Cases from cite.case.law:

M. DIAZ, v. LOPEZ,, 167 So. 3d 455 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . Sweetwater Charter section 6.09 expressly incorporates the resign-to-run law. . . .

In GILBRAITH,, 523 B.R. 198 (Bankr. D. Ariz. 2014)

. . . Proc. 2013-12 § 6.09(1). 7.Relief from Civil Penalties for Failing to Timely File 5500 Reports Rev. . . . Proc. 2013-12 § 6.09(1). . . .

WEYERHAEUSER COMPANY, v. DOMTAR CORPORATION LLC,, 61 F. Supp. 3d 445 (D. Del. 2014)

. . . B at § 6.09(a)(iii)) At the time of the Sale, there were approximately twelve U.S. . . . Section 6.09(a)(iii) of the Transaction Agreement is consistent with this conclusion because it does . . . B at Section 6.09(a)(iii)) . . . .

CHURCHILL DOWNS INCORPORATED v. TROUT, P. F. F. T. III,, 979 F. Supp. 2d 746 (W.D. Tex. 2013)

. . . . § 6.09; see also Tex. Pen.Code Ann. § 47.05 (West 2011). . . .

A. JONES, Jr. v. T. STONE, E., 516 F. App'x 866 (11th Cir. 2013)

. . . The Plaintiffs contend that the district court was wrong to exclude evidence of work rule 6.09(d), an . . . Because rule 6.09(d) remained in effect, the Plaintiffs assert that the district court erred when it . . . We see nothing wrong (or reversible) with the district court’s decision to exclude work rule 6.09(d). . . . Seeing no disagreement among the parties about whether rules 6.09(d) and 6.09(e) were in force, the district . . . The court did not commit reversible error in excluding reference to rule 6.09(d). B. . . .

HISTORIC BOARDWALK HALL, LLC, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE,, 694 F.3d 425 (3d Cir. 2012)

. . . loan in equal annual installments for 39 years, beginning on April 30, 2002, with an interest rate of 6.09% . . .

L. SOLIS, v. J. KORESKO, V,, 884 F. Supp. 2d 261 (E.D. Pa. 2012)

. . . Furthermore, section 6.09 of the Plan Document states: Funding Policy and Procedures — The Employer and . . . Plan Document § 6.09 (GX 14) (emphasis added). . . .

In BARGER, D. v. D. v. D. v. BAC LP,, 490 B.R. 744 (Bankr. S.D. Ohio 2012)

. . . Ohio Real Property Law and Practice, § 6.09, Title Issues— Conveyances (Matthew Bender & Company, Inc . . .

In W. R. GRACE CO., 475 B.R. 34 (D. Del. 2012)

. . . 2005 Letter Agreement, Grace agreed to pay post-petition interest to the Bank Lenders at a rate of 6.09% . . . The 6.09% Bank Lender rate was higher than the non-default rate set under the Credit Agreements and the . . . 2006 Letter Agreement, Grace modified the post-petition interest rate for the Bank Lenders so that the 6.09% . . . It follows that they therefore are being paid the full amount of interest— 6.09% converted to floating . . . Under the Term Sheet, the interest rate that would apply to the Bank Lenders’ claims is 6.09%. .To be . . .

CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS v. P. BECKER, J. L. F. R. Jr. R. W. Jr. R. M. Jr. Jr. J. Jr. Jr. J. III, L. A. Jr. C. Jr. L. Jr. A. Sr., 863 F. Supp. 2d 1190 (N.D. Ga. 2012)

. . . Vol. 7 at 152], The excerpt was a full chapter of the book and totaled 24 pages, or 6.09% of the total . . . This represents 6.09% or one chapter of the total work. . . .

D. CRUMLY, Sr. D. Jr. C. J. K. v. COBB COUNTY BOARD OF ELECTIONS AND VOTER REGISTRATION, 892 F. Supp. 2d 1333 (N.D. Ga. 2012)

. . . EXISTING 2012 FINAL DEVIATION BENCHMARK REMEDIAL _PLAN_PLAN_ DISTRICT 1 _ % TOTAL BLACK_13.22%_19.31%_+6.09% . . .

