The 2023 Florida Statutes (including Special Session C)

Title XXXIII
REGULATION OF TRADE, COMMERCE, INVESTMENTS, AND SOLICITATIONS

Chapter 500
FOOD PRODUCTS

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 500.10

500.10 Food deemed adulterated.—A food is deemed to be adulterated:

(1)(a) If it bears or contains any poisonous or deleterious substance which may render it injurious to health; but in case the substance is not an added substance such food shall not be considered adulterated under this clause if the quantity of such substance in such food does not ordinarily render it injurious to health;

(b) If it bears or contains any added poisonous or added deleterious substance, other than one which is a pesticide chemical in or on a raw agricultural commodity; a food additive; or a color additive, which is unsafe within the meaning of s. 500.13(1);

(c) If it is a raw agricultural commodity and it bears or contains a pesticide chemical which is unsafe within the meaning of 21 U.S.C. s. 346(a) or s. 500.13(1);

(d) If it is or it bears or contains, any food additive which is unsafe within the meaning of 21 U.S.C. s. 348 or s. 500.13(1); provided that where a pesticide chemical has been used in or on a raw agricultural commodity in conformity with an exemption granted or tolerance prescribed under 21 U.S.C. s. 346 or s. 500.13(1), and such raw agricultural commodity has been subjected to processing such as canning, cooking, freezing, dehydrating, or milling, the residue of such pesticide chemical remaining in or on such processed food shall, notwithstanding the provisions of s. 500.13, and this paragraph, not be deemed unsafe if such residue in or on the raw agricultural commodity has been removed to the extent possible in good manufacturing practice, and the concentration of such residue in the processed food when ready to eat, is not greater than the tolerance prescribed for the raw agricultural commodity;

(e) If it consists in whole or in part of a diseased, contaminated, filthy, putrid, or decomposed substance, or if it is otherwise unfit for food;

(f) If it has been produced, prepared, packed, transported, or held under insanitary conditions whereby it may become contaminated with filth, or whereby it may have been rendered diseased, unwholesome, or injurious to health;

(g) If it is the product of a diseased animal or an animal which has died otherwise than by slaughter, or that has been fed upon the uncooked offal from a slaughterhouse; or

(h) If its container is composed, in whole or in part, of any poisonous or deleterious substance which may render the contents injurious to health.

(2)(a) If any valuable constituent has been in whole or in part omitted or abstracted therefrom;

(b) If any substance has been substituted wholly or in part therefor;

(d) If any substance has been added thereto or mixed or packed therewith so as to increase its bulk or weight, or reduce its quality or strength or make it appear better or of greater value than it is.

(3) If it is confectionery and it bears or contains any alcohol or nonnutritive article or substance except harmless coloring, harmless flavoring, harmless resinous glaze not in excess of 0.4 percent, harmless natural gum, and pectin; however, this subsection shall not apply to any chewing gum by reason of its containing harmless nonnutritive masticatory substances; to any confectionery by reason of its containing less than 0.5 percent by volume of alcohol derived solely from the use of flavoring extracts; or to any candy by reason of its containing more than 0.5 percent but less than 5 percent by volume of alcohol derived from any source, if such candy:

(a) Is not sold to persons under 21 years of age;

(b) Is labeled with the following statement written in conspicuous print on the principal display panel of the package, or if sold in individual units, in a conspicuous manner adjacent to the product: “This product may not be sold to anyone under 21 years of age”;

(c) Is not sold in a form containing liquid alcohol so that it constitutes an alcoholic beverage under the Beverage Law; and

(d) Is distributed directly to Florida consumers only from permanent facilities owned or controlled by the product’s manufacturer, or from a vendor licensed pursuant to chapter 565, or from a vendor approved by the Department of Business and Professional Regulation consistent with rules adopted by such department establishing standards for such vendors.

(4) If it is or bears or contains any color additive which is unsafe within the meaning of the federal act or s. 500.13.

