The 2023 Florida Statutes (including Special Session C)

Title II
STATE ORGANIZATION

Chapter 7
COUNTY BOUNDARIES

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 7.19

7.19 Franklin County.—The boundary lines of Franklin County are as follows: Beginning at a point on the Apalachicola River, known as the mouth of Black or Owl Creek; thence northerly up the western bank of said creek to where the same intersects the middle section line of section twenty-six, township five south, range eight west; thence due east on the middle section line to the thread of the Ochlockonee River; thence south and easterly following the thread of said river, and the thread of such channel thereof as may be necessary to include the islands in said river; to a point directly south of the southernmost point of Grass Island; thence along a straight line to the center point of the U.S. 98 (State Road 30) bridge across Ochlockonee Bay; thence east-southeast to a point directly north of the easternmost point of James Island; thence easterly to the boundary line of the State of Florida; thence south and westerly along said boundary line, including the waters of the Gulf of Mexico within the jurisdiction of the State of Florida, to the Forbes line, produced southerly; thence following the Forbes line to the Jackson River; thence follow the Jackson River until it joins the Apalachicola River; thence northerly along the Apalachicola River to the mouth of the Brothers River; thence follow the Brothers River until it intersects the stream known as Brickyard Cutoff; thence follow Brickyard Cutoff to the Apalachicola River; thence northerly along the thread of said river to the place of beginning.

History.—s. 1, Feb. 8, 1832; s. 1, ch. 412, 1851; s. 1, ch. 3624, 1885; RS 18; GS 16; RGS 18; CGL 20; s. 1, ch. 72-119; s. 1, ch. 86-288.

F.S. 7.19 on Google Scholar

F.S. 7.19 on Casetext

Amendments to 7.19

Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 7.19

Level: Degree
Misdemeanor/Felony: First/Second/Third

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 7.19.

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases from cite.case.law:

BURKE, v. REGALADO, v., 935 F.3d 960 (10th Cir. 2019)

. . . Schwartz, Section 1983 Litigation Claims and Defenses § 7.19 (4th ed. 2019-1 Supp.). . . .

S. FULLER, Jr. v. CARILION CLINIC,, 382 F. Supp. 3d 475 (W.D. Va. 2019)

. . . Schwartz, Section 1983 Litigation: Claims and Defenses, Volume 1A, § 7.19[B], pg. 7-232. . . . Schwartz, Section 1983 Litigation: Claims and Defenses, Volume 1A, § 7.19[C], pg. 7-249. . . . 791 (4th Cir. 1994) ); see also Schwartz, Section 1983 Litigation: Claims and Defenses, Volume 1A, § 7.19 . . . Schwartz, Section 1983 Litigation: Claims and Defenses, Volume 1A, § 7.19[D], pg. 7-269. . . .

E. I. DUPONT DE NEMOURS COMPANY, v. SYNVINA C. V., 904 F.3d 996 (Fed. Cir. 2018)

. . . For DMF, FDCA yields ranged from 7.19% to 16.17%. Id. . . .

MIRANDA, v. COUNTY OF LAKE,, 900 F.3d 335 (7th Cir. 2018)

. . . See Seventh Circuit Pattern Civil Jury Instruction 7.19 (rev. 2017) (an element of a failure-to-protect-from-self-harm . . .

MONTOYA, v. CRST EXPEDITED, INC. CRST, 311 F. Supp. 3d 411 (D. Mass. 2018)

. . . Those hourly rates range from $0 to $7.19 per hour depending on several variables. . . .

GUINDON, v. PRITZKER,, 240 F. Supp. 3d 181 (D.D.C. 2017)

. . . Similarly, the recreational sector receives quotas of 7.19 million pounds and 7.09 million pounds in . . .

BANCO DEL AUSTRO, S. A. v. WELLS FARGO BANK, N. A., 215 F. Supp. 3d 302 (S.D.N.Y. 2016)

. . . A ¶ 7.19. . See Capital Ventures Int’l v. . . .

