The 2023 Florida Statutes (including Special Session C)

Title II
STATE ORGANIZATION

Chapter 7
COUNTY BOUNDARIES

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 7.30

7.30 Holmes County.—The boundary lines of Holmes County are as follows: Beginning on the Alabama state line where it is intersected by the line dividing centrally range eighteen, west: thence south on the section lines to the line dividing townships two and three, north, in range eighteen, west; thence east on said township line to the thread of the Choctawhatchee River; thence up the thread of said river to a point where said river is intersected by the township line between townships four and five north; thence east on said township line to the northwest corner of section four, township four north, range fifteen west; thence south one mile on section line to the southwest corner of section four, township four north, range fifteen west; thence east one mile to the southeast corner of section four, township four north, range fifteen west; thence south on section lines two miles to the southwest corner of section fifteen, township four north, range fifteen west; thence east on section lines to the thread of Holmes Creek; thence northward up the thread of Holmes Creek to a point where said creek crosses the Alabama line; thence west on said state line to the place of beginning.

History.—s. 1, ch. 176, 1848; RS 14; GS 12; s. 2, ch. 6935, 1915; RGS 13; CGL 15.

F.S. 7.30 on Google Scholar

F.S. 7.30 on Casetext

Amendments to 7.30

Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 7.30

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

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 7.30.

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases from cite.case.law:

R. BROWN, E. R. A. v. COLLIER, R. R. A. v., 929 F.3d 218 (5th Cir. 2019)

. . . than for those who are unable to recruit sufficient numbers of outside volunteers to comply with AD 7.30 . . .

BRINKMAN, a v. ABM ONSITE SERVICES WEST, INC., 383 F. Supp. 3d 1120 (D. Or. 2019)

. . . actual damage is $ 15.99 from the two deductions-$ 8.69 for the payroll ending April 20, 2011 and $ 7.30 . . .

HIRTENSTEIN, v. CEMPRA, INC. B. W. W., 348 F. Supp. 3d 530 (M.D.N.C. 2018)

. . . the FDA Briefing Document and Avigan memorandum, Cempra's common stock price dropped from $18.65 to $7.30 . . .

IN RE CANNAVEST CORP. SECURITIES LITIGATION, 307 F. Supp. 3d 222 (S.D.N.Y. 2018)

. . . . ¶ 116) In trading that day, shares of CannaVest stock fell $7.30 per share, or more than 20%, to close . . . (Id. ¶ 116) That same day, the Company's shares fell $7.30, or more than 20%, to close at $25.30 per . . .

WESTERN- SOUTHERN LIFE ASSURANCE COMPANY, v. W. KALEH,, 193 F. Supp. 3d 756 (S.D. Tex. 2016)

. . . Joint Exhibit 1, ¶ 7.30; Joint Exhibit 4, ¶ 15; Joint Exhibit 5, ¶ 10; Joint Exhibit 9, ¶ 5.5; Joint . . .

SMILOVITS, v. FIRST SOLAR INCORPORATED,, 119 F. Supp. 3d 978 (D. Ariz. 2015)

. . . guidance by $100 million and increased its earnings per share guidance for fiscal year 2010 from $6.80-$7.30 . . .

SALLUSTRO, v. CANNAVEST CORP. Jr. P. R. A. III, A. v. Jr. P. R. A. III,, 93 F. Supp. 3d 265 (S.D.N.Y. 2015)

. . . . ¶ 28) In trading that day, shares of CannaVest stock fell $7.30 per share, or more than 20%, to close . . . combines the share declines following the April 3, 2014 and April 14, 2014 corrective disclosures— $7.30 . . .

R. BROWN, v. LIVINGSTON,, 17 F. Supp. 3d 616 (S.D. Tex. 2014)

. . . The Court finds that: (a) TDCJ’s current Administrative Directive 7.30 (“AD 7.30”), which embodies TDCJ . . . to a religious sect or group or not, from the strictures and restrictions of the Scott Plan and AD 7.30 . . . The Court concludes that the Scott Plan and AD 7.30 do not relate to a legitimate penological interest . . . The TDCJ’s AD 7.30 permits additional time for communal religious activities if outside volunteers were . . . Thus, there is no evidence that the Scott Plan and AD 7.30 impact favorably on prison costs. . . .