(5) If a dietary supplement or its ingredients present a significant risk of illness or injury due to:

(a) The recommended or suggested conditions of use on the product labeling;

(b) The failure to provide conditions of use on the product labeling; or

(c) An ingredient for which there is inadequate information to provide reasonable assurance that such ingredient does not present a significant risk of illness or injury.

History.—s. 10, ch. 19656, 1939; CGL 1940 Supp. 4151(678); s. 2, ch. 63-259; s. 1, ch. 87-269; s. 7, ch. 94-180; s. 200, ch. 94-218; s. 5, ch. 2016-61.

F.S. 500.10 on Google Scholar

F.S. 500.10 on Casetext

Amendments to 500.10

Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 500.10

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

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 500.10.

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases from cite.case.law:

DOMINIQUE, v. ARTUS,, 25 F. Supp. 3d 321 (E.D.N.Y. 2014)

. . . . § 500.10(a)). . . .

RUSH, v. B. LEMPKE,, 500 F. App'x 12 (2d Cir. 2012)

. . . Rules of Court, Court of Appeals, § 500.10(a) (McKinney 1999), and N.Y.Crim. Proc. . . .

HARRIS, v. FISCHER,, 438 F. App'x 11 (2d Cir. 2011)

. . . Court Rules § 500.10(a) (current version at N.Y. Court Rules § 500.20(a) (2005)). . . .

T. DIXON M. v. WELLS FARGO BANK, N. A. FSB FSB,, 798 F. Supp. 2d 336 (D. Mass. 2011)

. . . . §§ 500.1(a) (giving the OTS “responsibility] for the administration and enforcement of [HOLA]”), 500.10 . . .

W. DEARSTYNE, v. MAZZUCA,, 48 F. Supp. 3d 222 (N.D.N.Y. 2011)

. . . Former New York Court of Appeals Rule 500.10(a) “permitted] only one application for direct review[.] . . . R. 500.10(a) (1999)). . . .

NARROD, v. NAPOLI,, 763 F. Supp. 2d 359 (W.D.N.Y. 2011)

. . . Under former New York Court of Appeals Rule 500.10(a), New York “permitted] only one application for . . . R. 500.10(a) (1999)). . . .

M. LINNEN, v. POOLE,, 766 F. Supp. 2d 427 (W.D.N.Y. 2011)

. . . Under former New York Court of Appeals Rule 500.10(a), New York “permitted] only one application for . . . R. 500.10(a) (1999)). . . .

YOUNG, v. CONWAY,, 761 F. Supp. 2d 59 (W.D.N.Y. 2011)

. . . Under former New York Court of Appeals Rule 500.10(a), New York “permitted] only one application for . . . R. 500.10(a)(1999)). . . .

CUNNINGHAM, v. T. CONWAY,, 717 F. Supp. 2d 339 (W.D.N.Y. 2010)

. . . Fac., 219 F.3d 162, 170 (2d Cir.2000) (relying on former New York Rules for the Court of Appeals § 500.10 . . . Rules for the Court of Appeals § 500.10 has since been amended, and criminal leave applications are now . . .

DeLEON L. v. WELLS FARGO BANK, N. A. N. A. FSB FSB NDEX LLC, 729 F. Supp. 2d 1119 (N.D. Cal. 2010)

. . . . §§ 500.1(a) (the OTS “is responsible for the administration and enforcement of the [HOLA]”), 500.10 . . .

BUMPUS, v. WARDEN, CLINTON CORRECTIONAL FACILITY,, 702 F. Supp. 2d 155 (E.D.N.Y. 2010)

. . . COURT RULES § 500.10(a)); see also N.Y. Crim. Proc. Law §§ 440.10(2)(c), 450.10(1); N.Y. . . .

M. LINNEN, v. POOLE,, 689 F. Supp. 2d 501 (W.D.N.Y. 2010)

. . . Court Rule § 500.10. . . .

GIBBS, v. DONNELLY,, 673 F. Supp. 2d 121 (W.D.N.Y. 2009)

. . . Court Rules § 500.10(a) (requiring counsel to “identify the issues on which the application is based” . . . Court Rules § 500.10(a) (providing a defendant with only one leave application); Bossett v. . . .