COVINGTON, v. NORTH CAROLINA,, 316 F.R.D. 117 (M.D.N.C. 2016)

. . . entirely within Forsyth County — has a BVAP of 42.53%, the remainder of Forsyth County has a BVAP of only 7.19% . . .

B. HIME, v. A. McDONALD,, 28 Vet. App. 1 (Vet. App. 2016)

. . . Board op Veterans’ Appeals Manual Number 1 (MBVA-1), ch. 7, § III, para. 7.19(g) (July 1977) [hereinafter . . .

SILVER STATE LAND, LLC, v. M. SCHNEIDER, U. S., 145 F. Supp. 3d 113 (D.D.C. 2015)

. . . The MPA was “not intended in any respect to be a development agreement,” AR. 1605 (MPA § 7.19), but the . . .

D. SEARCY v. FLORIDA BAR, 140 F. Supp. 3d 1290 (N.D. Fla. 2015)

. . . See Florida Bar Rule 4-7.19(d). . . .

S. FERREIRA v. STERLING JEWELERS, INC. d b a, 130 F. Supp. 3d 471 (D. Mass. 2015)

. . . She paid $114.99 plus sales tax of $7.19 and received the necklace by Federal Express about a week later . . .

HUSTEEL CO. LTD. NEXTEEL Co. HYSCO, ILJIN AJU Co. SeAH v. UNITED STATES, LLC, A JMC TMK IPSCO, L. P. USA, 98 F. Supp. 3d 1315 (Ct. Int'l Trade 2015)

. . . of 5.30% and the revised CV profit rates calculated by the petitioners for the petition were between 7.19% . . .

CAMP, v. CITY OF PELHAM,, 625 F. App'x 422 (11th Cir. 2015)

. . . Civil Service Law §§ 7.18, 7.19 (emphasis added). . . .

RUBENSTEIN P. A. v. FLORIDA BAR K., 72 F. Supp. 3d 1298 (S.D. Fla. 2014)

. . . Rule 4-7.19, Rules Reg. Fla. Bar (2013). . . . Rule 4-7.19. . . . Notices and opinions issued by the Ethics and Advertising Department under Rule 4-7.19 may be appealed . . . Rule 4-7.19(f)(2). . . .

UNITED STATES v. S. DAHL, 64 F. Supp. 3d 659 (E.D. Pa. 2014)

. . . Probation & Parole Procedure § 7.19. . . .

RUBENSTEIN P. A. v. FLORIDA BAR K., 69 F. Supp. 3d 1331 (S.D. Fla. 2014)

BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF BAY AREA ROOFERS HEALTH WELFARE TRUST FUND, v. WESTECH ROOFING,, 42 F. Supp. 3d 1220 (N.D. Cal. 2014)

. . . At the rate of 10% per annum, the daily rate on the unpaid February 2014 ERISA contributions is $7.19 . . .

In NATIONAL HERITAGE FOUNDATION, INC. R. v. In R. v. In D. v. In J. v., 510 B.R. 526 (E.D. Va. 2014)

. . . Section 7.19 released NHF’s officers and directors, including the Houk family, from any claims relating . . .

ESTATE OF L. BOOKER A. v. GOMEZ, Of d b a R. N. R. N., 745 F.3d 405 (10th Cir. 2014)

. . . Claims & Defenses, § 7.19[D] (2014) (supervisory liability standards “only survive Iqbal to the extent . . . See Schwartz, § 7.19[E] (“Under the holding in Iqbal that a supervisory official may be held liable under . . .

MARIANO, v. GHARAI, SGA v. LLC,, 999 F. Supp. 2d 167 (D.D.C. 2013)

. . . Pri- or to arbitration, the parties shall endeavor to resolve disputes by mediation. 7.19 Claims not . . .

In AMENDMENTS TO THE RULES REGULATING THE FLORIDA BAR- SUBCHAPTER LAWYER ADVERTISING RULES, 108 So. 3d 609 (Fla. 2013)

. . . 4-7.17 (Payment for Advertising and Promotion); 4-7.18 (Direct Contact with Prospective Clients); 4-7.19 . . . RULE 4-7.19 EVALUATION OF ADVERTISEMENTS (a)Filing Requirements. . . . FROM THE FILING AND REVIEW REQUIREMENT The following are exempt from the filing requirements of rule 4-7.19 . . .