CORBELLO, v. DeVITO, 832 F. Supp. 2d 1231 (D. Nev. 2011)

. . . . § 6.09 (citing Silverman v. Sunrise Pictures Corp., 273 F. 909 (2d Cir.1921); Edward B. . . .

CARTER, v. WERHOLTZ, 430 F. App'x 702 (10th Cir. 2011)

. . . Defendant’s purported authority for the motion was Kansas Supreme Court Rule 6.09(b). . . . 183 P.3d 788, 794 (2008) (“A new issue raised in a letter submitted pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 6.09 . . .

BROWNMARK FILMS, LLC, v. COMEDY PARTNERS, MTV LLC,, 800 F. Supp. 2d 991 (E.D. Wis. 2011)

. . . .); see also 1-6 Nimmer on Copyright § 6.09 (“[T]he relationship between such joint owners is said to . . .

GLENN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, LLC, v. BELL AEROSPACE SERVICES, INC., 785 F. Supp. 2d 1258 (M.D. Ala. 2011)

. . . . # 57 Ex. 1, General Conditions § 6.09(A)). . . .

In W. R. GRACE CO. s, 446 B.R. 96 (Bankr. D. Del. 2011)

. . . be paid the principal amount of their debt plus the amount of interest provided in the Joint Plan (6.09% . . . The parties agree that 6.09% exceeds the nondefault contract rate and that the provision regarding floating . . .

LLC, v., 136 T.C. 1 (T.C. 2011)

. . . The acquisition note bears interest at 6.09 percent per year and provides for level annual payments of . . .

D. LIVINGSTON, v. KANSAS, 407 F. App'x 267 (10th Cir. 2010)

. . . exhausted, as he raised it in a pro se supplemental brief that he submitted to the KCOA and in the Rule 6.09 . . . Further, “[a] new issue raised in a letter submitted pursuant to [Kansas] Supreme Court Rule 6.09 is . . . 216 P.3d 727, 730 (2009) ("A letter of additional authority pursuant to [Kansas] Supreme Court Rule 6.09 . . .

RODRIGUEZ, v. PEPSICO LONG TERM DISABILITY PLAN,, 716 F. Supp. 2d 855 (N.D. Cal. 2010)

. . . The LTD Plan explicitly provides in section 6.09(g) that court review shall be based solely on “the record . . .

M. LaFLAMME v. SOCI T AIR FRANCE, N. V. AG,, 702 F. Supp. 2d 136 (E.D.N.Y. 2010)

. . . Olympic Air adopted or adjusted passenger surcharges in varying amounts ranging from 5 to 15 Euros ($6.09 . . . have not disputed defendants' calculation that at the relevant time, 5-15 Euros was equivalent to $6.09 . . .

In MERCEDES HOMES, INC., 431 B.R. 869 (Bankr. S.D. Fla. 2009)

. . . Plan Supplement, Exhibit J, Schedule 6.09. During his testimony, Mr. . . .

CASTELLANOS- CONTRERAS v. DECATUR HOTELS, L. L. C. F. III,, 576 F.3d 274 (5th Cir. 2009)

. . . Decatur paid the guest workers whom it hired through Global Services, Inc., $6.09 per hour, the guest . . .

CASTELLANOS- CONTRERAS v. DECATUR HOTELS, LLC F. III,, 559 F.3d 332 (5th Cir. 2009)

. . . Decatur paid the guest workers whom it hired through Global Services, Inc., $6.09 per hour, the guest . . .

In EARNED CAPITAL CORPORATION, LLP v. L., 393 B.R. 362 (Bankr. W.D. Pa. 2008)

. . . funds, without interest, in prorata repayment of the aforesaid waived non-discharged Class 5 debts. 6.09 . . .

FIRST FEDERAL SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATION OF ROCHESTER, v. UNITED STATES,, 290 F. App'x 349 (Fed. Cir. 2008)

. . . Section 6.09. Compliance with Laws. . . . According to the government, the court’s construction of Section 6.10 conflicts with Section 6.09. . . . Section 6.09 expressly provided that all FSLIC and FHLBB regulations, except 12 C.F.R. § 563.13, remained . . .