ROBINSON, v. ARTUS,, 664 F. Supp. 2d 247 (W.D.N.Y. 2009)

. . . . §§ 600.8(b), 500.10(a), and if he were to raise the claim in a collateral motion to vacate, dismissal . . .

GOMEZ, v. BROWN,, 655 F. Supp. 2d 332 (S.D.N.Y. 2009)

. . . Court Rules § 500.10(a); Aparicio v. Artuz, 269 F.3d 78, 91 (2d Cir.2001); Bossett v. . . . Court Rules § 500.10(a); Aparicio, 269 F.3d at 91; Bossett, 41 F.3d at 829; Grey, 933 F.2d at 120; Holmes . . .

W. BURCH, II, v. T. MILLAS,, 663 F. Supp. 2d 151 (W.D.N.Y. 2009)

. . . Court Rules § 500.10; N.Y. Crim. Proc. Law § 440.10(2)(c)). . . .

SMITH, v. WEST,, 640 F. Supp. 2d 222 (W.D.N.Y. 2009)

. . . Court Rules § 500.10(a); Grey v. Hoke, 933 F.2d 117, 119-21 (2d Cir.1991); Sweet v. . . .

GUEITS, v. KIRKPATRICK,, 618 F. Supp. 2d 193 (E.D.N.Y. 2009)

. . . application for leave to appeal in November 2004, the applicable provision was New York Court Rule § 500.10 . . .

MILLS, v. A. GIRDICH,, 614 F. Supp. 2d 365 (W.D.N.Y. 2009)

. . . Court Rules § 500.10). Finally, respondent argues that the claim is without merit. . . .

LEWIS, v. MARSHALL,, 612 F. Supp. 2d 185 (N.D.N.Y. 2009)

. . . Court Rule 500.10(a). . . . Court Rule 500.10(a). . . .

R. CORCHADO, v. RABIDEAU,, 576 F. Supp. 2d 433 (W.D.N.Y. 2008)

. . . Court Rules § 500.10(a). Thus, Cor-chado has no further recourse in state court. . . .

CAMPBELL, v. T. POOLE,, 555 F. Supp. 2d 345 (W.D.N.Y. 2008)

. . . Court Rules § 500.10(a); N.Y. Crim. Proc. Law §§ 440.10(2)(a), (c). . . . Court Rules § 500.10(a), and if he were to raise these claims in a C.P.L. § 440.10 motion, the motion . . .

DAVENPORT, v. BRADT,, 560 F. Supp. 2d 313 (W.D.N.Y. 2008)

. . . Court Rules § 500.10(a) (only one leave application available); Bossett v. . . .

CANTEEN, v. SMITH,, 555 F. Supp. 2d 407 (S.D.N.Y. 2008)

. . . Court Rules § 500.10(a)). . . .

WALKER, v. POOLE,, 547 F. Supp. 2d 238 (W.D.N.Y. 2008)

. . . Court Rules § 500.10(a) (only one leave application available); Bossett v. . . .

BUMPUS, v. SUPERINTENDENT OF CLINTON CORRECTIONAL FACILITY,, 507 F. Supp. 2d 246 (E.D.N.Y. 2007)

. . . At the time when Bumpus sought leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals, this rule was contained in § 500.10 . . . At the time when Bumpus brought his state court appeal, this rule was contained in § 500.10(b). . . . .

BLAIR, v. CLINTON CORRECTIONAL FACILITY,, 497 F. Supp. 2d 511 (W.D.N.Y. 2007)

. . . Court Rules 500.10(a). . . .

DANIEL, v. CONWAY,, 498 F. Supp. 2d 673 (S.D.N.Y. 2007)

. . . Rules § 500.10(a) (only one application for leave to appeal to New York Court of Appeals is permitted . . .

DURDEN, v. GREENE,, 492 F. Supp. 2d 414 (S.D.N.Y. 2007)

. . . Formerly, Rule § 500.10(b)(4). . . . .

In OCWEN LOAN SERVICING, LLC MORTGAGE SERVICING LITIGATION. LLC, LLP, 491 F.3d 638 (7th Cir. 2007)

. . . . §§ 500.1, 500.10; “OTS Final Rule,” supra, 61 Fed. Reg. at 50965. . . .