RAMON, v. D. DANIEL, L. H. G. L. E., 533 F. App'x 433 (5th Cir. 2013)

. . . to have an outside volunteer present to supervise the gathering pursuant to Administrative Directive 7.30 . . .

OASIS INTERNATIONAL WATERS, INC. v. UNITED STATES,, 110 Fed. Cl. 87 (Fed. Cl. 2013)

. . . Rice, Attorney-Client Privilege in the United States § 7.30, at 1238-39 (2012). . . .

ROGERS, v. L. COFIELD, Jr., 935 F. Supp. 2d 351 (D. Mass. 2013)

. . . These entries. total 7.30 hours of work performed by Attorney Murray. . . . this court’s discretion and because the time does include work on interrelated claims, half of the 7.30 . . .

ELECTRONIC PRIVACY INFORMATION CENTER, v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY,, 892 F. Supp. 2d 28 (D.D.C. 2012)

. . . During this additional review, DHS also determined that it erroneously charged EPIC $7.30 for processing . . .

SLADE, M. v. BOARD OF SCHOOL DIRECTORS OF THE CITY OF MILWAUKEE, P., 871 F. Supp. 2d 829 (E.D. Wis. 2012)

. . . MPS Policy 7.30 provides, in relevant part: “No recreational swimming (including, but not limited to, . . .

PETWAY, v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,, 858 F. Supp. 2d 70 (D.D.C. 2012)

. . . Costs Plaintiff seeks costs in the amount of $7.30 for expenses arising from copying ($.10 per page) . . . costs requested by Plaintiff is $ 859.80, which can be broken down into $852.50 for legal fees, and $ 7.30 . . . Total fees thus equal $491.00, and total costs equal $7.30, which together total $498.30 . . . .

HARRIS, v. GARCIA,, 734 F. Supp. 2d 973 (N.D. Cal. 2010)

. . . CALJIC 7.30; Cal.Penal Code § 4532(b)(1). . . .

ALFORD, III, v. MARTIN GASS, INCORPORATED G. L. L. C., 391 F. App'x 296 (4th Cir. 2010)

. . . Alford a position as a rubber tire loader operator at an M & G worksite — albeit at $20.00 an hour, $7.30 . . .

G. RUPPERT A. v. ALLIANT ENERGY CASH BALANCE PENSION PLAN,, 716 F. Supp. 2d 801 (W.D. Wis. 2010)

. . . 22.60% 4.93% 2004 8.250% 11.00% 5.16% 2005 4.000% 4.90% 4.86% 2006 9.600% 12.80% 4.68% 2007 5.475% 7.30% . . .

BAKER HUGHES INCORPORATED, v. NALCO COMPANY,, 676 F. Supp. 2d 547 (S.D. Tex. 2009)

. . . method in that it injects malic acid into the wash water stream lowering the pH of the wash water from 7.30 . . .

R. MCALISTER, v. LIVINGSTON, IV, II J. I, 348 F. App'x 923 (5th Cir. 2009)

. . . Possession of Religious Items Under TDCJ Administrative Directive 7.30, “[offenders may possess religious . . .

ADAMS, v. PENN LINE SERVICES, INC., 620 F. Supp. 2d 835 (N.D. Ohio 2009)

. . . Rankin 6.90 $1,725.00 Prepare for and attend court ordered settlement conference 7.30 $1,496.50 TOTAL . . .

In J. GOBLE,, 401 B.R. 261 (Bankr. S.D. Ohio 2009)

. . . She then calculated the amount of her net monthly income as $7.30 and multiplied that amount by 60. . . .