FIRST FEDERAL SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATION OF ROCHESTER, v. UNITED STATES,, 290 F. App'x 349 (Fed. Cir. 2008)

. . . Section 6.09. Compliance with Laws. . . . According to the government, the court’s construction of Section 6.10 conflicts with Section 6.09. . . . Section 6.09 expressly provided that all FSLIC and FHLBB regulations, except 12 C.F.R. § 563.13, remained . . .

GELOW, v. CENTRAL PACIFIC MORTGAGE CORPORATION,, 560 F. Supp. 2d 972 (E.D. Cal. 2008)

. . . . § 6.09. . . . Id. § 6.09. The contract also describes the fee arrangement for arbitration. . . . B (employment contract of Jeffrey Just) §§ 6.06, 6.08, 6.09. Plaintiffs do not dispute this. . . .

R. POWELL, Sr. v. TPI PETROLEUM, INC., 510 F.3d 818 (8th Cir. 2007)

. . . Powell testified that he may have modified Section 3.02 and that he added Section 6.09, which included . . .

ALBERT, v. CITY OF HARTFORD,, 529 F. Supp. 2d 311 (D. Conn. 2007)

. . . The second charge addressed at the hearing was for the violation of Section 6.09, “intentional and willful . . . The Section 6.09 violation was also sustained. . . . Section 6.08 on August 29, 2001, (2) Section 1.00 on March 25, 2002. and (3 and 4) Sections 1.00 and 6.09 . . .

In OPENWAVE SYSTEMS SECURITIES LITIGATION., 528 F. Supp. 2d 236 (S.D.N.Y. 2007)

. . . widely during the class period, reaching a high of $23.19 per share on February 9, 2006, and a low of $6.09 . . .

FIRST FEDERAL SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATION OF ROCHESTER, v. UNITED STATES, 76 Fed. Cl. 106 (Fed. Cl. 2007)

. . . That is the purport of Section 6.09 of the Financing Agreement, which provided that all other FSLIC regulations . . . Section 6.09 specified that: [djuring the term of this Agreement, First Federal will comply with any . . .

In EARNED CAPITAL CORPORATION, v. LLP, 331 B.R. 208 (Bankr. W.D. Pa. 2005)

. . . funds, without interest, in prorata repayment of the aforesaid waived non-discharged Class 5 debts. 6.09 . . .

ASHBAUGH, v. R. NICHOLSON,, 129 F. App'x 607 (Fed. Cir. 2005)

. . . Ashbaugh relies on paragraph 6.09 of the manual. . . . Benefits Administration, Department of Veterans Affairs, Adjudication Procedures, M21-1, Part IV, H 6.09 . . . Paragraph 6.09 states that a claimant will receive benefits from the date of the informal claim if the . . .

ASHBAUGH, v. R. NICHOLSON,, 129 F. App'x 607 (Fed. Cir. 2005)

. . . Ashbaugh relies .on paragraph 6.09 of the manual. . . . Benefits Administration, Department of Veterans Affairs, Adjudication Procedures, M21-1, Part IV, ¶ 6.09 . . . Paragraph 6.09 states that a claimant will receive benefits from the date of the informal claim if the . . .

WILSON AIR CENTER, LLC, v. FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION,, 372 F.3d 807 (6th Cir. 2004)

. . . A separate agreement provided the rental rate for the 6.09 acres of taxiway that was conveyed to AMR . . .

In SENIOR LIVING PROPERTIES, L. L. C. B. L. L. C. v. ZC, 309 B.R. 223 (Bankr. N.D. Tex. 2004)

. . . and records of § 6.07, the payment of debt service of § 6.08, the debt service coverage ratios of § 6.09 . . .

FIRST FEDERAL SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATION OF ROCHESTER, v. UNITED STATES,, 58 Fed. Cl. 139 (Fed. Cl. 2003)

. . . Specifically, Section 6.09 of the Agreement provided that First Federal would remain subject to all regulatory . . .