HERNANDEZ, v. CONWAY,, 485 F. Supp. 2d 266 (W.D.N.Y. 2007)

. . . Court Rules § 500.10(a) (a defendant in New York has only one direct appeal); N.Y.Crim. Proc. . . . Court Rules § 500.10(a); N.Y.Crim. Proc. Law § 440.10(2)(a), (c); Grey v. Hoke, 933 F.2d at 120. . . .

BRIDGEFOURTH, v. ARTUS,, 475 F. Supp. 2d 261 (W.D.N.Y. 2007)

. . . Court Rules § 500.10(a). . . . Court Rules § 500.10(a); N.Y.Crim. Proc. Law § 440.10(2)(e); Grey v. Hoke, 933 F.2d at 120. . . . Court Rules § 500.10(a); N.Y.Crim. Proc. Law § 440.10(2)(c); Grey v. Hoke, 933 F.2d at 120. . . .

SMITH, v. M. MAHER,, 468 F. Supp. 2d 466 (W.D.N.Y. 2006)

. . . Court Rules § 500.10(a), and New York’s collateral procedures are unavailable because Smith could have . . .

D. ALSTON, v. DONNELLY,, 461 F. Supp. 2d 112 (W.D.N.Y. 2006)

. . . Court Rules § 500.10(2)). . . .

L. CRUZ, v. BERBARY,, 456 F. Supp. 2d 410 (W.D.N.Y. 2006)

. . . Court Rules § 500.10(a), and if he were to attempt to raise it in a collateral C.P.L. § 440.10 motion . . .

HOGAN, v. WEST,, 448 F. Supp. 2d 496 (W.D.N.Y. 2006)

. . . Court Rule 500.10(a). . . .

JONES, v. CONWAY,, 442 F. Supp. 2d 113 (S.D.N.Y. 2006)

. . . . § 500.10(a); see also Lurie v. Wittner, 228 F.3d 113, 124 (2d Cir.2000). . . .

WILLIAMS, v. PHILLIPS,, 433 F. Supp. 2d 303 (W.D.N.Y. 2006)

. . . Court Rules § 500.10(a); accord Grey, supra; St. Helen v. . . .

STEPHANSKI, v. SUPERINTENDENT OF UPSTATE CORRECTIONAL FACILITY,, 433 F. Supp. 2d 273 (W.D.N.Y. 2006)

. . . Court Rule 500.10(a). . . .

In C. LOPES, d b a v. C., 339 B.R. 82 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2006)

. . . Under the New York Criminal Procedure Law § 500.10, a criminal defendant is known as a “principal,” but . . .

HILL, v. A. SENKOWSKI,, 409 F. Supp. 2d 222 (W.D.N.Y. 2006)

. . . See New York Court Rules § 500.10. . . . See New York Court Rules § 500.10(a); N.Y.Crim. Proc. Law §§ 440.10(2)(a), 440.10(2)(e). . . .

LEWIS, v. DUFRAIN,, 392 F. Supp. 2d 498 (W.D.N.Y. 2005)

. . . Court Rule § 500.10(a). . . .

LEE, v. RICKS,, 388 F. Supp. 2d 141 (W.D.N.Y. 2005)

. . . Court Rule § 500.10(a). . . .

DAILY, v. NEW YORK,, 388 F. Supp. 2d 238 (S.D.N.Y. 2005)

. . . Rules of Court, Court of Appeals, § 500.10(b). That time period has long since passed. . . .

SMITH, v. DUNCAN,, 411 F.3d 340 (2d Cir. 2005)

. . . (quoting New York Court Rules § 500.10(a) (McKinney 1999)). . . . New York Court Rule section 500.10 governing criminal leave applications has subsequently been amended . . .

BROWN, v. NEW YORK STATE,, 374 F. Supp. 2d 314 (W.D.N.Y. 2005)

. . . Court Rule § 500.10(a). . . .