In G. RADCLIFFE, G. v., 390 B.R. 881 (Bankr. N.D. Ind. 2008)

. . . The offset of debts due International is allowed by Section 7.30(c) of the Pension Plan document and . . . [his] debt to the Pension Fund until such time as the judgment has been satisfied,” and it cited § 7.30 . . . International then says that it, like the plan in Northcutt, is simply invoking the contractual remedy in § 7.30 . . . As International explained in its November 2 letter to Radcliffe, it is attempting to invoke § 7.30(c . . . Thus, unlike the contractual provision in Northcutt, § 7.30(c) is not a contractual provision for the . . .

MILLER, v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE,, 247 F. App'x 841 (8th Cir. 2007)

. . . . § 7.30, Miller appealed her suspension to the Knox County FSA and the Missouri State FSA Committee, . . . of the APA offers Miller no protection in this matter, USDA regulations do, particularly 7 C.F.R. §§ 7.30 . . . formal hearing under 7 C.F.R. § 7.31, her appeal proceeded under the procedures outlined in 7 C.F.R. § 7.30 . . . However, 7 C.F.R. § 7.30 did not give Miller the right to cross-examine witnesses or any of the other . . .

In G. RADCLIFFE, G. v., 372 B.R. 401 (Bankr. N.D. Ind. 2007)

. . . pertinent portion of the letter then states: The offset of debts due the Fund is allowed by Section 7.30 . . .

In L. BURTON, L. v., 339 B.R. 856 (Bankr. E.D. Va. 2006)

. . . shows that in addition to the $14.00 per hour he made at Nextel, he made $11.00 per hour at Gateway; $7.30 . . .

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

. . . (JPTO ¶ 7.30.) The next day, Markus asked Biss to return the BrandAid shares in escrow. . . .

GARVEY, On v. ARKOOSH, 354 F. Supp. 2d 73 (D. Mass. 2005)

. . . The stock closed today at $7.30 which is up 5% from when we profiled the company. . . .

UNITED STATES v. D. MASSEY,, 380 F.3d 437 (8th Cir. 2004)

. . . . § 7.30. . . .

FOGARAZZO L. v. LEHMAN BROTHERS, INC. Co. Co., 341 F. Supp. 2d 274 (S.D.N.Y. 2004)

. . . On July 18, 2000, RSL dropped to $7.30 per share when it revealed the $48 million write-down of its earnings . . .

FRANKS, v. G. ROSS, Jr., 293 F. Supp. 2d 599 (E.D.N.C. 2003)

. . . . §§ 7.30 and 7.35; 24 C.F.R. § 1.4, et. seq., and 34 C.F.R. § 100.3, et. seq. . . . issuing rules, regulations, or orders of general applicability .... ” 42 U.S.C. § 2000d-l. . 40 C.F.R. § 7.30 . . .

SKYSIGN INTERNATIONAL, INC. v. CITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU, 276 F.3d 1109 (9th Cir. 2002)

. . . After a 1999 recodification, this section now appears at § 21-7.30. . . . .

SOUTH CAMDEN CITIZENS IN ACTION v. NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION C. Jr. NJ St. Co. L. L. C. D. C. v. Of C. Jr. NJ St. Co. L. L. C. D. C. C. Jr., 274 F.3d 771 (3d Cir. 2001)

. . . . §§ 7.30 & 7.35(b). . . .

SOUTH CAMDEN CITIZENS IN ACTION, v. NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION C. St. Co. L. L. C., 145 F. Supp. 2d 505 (D.N.J. 2001)

. . . shall set forth the relevant portions of EPA’s § 602 implementing regulations in their entirety: § 7.30 . . . specific prohibitions of discrimination enumerated above do not limit the general prohibition of §§ 7.30 . . . or activity receiving EPA assistance on the basis of race, color, [or] national origin.” 40 C.F.R. § 7.30 . . . program or activity receiving EPA assistance on the basis of race, color, national origin.” 40 C.F.R. § 7.30 . . . incorporate the mandatory language of section 601 into the general anti-discrimination provision, 40 C.F.R. § 7.30 . . .

SOUTH CAMDEN CITIZENS IN ACTION, v. NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION C. St. Co. L. L. C., 145 F. Supp. 2d 446 (D.N.J. 2001)

. . . . § 7.30. . . . . § 7.30. 146. . . . specific prohibitions of discrimination enumerated above do not limit the general prohibition of §§ 7.30 . . .