In NATIONAL HERITAGE FOUNDATION, INC., 478 B.R. 216 (Bankr. E.D. Va. 2012)

. . . The Release Provisions (Section 7.19). . . . This provision is less offensive than the Release Provisions of Section 7.19 of the Plan. . . . Plan, §~ 7.19, 7.21. . . . Plan at 19, § 7.19. . . . Plan, § 7.19. . . .

RAMIREZ- LLUVERAS, v. PAGAN- CRUZ,, 833 F. Supp. 2d 151 (D.P.R. 2011)

. . . Schwartz, Section 1983 Litigation: Claims and Defenses, § 7.19[D] (4th Ed.2010)); Casanova v. . . .

In LAKEWOOD ENGINEERING MANUFACTURING CO. INC. Co. d b a v. LLC,, 459 B.R. 306 (Bankr. N.D. Ill. 2011)

. . . Eventually, Lakewood selected CAM to manufacture 20 inch box fans at a cost to Lakewood of $7.19 per . . . For $7.19 per fan plus the motor and cord set, Lakewood would receive “a box fan ready to ship to their . . .

E. PERKINS, v. J. ASTRUE,, 648 F.3d 892 (8th Cir. 2011)

. . . Sept. 9, 2008) (finding that an ALJ’s approval rate of only 7.19 percent was troubling, but insufficient . . .

VANCE v. RUMSFELD, 653 F.3d 591 (7th Cir. 2011)

. . . Schwartz, Section 1983 Litigation: Claims and Defenses, § 7.19[C], at 7-239 (4th ed.2010) (noting that . . .

DODDS, Jr. v. RICHARDSON, s, 614 F.3d 1185 (10th Cir. 2010)

. . . Schwartz, Section 1983 Litigation: Claims and Defenses, § 7.19[C] (4th ed. 2010) (“[Supervisory officials . . . B.l, at § 7.19[D], We have already acknowledged that Iqbal may have changed the § 1983 supervisory liability . . . See Schwartz, supra III.B.1, at § 7.19[C] (positing that imposing liability upon officials for their . . . Nahmod, supra note 4, at § 3:93; see also Schwartz, supra III.B.1, at § 7.19[C] ("A combined reading . . .

BARRUS, v. DICK S SPORTING GOODS, INC. s, 732 F. Supp. 2d 243 (W.D.N.Y. 2010)

. . . Id. at §§ 7.19-7.20. . . .

MORGAN, v. FAMILY DOLLAR STORES, INC., 551 F.3d 1233 (11th Cir. 2008)

. . . Manager’s Salary 70 hours: 1999: $ 7.47 2000: $ 7.74 Assistant Manager’s Hourly Wage 1999: $7.11 2000: $7.19 . . .

UNITED STATES v. DEDMAN,, 527 F.3d 577 (6th Cir. 2008)

. . . reject its determination of state law was copied from Sixth Circuit Criminal Pattern Jury Instruction 7.19 . . . The Sixth Circuit Criminal Pattern Jury Instruction 7.19, however, is based upon Federal Rule of Evidence . . . whenever the court has taken judicial notice of a fact” Sixth Circuit Criminal Pattern Jury Instructions 7.19 . . . The improper use of Criminal Pattern Jury Instruction 7.19 when there is a conclusion of law rather than . . . Accordingly, judges should take care to limit judicial notice and use of Criminal Pattern Jury Instruction 7.19 . . .

YAN YU YANG, v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE,, 280 F. App'x 29 (2d Cir. 2008)

. . . Doherty, 502 U.S. 314, 323, 112 S.Ct. 7.19, 116 L.Ed.2d 823 (1992) (“Motions for reopening of immigration . . .

WARE, v. A. HARRY,, 636 F. Supp. 2d 574 (E.D. Mich. 2008)

. . . Criminal Jury Instruction 2d § 7.19. . . .