MARTINEZ, v. WALKER,, 380 F. Supp. 2d 179 (W.D.N.Y. 2005)

. . . Court Rules § 500.10(a) (authorizing only one request for review of a conviction). . . .

MOORE, v. NEW YORK, 378 F. Supp. 2d 202 (W.D.N.Y. 2005)

. . . Court Rules § 500.10(a). . . .

GALDAMEZ, v. P. KEANE,, 394 F.3d 68 (2d Cir. 2005)

. . . attention should be given to identifying reviewability and preservation issues (Rules of Practice, § 500.10 . . . Appeals without identifying the issues for which he sought review pursuant to New York Court Rules § 500.10 . . . New York Court Rules § 500.10(a) (McKinney 1999). . . . to “identify the issues on which the application is based” in accordance with New York Court Rules § 500.10 . . . See New York Court Rules § 500.10(a) (McKinney 1999). . . . .

HAYMON, v. NEW YORK,, 332 F. Supp. 2d 550 (W.D.N.Y. 2004)

. . . Court Rule § 500.10(a). . . .

ACOSTA, v. M. GIAMBRUNO, C. F., 326 F. Supp. 2d 513 (S.D.N.Y. 2004)

. . . Rules § 500.10(a) (stating that only one application for leave to appeal to the New York Court of Appeals . . .

LEWIS, v. G. BENNETT,, 328 F. Supp. 2d 396 (W.D.N.Y. 2004)

. . . Court Rule § 500.10(a). . . .

ST. HELEN, v. A. SENKOWSKI,, 374 F.3d 181 (2d Cir. 2004)

. . . Court Rules, § 500.10(a)(authorizing only one request for review of a conviction), and the failure to-have . . .

BENN A- v. GREINER,, 294 F. Supp. 2d 354 (E.D.N.Y. 2003)

. . . See McKinney’s New York Rules of Court § 500.10(a) (litigant may file only one leave application with . . .

MASTIN, v. SENKOWSKI, R., 297 F. Supp. 2d 558 (W.D.N.Y. 2003)

. . . New York Court Rules § 500.10(a). . . .

GLISSON, v. MANTELLO,, 287 F. Supp. 2d 414 (S.D.N.Y. 2003)

. . . . § 500.10(a). . . .

BENNETT, v. ARTUZ,, 285 F. Supp. 2d 305 (E.D.N.Y. 2003)

. . . Court Rules § 500.10(a); Lurie v. Wittner, 228 F.3d 113, 124 (2d Cir.2000); Brown v. . . .

CARR, v. FISCHER,, 283 F. Supp. 2d 816 (E.D.N.Y. 2003)

. . . has already made the one and only request for leave to appeal to which he is entitled under Section 500.10 . . .

WILLIAMS, v. S. GOORD,, 277 F. Supp. 2d 309 (S.D.N.Y. 2003)

. . . Court Rule § 500.10(a). . . . Court Rule § 500.10(a) (only one application available for leave to appeal to New York Court of Appeals . . . Court Rule § 500.10(a) represents a procedural bar that “provides an independent and adequate state-law . . .

BROWN, v. HERBERT,, 288 F. Supp. 2d 351 (W.D.N.Y. 2003)

. . . New York Court Rules § 500.10(a). . . .

BOWERS, v. WALSH,, 277 F. Supp. 2d 208 (W.D.N.Y. 2003)

. . . New York Court Rules § 500.10(a). . . .

GINYARD, v. FISHER,, 272 F. Supp. 2d 275 (S.D.N.Y. 2003)

. . . C.P.L.R. 500.10(a) (McKinney 2002); Lurie v. Wittner, 228 F.3d 113, 124 (2d Cir.2000); Strogov v. . . .

L. WALKER, v. G. BENNETT,, 262 F. Supp. 2d 25 (W.D. Pa. 2003)

. . . . § 450.10(1); New York Court Rule § 500.10(a)). . . .

JONES, v. KEANE,, 329 F.3d 290 (2d Cir. 2003)

. . . Rules of Court, Court of Appeals, § 500.10(a) (authorizing only one request for review of conviction) . . .