In HATFIELD, v. D. EFG U. S. A. MSU f k a, 257 B.R. 575 (Bankr. D. Mont. 2000)

. . . She paid $846.65 in principal, $817.18 in interest and $7.30 in late fees. . . .

In CM HOLDINGS, INC. G. M. G. v. CM, 254 B.R. 578 (D. Del. 2000)

. . . 1_10,00%_2,00%_8.00% 2_20,00%_6.80% 13.20% 3_30.00%_6.80% 23.20% 4-7_95.00%_7.30% 87.70% 8-9_70,00%7.30% . . .

BUCHHOLZ, v. ALDAYA W. O, 210 F.3d 862 (8th Cir. 2000)

. . . . §§ 7.30-7.31. . . .

In RECYCLING INDUSTRIES, INC. EIN, 243 B.R. 396 (Bankr. D. Colo. 2000)

. . . Feldman $270.00 93.00 $25,110.00 Fransesca Sena $200.00 26.80 $ 5,360.00 Nicole Sabado $185.00 7.30 $ . . .

FALANGA, F. v. STATE BAR OF GEORGIA, FALANGA, F. v. STATE BAR OF GEORGIA,, 150 F.3d 1333 (11th Cir. 1998)

. . . Conduct 7.30 (Baldwin 1998); La.Rev.Stat. Ann., Articles of Incorp. of the State Bar Ass’n, art. . . .

v., 111 T.C. 105 (T.C. 1998)

. . . Respondent would apportion 73 percent of the consolidated NOL ($7.30) to Member B and 27 percent ($2.70 . . .

MILLER, v. U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE FARM SERVICES AGENCY, USDA,, 143 F.3d 1413 (11th Cir. 1998)

. . . . §§ 7.30 and 7.31. . . .

ACKERLEY COMMUNICATIONS OF MASSACHUSETTS, INC. v. CITY OF CAMBRIDGE, 135 F.3d 210 (1st Cir. 1998)

. . . . § 7.30. . . . Although Ordinance § 7.30, see supra p.-, only applies to invalidated “parts” of the Ordinance, that . . . separation of powers would counsel that the explicit severability presumption contained in Ordinance § 7.30 . . . respect for the principles of federalism and separation of powers counsels against construing section 7.30 . . .

MILLER, v. U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE FARM SERVICES AGENCY,, 966 F. Supp. 1087 (N.D. Ala. 1997)

. . . . §§ 7.30 and 7.31, a hearing before the Deputy Administrator. . . . Deputy Administrator’s action was “final and not subject to further administrative review,” 7 C.F.R. § 7.30 . . .

MOORE, v. GLICKMAN, R., 113 F.3d 988 (9th Cir. 1997)

. . . . § 7.30. They may then appeal to the ASCS Deputy Administrator, State and County Operations. Id. . . .

TERWILLIGER, v. GMRI, INC. a d b a, 952 F. Supp. 1224 (E.D. Mich. 1997)

. . . starting wages of three male employees, namely Toensfeldt, Leslie and Cardinal, was $7.00, $6.50 and $7.30 . . .

ANDRADE, v. MORSE OPERATIONS, INC., 946 F. Supp. 979 (M.D. Fla. 1996)

. . . From January, 1993 through May, 1993, Plaintiff averaged 7.30 ears per month, ranking last among all . . .

SLIGO, INC. v. R. NEVOIS A. H., 84 F.3d 1014 (8th Cir. 1996)

. . . See 1 O'Neal, Close Corporations § 7.30 at 141 (3d ed.1994) ("Ordinarily, in order to avoid closing books . . .

UNITED STRUCTURES OF AMERICA, INC. v. G. R. G. ENGINEERING, S. E., 927 F. Supp. 556 (D.P.R. 1996)

. . . See Exhibits 7.30 through 7.36, and 7.44. See ¶ 9 of Luis R. Marin Aponte’s Unsworn Declaration. . . .