GANT, v. SABINE PILOTS, E. R. L. G. E. J. D. S. J. L. R. M. H. J. H. O. R. E. M. A. C. B. K. I. D. M. M. D. C. A. E. K. A., 204 F. Supp. 2d 977 (E.D. Tex. 2002)

. . . Ex. 1 ¶¶ 6.05, 6.09. . . . Ex. 1 ¶ 6.09. . . .

A. CALDWELL, III, v. LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF NORTH AMERICA,, 287 F.3d 1276 (10th Cir. 2002)

. . . which it found plaintiff entitled to prejudgment interest, determined that rates varied from 8.7% to 6.09% . . .

HILL, Sr. v. GALAXY TELECOM, L. P. d b a, 176 F. Supp. 2d 636 (N.D. Miss. 2001)

. . . When the amount for uncollectible accounts is subtracted, the remaining cost of $6.09 per past due account . . .

WESTERN CAPITAL DESIGN, LLC, v. NEW YORK MERCANTILE EXCHANGE,, 180 F. Supp. 2d 438 (S.D.N.Y. 2001)

. . . Silberberg, Civil Practice in the Southern District of New York § 6.09 at 6-20-22 (2d ed. (1999)). . . .

SPECIAL PURPOSE ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE COOPERATIVE CORPORATION v. PRIME ONE CAPITAL COMPANY, L. L. C., 125 F. Supp. 2d 1093 (S.D. Fla. 2000)

. . . B, §§ 6.01-6.09. . . .

In ESTRELLA,, 257 B.R. 114 (Bankr. D.P.R. 2000)

. . . . & Prac.2d § 122:12; and Lundin, Chapter 13 Bankruptcy, Second Edition, Volume 2, § 6.09 [Binding Effect . . .

KRUEGER INTERNATIONAL, INC. R. J. v. BLANK,, 225 F.3d 806 (7th Cir. 2000)

. . . They pointed to another provision of the SERP, § 6.09(c), which permits deferral of the receipt of a . . . the same rate as other accounts when distribution is deferred after the principal beneficiary dies (§ 6.09 . . .

L. JACKSON, K. R. v. T. SAULS, T. L., 206 F.3d 1156 (11th Cir. 2000)

. . . ’s final recommendation was that only Officer Pinckney be charged and only with work rule violation 6.09 . . .

S. SCOTT, v. ESTES,, 60 F. Supp. 2d 1260 (M.D. Ala. 1999)

. . . Const, amend. 328, § 6.09(a) (“A state judicial compensation commission is hereby created which shall . . .

UMC ELECTRONICS CO. v. UNITED STATES,, 43 Fed. Cl. 776 (Fed. Cl. 1999)

. . . Monetary Claim Breakdown and Schedules filed in the bankruptcy court identifies UMC’s total claim as $6.09 . . .

RODRIGUE, Jr. v. RODRIGUE, 55 F. Supp. 2d 534 (E.D. La. 1999)

. . . See Nimmer Treatise, § 6.09; Robert A. Gorman, Copyright Law, 48 (Federal Judicial Center 1991). . . .

ERICSSON GE MOBILE COMMUNICATIONS, INC. a v. MOTOROLA COMMUNICATIONS ELECTRONICS, INC. a Jr., 120 F.3d 216 (11th Cir. 1997)

. . . The district court concluded that the Mayor had violated § 6.09 of the Mayor-Council Act of 1955 by negotiating . . .

ENDICO POTATOES, INC. UFS v. CIT GROUP FACTORING, INC., 67 F.3d 1063 (2d Cir. 1995)

. . . Finally, Endico challenges Judge Sand’s award of prejudgment interest at a rate of 6.09 percent rather . . . Judge Sand awarded prejudgment interest at a rate of 6.09 percent. . . . Accordingly, Judge Sand’s use of a 6.09 percent rate does not constitute an abuse of discretion. . . .

