Cases from cite.case.law:

IN RE SRC LIQUIDATION, LLC,, 573 B.R. 537 (Bankr. D. Del. 2017)

. . . In addition, shipping charges of $270.01 relate to Directly Delivered Goods. . . .

In L. DUPLANTE, AT T UNIVERSAL CARD SERVICES CORPORATION, v. L. DUPLANTE,, 215 B.R. 444 (B.A.P. 9th Cir. 1997)

. . . Schedule F reflects that Debtor incurred $79,-270.01 in unsecured credit card debt in 1995 and 1996 ( . . .

CROWN COAT FRONT CO. INC. v. THE UNITED STATES, 209 Ct. Cl. 653 (Ct. Cl. 1976)

. . . For this deviation, the original contract price of $60,691.76 was reduced by $270.01. . . . In any event, the total price reductions were so small, $270.01 out of an original $60,691.76 on contract . . .

CROWN COAT FRONT CO. v. UNITED STATES, 395 F.2d 160 (2nd Cir. 1968)

. . . plaintiff Crown Coat Front Co., Inc. on a contract with defendant United States was reduced by the sum of $270.01 . . . Crown Coat agreed to a price reduction of one-half cent per canteen cover, a total of $270.01, and was . . .

CROWN COAT FRONT CO. v. UNITED STATES, 275 F. Supp. 10 (S.D.N.Y. 1967)

. . . standards with respect to mildew, but ultimately accepted the goods after agreeing to a reduction of $270.01 . . . Appeals (“Board” herein), plaintiff’s counsel wrote the Contracting Officer demanding a refund of the $270.01 . . . review the Board’s decision under the Tucker Act (28 U.S.C. § 1346(a) (2)) seeking a return of the $270.01 . . .

CROWN COAT FRONT CO. v. UNITED STATES, 363 F.2d 407 (2d Cir. 1966)

. . . A contract modification of $.005 less per unit — a total of $270.01 — was agreed upon. . . . October 4, 1961, appellant’s counsel wrote the Contracting Officer and demanded (1) a refund of the $270.01 . . . invoice, appellant brought this suit under the-Tucker Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1346(a) (2), demanding the $270.01 . . .