COTTREL, v. NEW YORK,, 259 F. Supp. 2d 300 (S.D.N.Y. 2003)

. . . . §§ 500.10(a), 600.8(b); N.Y.Crim. Proc. § 440.10(2)(a),(c). . . .

COPELAND, v. G. WALKER,, 258 F. Supp. 2d 105 (E.D.N.Y. 2003)

. . . Under New York Rules of Court § 500.10(a) an application for leave to appeal to the New York Court of . . . Rules § 500.10(a) (McKinney 2000); see also Bossett, 41 F.3d at 829; Grey, 933 F.2d at 120. . . .

S. HUTCHINGS, v. HERBERT,, 260 F. Supp. 2d 571 (W.D.N.Y. 2003)

. . . Court Rules § 500.10(a). . . .

JELINEK, v. COSTELLO,, 247 F. Supp. 2d 212 (E.D.N.Y. 2003)

. . . Because New York law permits only a single request for direct review of a conviction under section 500.10 . . .

ALFINI, v. LORD,, 245 F. Supp. 2d 493 (E.D.N.Y. 2003)

. . . . § 500.10(a) (failing to raise issues before Court of Appeals precludes further review because the Petitioner . . .

PRESSLEY, v. BENNETT,, 235 F. Supp. 2d 349 (S.D.N.Y. 2003)

. . . has the right to raise his claim under New York law either on direct appeal, see N.Y.Court Rules § 500.10 . . .

CHALK, v. L. KUHLMANN,, 311 F.3d 525 (2d Cir. 2002)

. . . Rules of Court § 500.10(a) (“Counsel assigned or retained at the Appellate Divisions or other intermediate . . .

SANTANA, v. H. KUHLMANN, 232 F. Supp. 2d 154 (S.D.N.Y. 2002)

. . . these claims in State court, see New York Criminal Procedure Law § 470.05(2); New York Court Rules § 500.10 . . .

BANK OF AMERICA N. A. v. CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, O A. T. N. A. v. H., 309 F.3d 551 (9th Cir. 2002)

. . . . §§ 500.1(a) (the OTS "is responsible for the administration and enforcement of the [HOLA]”), 500.10 . . .

COOK, v. PEARLMAN,, 212 F. Supp. 2d 258 (S.D.N.Y. 2002)

. . . Court Rules § 500.10. . . .

PEREZ, v. GREINER,, 296 F.3d 123 (2d Cir. 2002)

. . . . & Regs. tit. 22, § 500.10(a), and the time to file a petition had expired, see N.Y.Crim. . . .

MONTERO, v. B. FISCHER,, 211 F. Supp. 2d 489 (S.D.N.Y. 2002)

. . . Rules § 500.10(a)-(b); Grey v. Hoke, 933 F.2d 117, 120 (2d Cir.1991). . . .

ALSTON, v. SENKOWSKI,, 210 F. Supp. 2d 413 (S.D.N.Y. 2002)

. . . Court Rules § 500.10(a) (requiring counsel to “identify the issues on which the application is based” . . . Court Rules § 500.10(a) Counsel’s letter in this case identified no such issues. . . . Court Rules § 500.10(a). . . . See New York Court Rules § 500.10(a) (only one application available for leave to appeal to Court of . . .

JONES, v. D. A. SENKOWSKI,, 42 F. App'x 485 (2d Cir. 2002)

. . . Court Rules § 500.10(a), and here, petitioner failed to bring his suggestive identification claim on . . .

MACKENZIE, v. A. PORTUONDO,, 208 F. Supp. 2d 302 (E.D.N.Y. 2002)

. . . . § 500.10(a) (failing to raise issues before Court of Appeals precludes further review because the Petitioner . . .

CAMPOS, v. PORTUONDO,, 193 F. Supp. 2d 735 (S.D.N.Y. 2002)

. . . Rule § 500.10(a)) but made no request that the Court consider the issues raised in his brief. . . .

REESE, v. ALEXANDER,, 37 F. App'x 5 (2d Cir. 2002)

. . . Court Rules § 500.10. . . .