ROXBURY TAXPAYERS ALLIANCE, E. V. S. v. DELAWARE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS,, 80 F.3d 42 (2d Cir. 1996)

. . . district, Middletown, that had 7.21% of the County’s total population and was allocated approximately 7.30% . . . has 7.21% of the County’s residents and that the weighted-voting system gives their representative 7.30% . . .

R. A. M. AL- RA ID, a k a E. v. J. INGLE, Jr., 69 F.3d 28 (5th Cir. 1995)

. . . TDCJID Administrative Directive AD-7.30 specifies in its statement of policy that “no one shall disparage . . .

ROXBURY TAXPAYERS ALLIANCE, v. DELAWARE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS,, 886 F. Supp. 242 (N.D.N.Y. 1995)

. . . Moore are registered voters in the Town of Middle-town which has 7.21% of the county population and 7.30% . . .

PERDONI BROTHERS, INC. v. CONCRETE SYSTEMS, INC., 35 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 1994)

. . . Pstragowski, 553 F.2d at 3 (emphasis added); accord Fleming James Jr. et al., Civil Procedure § 7.30 . . .

NRG COMPANY, v. UNITED STATES,, 31 Fed. Cl. 659 (Fed. Cl. 1994)

. . . 12%% (1/1-6/30) 10.12% 1990 8%% (1/1-6/30) 8.37% 10%% (7/1-12/31) 9% (7/1-12/31) 1986 9%% (1/1-6/30) 7.30% . . .

v. Co., 17 Ct. Int'l Trade 1230 (Ct. Int'l Trade 1993)

. . . incorporated in sector 106 products by the total inputs (FOB) for sector 106 products, yielding a rate of 7.30% . . .

WHEATLAND TUBE CORPORATION, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Co., 841 F. Supp. 1222 (Ct. Int'l Trade 1993)

. . . incorporated in sector 106 products by the total inputs (FOB) for sector 106 products, yielding a rate of 7.30% . . .

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

. . . Washington-Baltimore Newspaper Guild, Local 35, 787 F.2d 604, 607 (D.C.Cir.1986). 7.30 The Eagles’ section . . .

ORTHO DIAGNOSTIC SYSTEMS, INC. v. ABBOTT LABORATORIES, INC., 822 F. Supp. 145 (S.D.N.Y. 1993)

. . . were to buy all the tests except the HBsAg test from Abbott, the price for the Abbott tests would be $7.30 . . .

In TAK COMMUNICATIONS, INC., 154 B.R. 514 (Bank. W.D. Wis. 1993)

. . . [This is the only task in this entry]; 11/21/91 7.30 1,314.00 FRAUDULENT CONVEYANCE ANALYSIS — REVIEW . . . ; factual and legal research re: same); 2/04/92 5.90 1,062.00 REVISE FRAUD CONVEYANCE MEMO; 2/05/92 7.30 . . .

CITY OF MIAMI, v. FERNANDEZ,, 603 So. 2d 1346 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)

. . . At the time of injury, claimant had worked a total of 18 hours at the rate of $7.30 per hour, earning . . . period of October 23, 1986, through January 22, 1987, for nine other standby laborers, each making $7.30 . . . In his order, the JCC found that claimant was hired as a standby laborer at the rate of $7.30 per hour . . . There was also no showing that the similar employees who also made $7.30 per hour were minors. . . .

T. AGUINAGA, v. UNITED FOOD AND COMMERCIAL WORKERS INTERNATIONAL UNION, AFL- CIO CLC,, 142 F.R.D. 328 (D. Kan. 1992)

. . . Trouslot (2.60 hours on 6/21/90; 6.30 hours on 6/22/90; 8.20 hours on 6/25/ 90; 7.90 hours on 6/26/90; 7.30 . . .

R. HOLLAND, E. D. v. AMALGAMATED SUGAR COMPANY,, 787 F. Supp. 996 (D. Utah 1992)

. . . /63 to 09/30/64 - 1.40% 10/01/64 to 09/30/65 14.10% 10/01/65 to 09/30/66 9.50% 10/01/66 to 09/30/67 7.30% . . .