In MAXWELL COMMUNICATION CORPORATION PLC, MAXWELL COMMUNICATION CORPORATION PLC, By HOMAN, v. SOCIETE GENERAL PLC, MAXWELL COMMUNICATION CORPORATION PLC, By HOMAN, A. v. BARCLAYS BANK PLC, MAXWELL COMMUNICATION CORPORATION PLC, By HOMAN, A. v. NATIONAL WESTMINSTER BANK PLC,, 186 B.R. 807 (S.D.N.Y. 1995)

. . . The Banks have also pointed to Plan § 6.09, which provides that [n]o act taken by the Joint Administrators . . . reasonable, on a motion to dismiss I assume that “jurisdiction” refers to personal jurisdiction and that § 6.09 . . .

J. RUBANO, v. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION,, 656 So. 2d 1264 (Fla. 1995)

. . . Sackman, Nichols’ The Law of Eminent Domain § 6.09[2] (rev. 3d ed. 1995). . . . Sackman, Nichols’ The Law of Eminent Domain § 6.09[1] (rev. 3d ed. 1995) ("Although there appear to be . . .

ALLIANCE FOR COMMUNITY MEDIA v. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION DENVER AREA EDUCATIONAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS CONSORTIUM, INC. v. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION ALLIANCE FOR COMMUNITY MEDIA v. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION, v. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION, 56 F.3d 105 (D.C. Cir. 1995)

. . . Bren-NER, ET AL., CABLE TELEVISION AND OTHER Nonbroadcast Video § 6.09[3][e], at 6-98 (1994). . . .

NORTHEAST OHIO COALITION FOR THE HOMELESS, v. CITY OF CLEVELAND,, 885 F. Supp. 1029 (N.D. Ohio 1995)

. . . costs: $26.74 License issuance: $ 2.25 Miscellaneous Paper Costs: $ .28 Annual Field Maintenance: $ 6.09 . . .

In HEALTH SCIENCE PRODUCTS, INC. HEALTH SCIENCE PRODUCTS, INC. v. TAYLOR, 183 B.R. 903 (Bankr. N.D. Ala. 1995)

. . . Section 6.09 Assignment, etc. of Leasehold Interest The User may assign his rights under this Lease Agreement . . .

UNISYS CORPORATION, v. UNITED STATES,, 30 Fed. Cl. 552 (Fed. Cl. 1994)

. . . SI is 7x; therefore, the chain deficit ratio is 7x divided by 7x + 108x, which equals approximately 6.09% . . .

BENTELER INDUSTRIES, INC. v. UNITED STATES,, 840 F. Supp. 912 (Ct. Int'l Trade 1993)

. . . case, the parties have stipulated that the lengths of the BTR 110 sections sought to be entered are 6.09 . . .

v., 17 Ct. Int'l Trade 1349 (Ct. Int'l Trade 1993)

. . . case, the parties have stipulated that the lengths of the BTR 110 sections sought to be entered are 6.09 . . .

In GREENSBORO LUMBER COMPANY,, 157 B.R. 921 (Bankr. M.D. Ga. 1993)

. . . the Cooperative shall equal at least forty percent (40%) of the total assets of the Cooperative]. [6.09 . . . Section 6.09 was "deemed superfluous and unnecessary” and was deleted in August of 1991. . 11 U.S.C.A . . .

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, v. WEISENFELD,, 617 So. 2d 1071 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)

. . . Sackman, Nichol’s The Law of Eminent Domain § 6.09, at 6-55 (rev. 3rd ed. 1985) ("The modern prevailing . . .

In JOINT EASTERN SOUTHERN DISTRICTS ASBESTOS LITIGATION. In JOHNS- MANVILLE CORPORATION, K. FINDLEY, v. M. BLINKEN,, 800 F. Supp. 643 (C.D. Ill. 1992)

. . . Both awards included the calculation of interest thereon at a rate of 6.07 and 6.09 percent respectively . . .

WESCH, v. HUNT,, 785 F. Supp. 1491 (S.D. Ala. 1992)

. . . 436 65 100.00% 86.51% 12.90% 3 0 0 0.60% . 0.00% 0.00% BOOKER HEIGHTS COMMUNITY 197 12 185 100.00% 6.09% . . .