COLON, v. ARTUZ, 174 F. Supp. 2d 108 (S.D.N.Y. 2001)

. . . Rules of Court § 500.10(a); see also Spence, 219 F.3d at 170. . . .

CORREA a k a v. DUNCAN,, 172 F. Supp. 2d 378 (E.D.N.Y. 2001)

. . . . § 500.10(a). . . . Court Rules § 500.10(a)). . . .

TIRADO, v. WALSH,, 168 F. Supp. 2d 162 (S.D.N.Y. 2001)

. . . See New York Rules of Court § 500.10(a). . . .

APARICIO, v. ARTUZ,, 269 F.3d 78 (2d Cir. 2001)

. . . . § 500.10(a). . . . Court R. § 500.10(a). . . .

A. RAMIREZ, v. ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK F., 280 F.3d 87 (2d Cir. 2001)

. . . Rules § 500.10(a), or could have been raised in earlier proceedings, see N.Y.Crim. . . .

HINCAPIE, v. GREINER,, 155 F. Supp. 2d 66 (S.D.N.Y. 2001)

. . . Court Rules § 500.10(a), Moreover, collateral review of the claims is barred because they were addressed . . .

SPENCE, v. SUPERINTENDENT, GREAT MEADOW CORRECTIONAL FACILITY,, 219 F.3d 162 (2d Cir. 2000)

. . . Rules of Court, Court of Appeals, § 500.10(a) (McKinney 1999), and having failed to raise the claim on . . .

EL, v. ARTUZ,, 105 F. Supp. 2d 242 (S.D.N.Y. 2000)

. . . . & Regs. tit. 22 § 500.10(a) (1997); see Maddaloni v. Greiner, No. 97 Civ. 3034, 1999 U.S.Dist. . . .

STONE, v. STINSON,, 121 F. Supp. 2d 226 (W.D.N.Y. 2000)

. . . State of New York, 191 F.3d 188, 193 (2d Cir.1999) (citing N.Y.Rules of Court, Court of Appeals, § 500.10 . . .

L. SIMS, v. STINSON,, 101 F. Supp. 2d 187 (S.D.N.Y. 2000)

. . . Court of Appeals Rule 500.10(a) requires that criminal leave applications “identify the issues on which . . .

COWAN, v. ARTUZ,, 96 F. Supp. 2d 298 (S.D.N.Y. 2000)

. . . See N.Y.Ct.Rules § 500.10(a) (only one application for leave to appeal to the New York Court of Appeals . . .

LAWRENCE, v. ARTUZ,, 91 F. Supp. 2d 528 (E.D.N.Y. 2000)

. . . . § 500.10(a) (permitting only a single application for leave to appeal to New York Court of Appeals) . . .

MORGAN, v. BENNETT,, 204 F.3d 360 (2d Cir. 2000)

. . . Rules § 500.10 (McKinney 1999). . . .

LUGO, v. H. KUHLMANN,, 68 F. Supp. 2d 347 (S.D.N.Y. 1999)

. . . Court Rules § 500.10(a), or on collateral review. . . . Court Rules § 500.10(a). . . .

STROGOV, v. ATTORNEY GENERAL OF STATE OF NEW YORK,, 191 F.3d 188 (2d Cir. 1999)

. . . Rules of Court, Court of Appeals, § 500.10(a) (McKinney 1999) (“Only one application is available.”), . . .

SMITH- BERCH, INC. v. BALTIMORE COUNTY,, 68 F. Supp. 2d 602 (D. Md. 1999)

. . . . §§ 500.10, 502. . . .

AVINCOLA, v. STINSON,, 60 F. Supp. 2d 133 (S.D.N.Y. 1999)

. . . Court Rules § 500.10(a), or on collateral review. . . .

HOWARD, v. J. LACY,, 58 F. Supp. 2d 157 (S.D.N.Y. 1999)

. . . Court Rules § 500.10(a). . . .

FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION, v. A. FRATES,, 44 F. Supp. 2d 1176 (N.D. Okla. 1999)

. . . . §§ 500.10 and 501.11 (1986). . . .