V. KRUEGER, Jr. v. E. LYNG, J. J. D., 927 F.2d 1050 (8th Cir. 1991)

. . . State and County Operations, of the Department of Agriculture (“Deputy Administrator”). 7 CFR §§ 7.29 & 7.30 . . . suspended CED is to be given a written statement of the reasons for the adverse action, 7 CFR §§ 7.29 & 7.30 . . .

In BLAKENEY, BLAKENEY, v. BENEFACT MORTGAGE, USA,, 126 B.R. 449 (Bankr. E.D. Pa. 1991)

. . . The additional per diem accrual of interest ($44,387.07 x .01644) calculates to about $7.30. . . . The secured loan of the Debtor to the Defendants is fixed at $50,736.22, as of March 5, 1991, plus $7.30 . . .

HEDMAN, v. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE,, 915 F.2d 1552 (Fed. Cir. 1990)

. . . . §§ 7.28, 7.30 (1989) and in the 22-PM. . . .

In C. BORDEN M., 104 B.R. 167 (Bankr. D. Minn. 1989)

. . . researching and preparing to orally respond at hearing, as well as attendance at hearing on motion to dismiss 7.30 . . .

In CONVENT GUARDIAN CORP. In N. WENIGER,, 103 B.R. 937 (Bankr. N.D. Ill. 1989)

. . . 87 Federal Express Charges 2.44 6/19/87 Federal Express Charges 7.33 6/19/87 Federal Express Charges 7.30 . . .

In CHURCHFIELD MANAGEMENT INVESTMENT CORPORATION,, 98 B.R. 838 (Bankr. N.D. Ill. 1989)

. . . Pelliccioni’s time on this Project will be disallowed — 22.85 hours disallowed (7.30 @ $200 + 15.55 @ . . .

J. GRIMES, v. LEON COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD, 518 So. 2d 327 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1987)

. . . Larson, supra § 7.30 at 3-1.3. . . .

BEE, v. Dr. GREAVES,, 669 F. Supp. 372 (D. Utah 1987)

. . . = $107,051.00 CDN (lawyer) 95.30 X $ 80 = 7,624.00 DJM (lawyer) 14.60 X $ 80 = 1,168.00 BP (lawyer) 7.30 . . . $125 = $63,632.50 CDN (lawyer) 95.30 X $ 60 = 5,718.00 DJM (lawyer) 7.10 X $ 60 = 426.00 BP (lawyer) 7.30 . . .

W. BOEKELOO, A. S. M. M. L. v. HODEL,, 828 F.2d 727 (Fed. Cir. 1987)

. . . . § 7.30 (Callaghan 1984)). . . .

M. LeDOUX, v. CONTINENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY, INC. a, 666 F. Supp. 178 (D. Alaska 1987)

. . . See Punitive Damages §§ 7.11-7.14, 7.29-7.30; see generally Annotation, Liability Insurance Coverage . . .

In AMHERST SPARKLE MARKET, INC., 75 B.R. 847 (Bankr. N.D. Ohio 1987)

. . . inclusive of (1) a ten percent reduction in rate for four specified positions; (2) a reduction to $7.30 . . .

In ISHPEMING HOTEL COMPANY, d b a, 70 B.R. 629 (Bankr. W.D. Mich. 1986)

. . . Michigan Statutes Annotated, Section 7.30; M.C.L.A. Section 211.30. . . .

In BONDS LUCKY FOODS, INC. NO. No., 76 B.R. 664 (Bankr. E.D. Ark. 1986)

. . . Bonds and Gentry 7.30 140 4/19/85 Office conference with Mr. and Mrs. . . .

RAMOS, v. D. LAMM,, 632 F. Supp. 376 (D. Colo. 1986)

. . . Donnell) Edwin Kahn 77.70 62.60 137.60 52.80 61.50 13.30 405.50 Arlena Barnes 2.30 2.30 Terre Rushton - 7.30 . . . _ 7.30 Barbara Soloman _ 2.90 _____ 2.90 Legal Assistants _ _ _ 57.30 2.60 21.30 81.20 TOTAL HOURS REQUESTED . . . Jr. 925.15 Steve Ney 91.70 Dudley Spiller 580.65 Edwin Kahn 405.50 Arlena Barnes 2.30 Terre Rushton 7.30 . . .