F. KNIGHT, Jr. S. T. D. S. S. Jr. L. Dr. W. Y. N. S. Dr. Jr. v. STATE ALABAMA M. Jr. S. Jr. B. H. J. P. Dr. D. III, F. A. A. Sr. A. G. A M W. Dr. A M Jr. W. M. H. B. L. A. R. C. Dr. V. Dr. E. B. F. W. Jr. W. T. Jr. R. R. E. W. A. C. J. D. Jr. T. B. Jr. O. H. Jr. T. Jr. E. G. Jr. S. H. Jr. B. Dr. A. UNITED STATES v. STATE OF ALABAMA A M a a a a a a a a a a, 787 F. Supp. 1030 (N.D. Ala. 1991)

. . . 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 96.00 95.01 4.00 4.99 00*001 00*001 59.06 59.27 6.18 5.24 26.95 27.17 7.55 6.09 . . .

M. SWEATT, Jr. St. a v. FLORIDA BOARD OF PILOT COMMISSIONERS, a H., 776 F. Supp. 1538 (M.D. Fla. 1991)

. . . Fla.Stat. ch. 6.09(2) (1989); Ga.Code Ann. § 50-2-1 (Michie 1991). . . .

GTE PRODUCTS CORP. v. KENNAMETAL, INC., 772 F. Supp. 907 (W.D. Va. 1991)

. . . to the plaintiffs against the defendant in the amount of $6,010,000 to bear interest at the rate of 6.09% . . .

W. C. SULLIVAN, v. J. T. WOODWARD,, 582 So. 2d 31 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)

. . . formerly claimed by the said state, which land is within the State of Florida by the line specified in S. 6.09 . . .

In PALMER Jo In VOYLES, 123 B.R. 218 (Bankr. N.D. Tex. 1991)

. . . Tex.Rev.Civ.Stat.Ann. arts. 5069-6.01— 5069-6.09 (Vernon 1987). . . . Stat.Ann. art. 5069-6.09 (Vernon 1987) states that “[n]o act or agreement of the retail buyer before . . .

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE AND CONSUMER SERVICES, v. O. POLK,, 568 So. 2d 35 (Fla. 1990)

. . . though the title and possession of the owner remains undisturbed. 2 Nichols’ The Law of Eminent Domain § 6.09 . . .

UNITED STATES v. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF CONSOLIDATED HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT PALOS HILLS, ILLINOIS, 761 F. Supp. 519 (N.D. Ill. 1990)

. . . Board] deems the leave to be of benefit to the professional and educational program of the District” (¶ 6.09 . . .

JOINT VENTURES, INC. v. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION,, 563 So. 2d 622 (Fla. 1990)

. . . Sackman, Nichob’ The Law of Eminent Domain § 6.09, at 6-55 (rev. 3rd ed. 1985) (“The modern, prevailing . . .

In WILLOWOOD EAST APARTMENTS OF INDIANAPOLIS II, LTD., 113 B.R. 392 (Bankr. S.D. Ohio 1990)

. . . The multiples Meisner found for the five properties ranged from 5 to 6.09. . . .

H. ARNOLD, a a v. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF ESCAMBIA COUNTY, ALABAMA,, 880 F.2d 305 (11th Cir. 1989)

. . . Williams, 862 F.2d 1471, 1480-81 (11th Cir.1989); Nahmod, supra, § 6.09-6.10. . . . .

ASSOCIATED INDUSTRIES OF MASSACHUSETTS, v. F. SNOW,, 717 F. Supp. 951 (D. Mass. 1989)

. . . . § 6.09(4)(a)). . . .

In J. A. VOLPE, M. D. s, 100 B.R. 840 (Bankr. W.D. Tex. 1989)

. . . resolve this issue but states that both explanations of the intent of the 1984 amendments are plausible. 6.09 . . .