MOMBOURQUETTE, MOMBOURQUETTE, E. S. a C. S. a Of v. AMUNDSON,, 469 F. Supp. 2d 624 (W.D. Wis. 2007)

. . . Schwartz, Section 1988 Litigation, § 7.19[C] (4th ed.2006). . . .

OGLESBY, v. AT T CORP. AT T, 527 F. Supp. 2d 528 (N.D. Tex. 2006)

. . . Ex. 2 § 7.19) (emphasis added) Looking to these provisions, the beneficiary death clause is not applicable . . . Ex. 2 § 7.19) After the Oglesbys executed the Election Form through which Mr. . . .

In STOCKERYALE SECURITIES LITIGATION, 453 F. Supp. 2d 345 (D.N.H. 2006)

. . . Lawrence Blodgett sold $352,000 worth of StockerYale shares, in two blocks (at $6.12 per share and $7.19 . . .

In ARMSTRONG WORLD INDUSTRIES, INC., 348 B.R. 136 (D. Del. 2006)

. . . Securities......................206 7.18 Expiration of the Retention Period ..........................207 7.19 . . . incurred in connection with such services in an amount pursuant to the procedures set forth in section 7.19 . . . without express or implied limitation, escheat rights of any governmental unit under applicable law. 7.19 . . .

SHARIFF, v. GOORD,, 235 F.R.D. 563 (W.D.N.Y. 2006)

. . . Id. at §§ 7.19-7.20. . . .

In GEOPHARMA, INC. SECURITIES LITIGATION, 411 F. Supp. 2d 434 (S.D.N.Y. 2006)

. . . The lowest target average closing price was $7.19 per share. See id. ¶ 32. . Id. ¶ 32. . . . . closing price would have been $7.25 per share (($10 + $10 + $5.46 + $5.35 + $5.44)/5 days) and the $7.19 . . .

In GEOPHARMA, INC. SECURITIES LITIGATION, 399 F. Supp. 2d 432 (S.D.N.Y. 2005)

. . . accept shares of the Company’s common stock in lieu of cash payments if the stock reached a minimum of $7.19 . . . See id. ¶ 30 (term note, convertible into common stock if that stock trades higher than $7.19/share for . . .

BRANDAID MARKETING CORPORATION. v. S. S. v., 418 F. Supp. 2d 329 (S.D.N.Y. 2005)

. . . (PX III-8; JPTO ¶ 7.19; Sloan Direct II307.) . . .

NATIONAL WESTMINSTER BANK, PLC, v. UNITED STATES,, 58 Fed. Cl. 491 (Fed. Cl. 2003)

. . . which was subject to U.S. minimum capital regulations, had capital ratios that varied from 6.03% to 7.19% . . .

In ML ASSOCIATES, INC. W. v. T R, 301 B.R. 195 (Bankr. N.D. Tex. 2003)

. . . accordance with Section 1, Chapter 87, Acts of the 56th Legislature, Regular Session, 1959 (Article 7.19 . . .

In CURRENCY CONVERSION FEE ANTITRUST LITIGATION, 265 F. Supp. 2d 385 (S.D.N.Y. 2003)

. . . (Refer to Section 7.19.)” (Uhlig Decl. Ex. 2.) . . . Section 7.19 of the amended cardholder agreement, as included in the Important Notice, provided: 7.19 . . . Ex. 2, § 7.19 (emphasis added).) . . .

f. k. a. v., 120 T.C. 69 (T.C. 2003)

. . . Actuarial present value of future service 4.81 6.63 7.26 7.19 5. . . . Average present value of future service 4.81 6.63 7.26 7.19 H. . . . Average present value of future service 4.81 6.63 7.26 7.19 F. . . .

ECASH TECHNOLOGIES, INC. a v. GUAGLIARDO,, 35 F. App'x 498 (9th Cir. 2002)

. . . R. 7.19 & 27. . . .

M. HERNANDEZ, v. F. GATES,, 100 F. Supp. 2d 1209 (C.D. Cal. 2000)

. . . See 1B Schwartz § 7.19, at 117. . . . Doe, 513 U.S. 815, 115 S.Ct. 70, 130 L.Ed.2d 25 (1994); see generally 1B Schwartz § 7.19, at 116 (compiling . . .