CRAWFORD, v. L. PITTMAN,, 708 F.2d 1028 (5th Cir. 1983)

. . . For the 1978-79 school year, the ratio was $7.30 to $1.00. . . .

J. DONOVAN, v. TONY AND SUSAN ALAMO FOUNDATION,, 567 F. Supp. 556 (W.D. Ark. 1982)

. . . 22.89 21.26 20.88 22.47 29.81 35.01 OTHER 134.93 105.73 122.03 147.43 136.00 163.80 RECREATION .00 .00 7.30 . . .

KRASNER, v. DREYFUS CORPORATION GROSS v. DREYFUS CORPORATION UNTERMEYER, Jr. v. DREYFUS LIQUID ASSETS, INC. UNTERMEYER, Jr. v. DREYFUS LIQUID ASSETS, INC., 90 F.R.D. 665 (S.D.N.Y. 1981)

. . . Knapp 7.30 125 912.50 Neil L. . . .

CONSOLIDATED GAS SUPPLY CORPORATION, v. FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION, R, 653 F.2d 129 (4th Cir. 1981)

. . . $1,645,832,000 100.0% 10.19 RP79-22 Amount Ratio Cost Weighted Cost Long-Term Debt $ 680,400,000 40.9% 7.30% . . .

In M. CONE, SUN BANK, N. A. v. W. SNELL, M. d b a, 11 B.R. 925 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1981)

. . . N.A., the sum of $20,556.65 together with interest thereon from March 2, 1981, at a per diem rate of $7.30 . . .

SEATTLE SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. v. STATE OF WASHINGTON, 633 F.2d 1338 (9th Cir. 1980)

. . . See Findings of Fact 7.30, 7.31, and 7.32. . . .

UNITED STATES MERRITT, Jr. v. HICKS,, 492 F. Supp. 99 (D.N.J. 1980)

. . . See also R-16 at 7.30/16-25. . . . .

In FRANKLIN NATIONAL BANK SECURITIES LITIGATION. CORBIN, v. FRANKLIN NATIONAL BANK, 2 B.R. 687 (E.D.N.Y. 1979)

. . . Corporation be approved, prior to consummation Franklin New York Corporation will invest the Bank’s 7.30% . . . Reserve Board relating to its proposed acquisition of Talcott National Corporation” to convert the 7.30% . . . RESOLVED, that subject to approval of the Comptroller of the Currency, the Corporation exchange the 7.30% . . . of the Currency, the Bank accepts the offer of Franklin New York Corporation to exchange the Bank’s 7.30% . . . The 7.30% notes could be called upon the “default in the payment of any indebtedness for borrowed money . . .

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

. . . campaign, since, they felt, its interjection into the campaign would have lost support for the initiative. 7.30 . . .

GENERAL TELEPHONE CO. OF FLORIDA, 47 Fla. Supp. 155 (Fla. P.S.C. 1978)

. . . 17.20 11.25 9.10 7.75 6.75 VI 29.90 N/A 17.90 11.75 9.50 8.05 7.05 VII 31.15 N/A 18.70 12.20 9.95 8.30 7.30 . . .

McGOFF, L. v. RAPONE, Co. Co. Jr. Co. Co. I. Co., 78 F.R.D. 8 (E.D. Pa. 1978)

. . . average daily population into the total monthly visits): 1976 January 4.98 February 5.15 March 5.15 April 7.30 . . .

S. JACOBSON, v. TAHOE REGIONAL PLANNING AGENCY, a F. JONES, M. D. E. W. E. G. a v. TAHOE REGIONAL PLANNING AGENCY T. R. P. A. a El LAKE COUNTRY ESTATES, INC. a a v. TAHOE REGIONAL PLANNING AGENCY, COUNTY OF EL DORADO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, LAYTON- TAHOE PROPERTIES, v. TAHOE REGIONAL PLANNING AGENCY,, 566 F.2d 1353 (9th Cir. 1977)

. . . Id. at § 7.30. . Id. at § 7.110. . See infra, p. 1359-1360. . . . .