UNITED STATES v. B. VINEYARD, Jr. a k a, 699 F. Supp. 103 (N.D. Tex. 1988)

. . . Corporation is entitled to interest on the above amounts from the date of conviction at the rate of 6.09% . . . HUNDRED TEN THOUSAND DOLLARS ($2,210,000.00) together with interest from January 30, 1987, at the rate of 6.09% . . . HUNDRED TEN THOUSAND DOLLARS ($2,210,000.00) together with interest from January 30,1987, at the rate of 6.09% . . . THOUSAND SIX HUNDRED DOLLARS ($336,-600.00) together with interest from January 30, 1987, at the rate of 6.09% . . .

ALLIED INDUSTRIES INTERNATIONAL, INC. MSR, v. AGFA- GEVAERT, INC. a v. RUBIN,, 688 F. Supp. 1516 (S.D. Fla. 1988)

. . . The court awarded AGFA $128,-684.12 plus post judgment interest at the rate of 6.09%. . . .

In MOODY, Jr. W. SMITH, v. MOODY, Jr., 837 F.2d 719 (5th Cir. 1988)

. . . ., plus prejudgment interest at the rate of 6.0%, all costs of court, and post-judgment interest of 6.09% . . .

In MOODY, Jr. W. SMITH, v. MOODY, Jr., 837 F.2d 719 (5th Cir. 1988)

. . . ., plus prejudgment interest at the rate of 6.0%, all costs of court, and post-judgment interest of 6.09% . . .

In FAULKNER,, 79 B.R. 362 (Bankr. E.D. Tenn. 1987)

. . . Participant’s account, as of the applicable Valuation Date, shall be paid to him in a single lump sum. 6.09 . . . The anti-alienation and anti-assignment provisions of paragraph 6.09 of the Plan are qualified by the . . . The anti-alienation and anti-assignment provisions of paragraph 6.09 of the Plan have thus been avoided . . .

THE FLORIDA BAR AMENDMENT TO RULES REGULATING THE FLORIDA BAR CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION, 510 So. 2d 585 (Fla. 1987)

. . . reasonably relates to the preparation of any legal document related to the rendering of legal services. 6.09 . . .

UNITED STATES v. D. BUSHMAN,, 661 F. Supp. 266 (E.D. Mo. 1987)

. . . Bushman on the merits in the amount of $17,900.80 with interest at the rate of 6.09 percent from March . . . Bushman on the merits in the amount of $14,638.72 with interest at the rate of 6.09 percent from March . . .

In BEKER INDUSTRIES CORP. In BEKER PHOSPHATE CORPORATION,, 55 B.R. 945 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 1985)

. . . Secondly, the assertion that the making of the motion violates § 6.09 of the Indenture is not worthy . . .

GARDNER, n k a v. A. GARDNER,, 467 So. 2d 407 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1985)

. . . Davidson, Legal Rights of Children, § 6.09 (1984). Dr. . . .

UNITED STATES TRUST COMPANY OF NEW YORK, N. A. UV R. W. UV v. EXECUTIVE LIFE INSURANCE CO. OCCI Co. Co. Co. Co. a A. Co. Co. a Co. W. H. a Co. Co. S. Co. Co. a, 602 F. Supp. 930 (S.D.N.Y. 1984)

. . . Under Section 6.09 of the U.S. . . . This suit, brought, inter alia, by the trustees, falls within the proviso to Section 6.09 of the U.S. . . .

v., 8 Ct. Int'l Trade 262 (Ct. Int'l Trade 1984)

. . . that the weighted average dumping margins for Brazilian hot-rolled steel sheet producers ranged from 6.09 . . .

In MALLAS ENTERPRISES, INC. PAN AMERICAN BANK OF LOS ANGELES, a v. MALLAS ENTERPRISES, INC., 37 B.R. 964 (B.A.P. 9th Cir. 1984)

. . . of a plan that any proposal would be futile were held premature. 6 Collier on Bankruptcy, Part 2, § 6.09 . . .

PINEY WOODS COUNTRY LIFE SCHOOL, D Lo L. L. Jr. V. V. v. SHELL OIL COMPANY,, 726 F.2d 225 (5th Cir. 1984)

. . . Brown, The Law of Oil and Gas Leases § 6.09, at 6-66 to 6-67 (1983). . . .