VAN GERWEN, v. GUARANTEE MUTUAL LIFE COMPANY, a ERISA, 214 F.3d 1041 (9th Cir. 2000)

. . . R. 7.19; Fed. R. Civ. P. 11, 26(g)(3), 37. . . .

A. MURPHY, v. NEW YORK RACING ASSOCIATION, INC. NYRA Jr. NYRA NYRA M. V. Jr. H. Sr. M. R. S. Jr. L. E. P. A. F. J I. W. F. G. K. P. V., 76 F. Supp. 2d 489 (S.D.N.Y. 1999)

. . . Schwartz, Section 1983 Liability, § 7.19, at 119 (citing Monell v. . . . imposed a duty upon the supervisor to [intervene in some way],” Schwartz, Section 1983 Litigation § 7.19 . . . Schwartz, Section 1983 Litigation § 7.19, at 121. . . .

BIG BEAR LODGING ASSOCIATION a s v. SNOW SUMMIT, INC. a Co. s RV a, 182 F.3d 1096 (9th Cir. 1999)

. . . Local Rule 7.19 authorizes the court to sanction parties who file frivolous motions and Local Rule 27 . . .

KUSTOM SIGNALS, INC. v. APPLIED CONCEPTS, INC. L., 52 F. Supp. 2d 1260 (D. Kan. 1999)

. . . See Def.’s Exh. 404 at 7.19. . . .

POTTS, v. STATE, 718 So. 2d 757 (Fla. 1998)

. . . Pro. 3.111(d)(2)-(3), 7.19 So.2d 873, 873, 876-880 (Fla.1998). . . .

CAM, v. MARION COUNTY, OREGON,, 987 F. Supp. 854 (D. Or. 1997)

. . . Conflicting testimony was presented about the circumstances prompting the move to the 7.19 acre parcel . . . Cam started his own church on the 7.19 acre parcel. . . .

UNITED STATES v. S. ELY, UNITED STATES v. S. ELY, UNITED STATES v. E. WHITMORE, Jr. UNITED STATES v. E. WHITMORE, Jr. UNITED STATES v. S. SWAIN, UNITED STATES v. H. SMITH,, 142 F.3d 1113 (9th Cir. 1997)

. . . The district court not only found no such intent charged but noted that the indictment, ¶ 7.19, declared . . . The district court focused on the awkward and ungrammatical, if not unintelligible, phrase in ¶ 7.19 . . . intent is sufficiently alleged, we do not attach significance to the “not necessarily” clause of ¶ 7.19 . . .

CUSTOM WAREHOUSE, INC. v. G. LENERTZ, Sr., 975 F. Supp. 1240 (E.D. Mo. 1997)

. . . On November 29, 1985, Frederick Lenertz purchased from Mary Howard approximately 7.19 acres in property . . .

MICRON TECHNOLOGY, INC. v. UNITED STATES, Co. LG Co. LG Co., 117 F.3d 1386 (Fed. Cir. 1997)

. . . computed the relevant dumping margins, expressed in percentages, as follows: Goldstar(LGS) 4.97 HEI 7.19 . . .

E. DAVIS, v. RUTGERS CASUALTY INSURANCE CO., 964 F. Supp. 560 (D.N.J. 1997)

. . . as follows: January 1991 7.53% January 1992 5.12% January 1993 4.37% January 1994 3.98% January 1995 7.19% . . .

Dr. T. REED, Sr. Dr. Dr. St. G. v. TOWN OF BABYLON, H. Jr. A. V. E., 914 F. Supp. 843 (E.D.N.Y. 1996)

. . . contained 3,647 fewer people than that required for an ideal district and thus was underpopulated by 7.19% . . .

L. EWELL, D. v. W. MURRAY E. C. L. EWELL D. v. W. MURRAY E. C., 11 F.3d 482 (4th Cir. 1993)

. . . report contain summary of evidence presented, and written findings of basis for decision and penalty); 7.19 . . .

UNITED STATES v. JENKINS III D., 4 F.3d 1338 (6th Cir. 1993)

. . . Rather, he contends that the only amount properly attributable to him is 7.19 grams, the amount of cocaine . . .