S. JACOBSON, v. TAHOE REGIONAL PLANNING AGENCY, a F. JONES, M. D. E. W. E. G. a v. TAHOE REGIONAL PLANNING AGENCY T. R. P. A. a LAKE COUNTRY ESTATES, INC. a a v. TAHOE REGIONAL PLANNING AGENCY, El LAYTON- TAHOE PROPERTIES, v. TAHOE REGIONAL PLANNING AGENCY,, 558 F.2d 928 (9th Cir. 1977)

. . . Id. section 7.30. . Id. section 7.110. . See discussion of Frankfurter, J., dissenting in Petty v. . . .

v., 67 T.C. 131 (T.C. 1976)

. . . Laborers Local Unions No. 689 or 1450 Laborer. 5 $4.01 $0.10 Plumbers and Steamfitters Union Foreman. 14 7.30 . . . McGinnis.foreman $7.30 $16,423.02 G. Barr..journeyman 6.80 15,861.71 C. . . . Burkenstock.foreman 7.30 14,984.91 G. Lumetta.foreman 7.30 14,220.69 E. A. . . . Coon, Jr.foreman 7.30 13,425.72 K. Madere.foreman 7.30 13,399.08 M. . . . Stauder.foreman 7.30 13,155.49 R. Gremillion..journeyman 6.80 12,944.75 E. . . .

BORDONI, v. NEW YORK TIMES COMPANY, INC., 400 F. Supp. 1223 (S.D.N.Y. 1975)

. . . “Franklin New York Corporation has $35-million of 7.30 percent publicly held notes outstanding, and it . . .

RODWAY v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, 514 F.2d 809 (D.C. Cir. 1975)

. . . Nursing .................................. 8.80 38.00 Men, 20-35 years ..............'.............. 7.30 . . .

H. BROWN v. TAHOE REGIONAL PLANNING AGENCY, a, 385 F. Supp. 1128 (D. Nev. 1973)

. . . Section 9.14, referred to in sections 7.20 and 7.30, is a limited “grandfather clause.” . . .

UNITED STATES v. STATE OF MICHIGAN, 346 F. Supp. 1277 (E.D. Mich. 1972)

. . . . § 7.30) . . . .

In SPECTRUM ARENA, INC., 340 F. Supp. 767 (E.D. Pa. 1971)

. . . See generally, 6 Colliers on Bankruptcy, ¶ 7.30, pp. 1257-64, and discussion of the Trustees’ Plan, pp . . .

LEWIS, v. S. ADLER, 331 F. Supp. 1258 (S.D.N.Y. 1971)

. . . Company just before announcements of certain oil discoveries which drove the price of the stock up from $7.30 . . .

SUNDAY MAIL, INC. a v. F. CHRISTIE, 312 F. Supp. 677 (C.D. Cal. 1970)

. . . Plaintiffs contend that Section 7.30.-020 of the ordinance is void upon its face and seek declaratory . . .

PENN MART REALTY COMPANY, a v. A. BECKER, 300 F. Supp. 731 (S.D.N.Y. 1969)

. . . The sale to Aquitaine was at $1.35 per share; the sale to Paribas at $7.30 per share. . . . .

H. SCHOENBAUM, v. D. FIRSTBROOK, W. C. K., 405 F.2d 215 (2d Cir. 1968)

. . . In November 1965 Paribas negotiated a purchase of 270,000 shares of Banff stock at $7.30 a share, the . . .

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, v. KRENTZMAN,, 397 F.2d 55 (5th Cir. 1968)

. . . . § 573. 6 Collier, supra If 7.30. . . .

H. SCHOENBAUM, v. D. FIRSTBROOK W. C. K., 405 F.2d 200 (2d Cir. 1968)

. . . Pays-Bas, a French banking institution — negotiated a purchase of 270,000 shares of Banff Common at $7.30 . . . shares at $1.35 per share took place March 15, 1965, and that the Paribas purchase of 270,000 shares at $7.30 . . .