORATION,, 566 F. Supp. 2d 602 (E.D. Mich. 2008)

. . . authority indicating that reference numerals do not have an effect on the scope of a claim, see MPEP § 601.01 . . .

WASHINGTON v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, 530 F. Supp. 2d 163 (D.D.C. 2008)

. . . The plaintiffs argue that the District of Columbia Comprehensive Merit Protection Act, D.C.Code §§ 1-601.01 . . .

McMANUS, v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,, 530 F. Supp. 2d 46 (D.D.C. 2007)

. . . Code § 1-601.01 et seq. . . .

M. WINDER, v. ERSTE,, 511 F. Supp. 2d 160 (D.D.C. 2007)

. . . Comprehensive Merit Personnel Act, D.C.Code §§ 1-601.01 et seq. (“CMPA”). . . .

B. HOWERTON, v. OGLETREE,, 466 F. Supp. 2d 182 (D.C. Cir. 2006)

. . . remedies pursuant to the District of Columbia’s Comprehensive Merit Personnel Act ("CMPA”), D.C.Code §§ 1-601.01 . . .

LIGHTFOOT, v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,, 448 F.3d 392 (D.C. Cir. 2006)

. . . See D.C.Code § 1-601.01 et seq. (2001). . . .

MURRAY, v. GILMORE,, 231 F. Supp. 2d 82 (D.D.C. 2002)

. . . termination in violation of the Comprehensive Merit Personnel Act (“CMPA”), codified at D.C.Code § 1-601.01 . . . that she was terminated in violation of the Comprehensive Merit Personnel Act (“CMPA”), D.C.Code § 1-601.01 . . .

MURRAY, v. GILMORE,, 226 F. Supp. 2d 179 (D.D.C. 2002)

AMERICAN GREYHOUND RACING, INC. a a TP LLLP, v. HULL, v. a a TP LLLP, v. v. a a TP LLLP, v. v., 305 F.3d 1015 (9th Cir. 2002)

. . . . § 5-601.01, which provided: A. . . .

E. LUCAS, Jr. v. UNITED STATES, 268 F.3d 1089 (D.C. Cir. 2001)

. . . Comprehensive Merit Personnel Act, codified at D.C.Code §§ 1-601.01, et seq. (2001), (“Merit Act”), which . . .

AMERICAN GREYHOUND RACING, INC. v. HULL,, 146 F. Supp. 2d 1012 (D. Ariz. 2001)

. . . . § 5-601.01. . . . The problem is that § 5-601.01 does not explain the obligation of the Governor in the event that the . . . The Salt River Community filed a special action in the Arizona Supreme Court, arguing that § 5-601.01 . . . Finally, the Court rejected the Governor’s suggestion that § 5-601.01 was an unconstitutional “local . . . A.R.S. § 5-601.01, which originated as a voter initiative, provides: A. . . .

CLEMMONS, v. BOHANNON,, 918 F.2d 858 (10th Cir. 1990)

. . . . § 36-601.01 (1986) (restricting smoking in certain public areas); id. § 36-601.02(C) (specifically . . . . § 36-601.01 (1986). . . .

EVANS PACKING COMPANY, v. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE AND CONSUMER SERVICES,, 550 So. 2d 112 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1989)

. . . See § 601.01 et seq., Fla.Stat. (1979). . . . .

ALLEGHANY CORPORATION, v. D. HAASE,, 708 F. Supp. 1507 (W.D. Wis. 1989)

. . . . § 601.01(3). I see no need to prolong this discussion unnecessarily. . . . See generally Wis.Stats. §§ 601.01, .41, .415, .61-.64. . . .

R. JOHNSON, v. SERRA, a s v. s, 521 F.2d 1289 (8th Cir. 1975)

. . . . § 601.01, subdivision 1 (Supp. 1973) reduces a plaintiffs recovery in proportion to his degree of contributory . . .

NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, v. MINUTE MAID CORPORATION,, 283 F.2d 705 (5th Cir. 1960)

. . . Fla.Stat.1959, § 601.01 et seq., F.S.A. . . . .

TOWNSEND FRUIT COMPANY, v. MAYO, E. B., 98 So. 2d 345 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1957)

. . . . § 601.01 et seq., which act broadened the authority of the Commissioner of Agriculture to discipline . . .