WHITE, v. NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE PDB KMS B B NFL, 836 F. Supp. 1458 (D. Minn. 1993)

. . . court overrules the objections to the offer sheet clarifications set forth in Proposed Amendment No. 3. 7.19 . . . See White, 822 F.Supp. ¶¶ 7.19-7.27, at 1429-31. 7.23 In its order of April 30, 1993, the court found . . . White, 822 F.Supp. ¶7.19, at 1429. . See, e.g., Alumax Mill Prods., Inc. v. Congress Fin. . . .

WHITE, v. NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE PDB KMS B B NFL, 822 F. Supp. 1389 (D. Minn. 1993)

. . . The Philadelphia Eagles’ Objections 7.19 One NFL member club, the Philadelphia Eagles, also opposes final . . .

TRANSPORTATION LEASING COMPANY v. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, 861 F. Supp. 931 (C.D. Cal. 1993)

. . . received no monetary payments from System [7.17] and had no ownership or proprietary interest in System [7.19 . . .

WEST, v. B. WEST,, 825 F. Supp. 1033 (N.D. Ga. 1992)

. . . corporations, respectively, on July 25, 1988, the date the complaint was filed, were: 3.28% in West Lumber; 7.19% . . .

In M. COOK, d b a W. SANDALON, v. M. COOK, d b a W., 141 B.R. 777 (Bankr. M.D. Ga. 1992)

. . . The second diamond weighted 7.19 karats. Plaintiffs asking price was $38,826. . . . The customer wanted the jeweler to create a ring using the 7.19-karat diamond (hereafter “the diamond . . .

GOOD, v. H. AUSTIN, VAN STRATEN, v. H. AUSTIN,, 800 F. Supp. 557 (E.D. Mich. 1992)

. . . 7.46% 27,864 6.68% 4 580.956 425,655 6,182 1.06% 4,622 1.08% 5 580.956 418.962 48,758 8.39% 30,136 7.19% . . .

ORIGINAL GREAT AMERICAN CHOCOLATE CHIP COOKIE COMPANY, INC. a v. RIVER VALLEY COOKIES, LTD. M. B I, 773 F. Supp. 1123 (N.D. Ill. 1991)

. . . One of the two invoices that was past due was for $7.19, and was due on June 17, 1990. . . .

YAGMAN, v. REPUBLIC INSURANCE, 137 F.R.D. 310 (C.D. Cal. 1991)

. . . Local Rule 7.19 clearly states that violation of Local Rule 7 subjects the offender to the sanctions . . .

INTERNATIONAL RAW MATERIALS, LTD. v. STAUFFER CHEMICAL COMPANY, TG FMC, 716 F. Supp. 188 (E.D. Pa. 1989)

. . . Fugate, Foreign Commerce and the Antitrust Laws §§ 7.1-7.19 (3d ed. 1982 & Supp.1984 & Supp.1986) (section . . .

In WINDSOR COMMUNICATIONS GROUP, INC. t a WINDSOR COMMUNICATIONS GROUP, INC. t a v. HAVERTOWN PRINTING COMPANY,, 79 B.R. 210 (E.D. Pa. 1987)

. . . The rates of return for the relevant months of 1986 are: (1) January, 1986 — 7.31%; February, 1986— 7.19% . . .

BALTIMORE AND OHIO RAILROAD COMPANY, v. INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION, 826 F.2d 1125 (D.C. Cir. 1987)

. . . The B & 0 trackage at the center of this dispute, the “Indiana Subdivision,” is a 7.19-mile branch line . . .

JENKINS, AGYEI, v. STATE OF MISSOURI, R- Dr. A., 807 F.2d 657 (8th Cir. 1986)

. . . showing that although the school population in the three-county area, excluding KCMSD, was between 7.19% . . .

In D. CLAPP, D. CLAPP, v. NORWEST BANK HASTINGS, N. A., 57 B.R. 921 (Bankr. D. Minn. 1986)

. . . Specifically, the Debtor’s Plan provided for the following treatment: 7.19 Clclss T Claims: Allowed unsecured . . . There is no expressed intention in paragraph 7.19 to pay Norwest more than its prepetition claim under . . .

BUTLER COUNTY MEMORIAL HOSPITAL, a v. M. HECKLER, UNITED STATES, 780 F.2d 352 (3d Cir. 1985)

. . . average stays in the ICU and MCU in 1980 were comparable (ICU, 27.6 days; MCU, 24.57 days; routine, 7.19 . . .

Dr. REMSEN, v. UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA,, 429 So. 2d 1228 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1983)

. . . See Rule 6C1-7.19(3), Florida Administrative Code. . . .

PRICE E. v. DENISON INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT,, 694 F.2d 334 (5th Cir. 1982)

. . . elementaries with minority percentages below 9.1 percent, except in 1975-76 when a sixth elementary had 7.19 . . .

F. CARSTENS, M. W. R. J. R. v. D. LAMM, J. D. T. GOENS, v. D. LAMM,, 543 F. Supp. 68 (D. Colo. 1982)

. . . minority population in the second congressional district of each major plan is as follows: H.B. 1624 7.19% . . . H.B. 1624 had minority populations ranging from 7.19% to 36.6%; McPhee Plan # 2 from 7.5% to 37.1%; Governor . . .

SMILEY, v. BLEVINS,, 514 F. Supp. 1248 (S.D. Tex. 1981)

. . . plan: (1) By September 1978, the percentage of black pupils at Morgan shall not exceed 73.69% (balance 7.19% . . .

GANGULY, v. NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF MENTAL HYGIENE- DUNLAP MANHATTAN PSYCHIATRIC CENTER, 511 F. Supp. 420 (S.D.N.Y. 1981)

. . . Mental Hygiene Law § 7.19(c) (McKinney) (1978) by subdividing the general eligibility list for promotions . . .

KRASNER, v. DREYFUS CORPORATION GROSS v. DREYFUS CORPORATION, 500 F. Supp. 36 (S.D.N.Y. 1980)

. . . (3/i year) 1976 0.8 4.00 4.00 3.75 1977 0.9 4.50 4.30 4.13 1978 1.2 6.00 5.75 5.20 1979 1.5 , 7.50 7.19 . . .

V. v., 74 T.C. 516 (T.C. 1980)

. . . Casey, Federal Tax Practice, sec. 7.19 (1979 Cum. Supp. at 85). . . .

CORBIN, v. FEDERAL RESERVE BANK OF NEW YORK,, 475 F. Supp. 1060 (S.D.N.Y. 1979)

. . . SOMA 7.06 7.19 7.22 7.23 7.61 7.52 Prime 11.50 11.75 12.00 — — 11.75 3-5 Yr. U. S. . . .

SEATTLE SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, a v. STATE Ci. V. I. C., 473 F. Supp. 996 (W.D. Wash. 1979)

. . . there would be no loss of school district flexibility other than in busing for desegregation purposes. 7.19 . . .

SMILEY v. VOLLERT, 453 F. Supp. 463 (S.D. Tex. 1978)

. . . 12 7 8 9 9 NA 90 91 105 77 95 105 MA 30 29 19 22 24 22 TOTAL 130 132 131 107 128 136 55 565 14b 764 7.19 . . .

M. V. Jr. J. J. Jr. V. Jr. v., 69 T.C. 97 (T.C. 1977)

. . . Bate on Market Rate on Market Market new issue :yield new issue yield yield Other 7.069 6.94 7.309 7.19 . . .

COLEMAN MOTOR CO. a v. CHRYSLER CORPORATION, 525 F.2d 1338 (3d Cir. 1975)

. . . 1966 49.01 24.01 16.52 7.28 3.45 7.01 1967 50.50 20.73 17.60 7.51 2.87 8.30 1968 47.56 21.37 18.01 7.19 . . .

CONCERNED RESIDENTS OF BUCK HILL FALLS, By v. GRANT, U. S., 388 F. Supp. 394 (M.D. Pa. 1975)

. . . increased temperatures works to the detriment of the game fish and may result in their elimination. 7.19 . . .

SANDERSVILLE RAILROAD COMPANY, v. UNITED STATES, 385 F. Supp. 59 (M.D. Ga. 1974)

. . . Defendant supports a determination varying from approximately 21 to 26 days, or from 5.98 percent to 7.19 . . .

C. E. H. McDONNELL v. AMERICAN LEDUC PETROLEUMS, LTD., 456 F.2d 1170 (2d Cir. 1972)

. . . possible causes of action, including actions against those called to testify. 6 Collier On Bankruptcy |f 7.19 . . .

G. BRUNO M. v. CITY OF KENOSHA, a BLEASHKA, v. CITY OF KENOSHA, a SLEEPY S INC. v. CITY OF KENOSHA, a KAUZRICH, v. CITY OF KENOSHA, a, 333 F. Supp. 726 (E.D. Wis. 1971)

. . . Professor Davis in his Administrative Law Treatise has praised Hornsby and damned Lewis, 1970 Supplement, § 7.19 . . .

In INTEREST ON CUSTOMER DEPOSITS HELD BY PUBLIC UTILITIES, 32 Fla. Supp. 47 (Fla. P.S.C. 1969)

. . . this docket proposing to amend the commission’s rules 310-4.62(3) (formerly 310-4.15), 310-6.35, 310-7.19 . . . It is therefore ordered that the commission’s Rule 310-4.62(3), Rule 310-6.35, Rule 310-7.19, Rule 310 . . .

UNITED STATES v. LIPOWITZ,, 407 F.2d 597 (3d Cir. 1969)

. . . Tr. 7.19-7.20. . Cf. DeLuna v. United States, 308 F.2d 140 (5 Cir. 1962). . . . .

W. BAKER v. C. CARR, 247 F. Supp. 629 (M.D. Tenn. 1965)

. . . Similarly, on a population basis, Knox County is entitled to 2.40 senators and 7.19 representatives. . . .

In SCRANTON CORPORATION In RABCO TV PRODUCTION, INC., 37 F.R.D. 465 (M.D. Pa. 1965)

. . . . §§ 502, 44, sub. k; 6 Collier, Bankruptcy, Para. 7.19 [1] n. 13 at p. 2034 (14th ed.); 2 id. . . .

SAC AND FOX TRIBE OF INDIANS OF OKLAHOMA v. UNITED STATES,, 340 F.2d 368 (Ct. Cl. 1964)

. . . survey costs, means that in 1890 the raw and unimproved Sac and Fox lands had a fair market value of $7.19 . . .

THE SAC AND FOX TRIBE OF INDIANS OF OKLAHOMA, ET AL. APPELLANTS v. THE UNITED STATES, APPELLEE, 167 Ct. Cl. 710 (Ct. Cl. 1964)

. . . survey costs, means that in 1890 the raw and unimproved Sac and Fox lands had a fair market value of $7.19 . . .

v., 51 C.C.P.A. 81 (C.C.P.A. 1964)

. . . was arrived at on the basis of the following items: Sizes ¡ x 15 %x20 . x20 Material_ 7. 58 $ 7.16 7.19 . . .

MORTON SALT COMPANY, A CORPORATION v. THE UNITED STATES, 161 Ct. Cl. 640 (Ct. Cl. 1963)

. . . The brine sold by Sparta Oil Company contained approximately 3.01 pounds of dry salt and 7.19 pounds . . .

In RULE GOVERNING CONSUMERS DEPOSITS WITH PUBLIC UTILITY COMPANIES, 21 Fla. Supp. 107 (Fla. Railroad & P. U. C. 1963)

. . . pursuant to the statutory authority of and implements Florida Statute 365.01). (4) Commission rule 310-7.19 . . . APPENDIX “A” Rule 310-4.15 Rule 310-10.63(4) Rule 310-6.35 Rule 310-7.19 Rule 310-11.01 Each public utility . . .

v., 50 Cust. Ct. 529 (Cust. Ct. 1963)

. . . merchandise were given as follows: Sizes in inches ¡ by .015 % by .020 % by .020 Material_:_ 7.58 7.16 7.19 . . .