Cases from cite.case.law:

J. DETZNER, v. LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF FLORIDA,, 256 So. 3d 803 (Fla. 2018)

. . . . § 1002.35, Fla. Stat. (2018). . . . ." § 1002.35(1), Fla. Stat. (2018) (emphasis added). 4. . . .

STROPE, a k a E. v. CUMMINGS, R. K. R. J. a k a v. FNU FNU C. v. E. J. C. O. C. O., 653 F.3d 1271 (10th Cir. 2011)

. . . United States v. 1002.35 Acres of Land, 942 F.2d 733, 737 (10th Cir.1991). . . .

UNITED STATES v. HARRELL, N. III, G. D. J. Co- B. Jr. S. a P. JBD TFP WRD JAP J., 642 F.3d 907 (10th Cir. 2011)

. . . United States v. 1002.35 Acres of Land, 942 F.2d 733, 735-37 (10th Cir.1991). I. . . . See 1002.35 Acres of Land, 942 F.2d at 734-35. . . . We reversed on the ground that the new definition set forth in § 2412(d)(2)(H) applied. 1002.35 Acres . . . Under 1002.35 Acres of Land, 942 F.2d at 736, however, we are bound to apply the plain language of § . . . In this case, the district court cited 1002.35 Acres of Land for the legal standard to be applied to . . .

F. REYNOLDS, v. REHABCARE GROUP EAST, INC., 591 F.3d 1030 (8th Cir. 2010)

. . . . § 1002.35). . . .

F. REYNOLDS, v. REHABCARE GROUP EAST INC., 590 F. Supp. 2d 1107 (S.D. Iowa 2008)

. . . . § 1002.35. . . . See 20 C.F.R. § 1002.35 (“In general, an employer is a successor in interest where there is a substantial . . . Compare Leib, 925 F.2d at 247 with 20 C.F.R. § 1002.35. . . . .

F. REYNOLDS, v. REHABCARE GROUP EAST INC., 531 F. Supp. 2d 1050 (S.D. Iowa 2008)

. . . . § 1002.35. . . . The Murphree court also noted that the Department of Labor Regulations at 20 C.F.R. § 1002.35 “essentially . . . Notably, the Coffman court did not have 20 C.F.R. § 1002.35 available for reference, as that particular . . . Compare Leib, 925 F.2d at 247 with 20 C.F.R. § 1002.35. . . . .

B. MURPHREE v. COMMUNICATIONS TECHNOLOGIES, INC., 460 F. Supp. 2d 702 (E.D. La. 2006)

. . . . § 1002.35. . . .

LOTT, v. COYLE,, 2 F. Supp. 2d 961 (N.D. Ohio 1998)

. . . See United States v. 1002.35 Acres of Land, 942 F.2d 733 (10th Cir.1991) (deciding when a case is no . . .

E. LEWIS, v. SQUARESHOOTER CANDY COMPANY,, 176 B.R. 54 (D. Kan. 1994)

. . . United States v. 1002.35 Acres of Land, 942 F.2d 733, 736 (10th Cir.1991). . . .

L. ALLEN, TSC Co. v. ITM, LTD. SOUTH,, 167 B.R. 63 (M.D.N.C. 1994)

. . . United States v. 1002.35 Acres of Land, 942 F.2d 733, 736 (10th Cir.1991). . . .

JONES M. v. BROWN,, 6 Vet. App. 101 (Vet. App. 1993)

. . . applies”), which was in turn cited with approval and followed by the 10th Circuit in United States v. 1002.35 . . . Accord 1002.35 Acres of Land, 942 F.2d 733, 736 (10th Cir.1991). . See supra note 7. . . . .

DIAZ, v. SHALLBETTER,, 984 F.2d 850 (7th Cir. 1993)

. . . In United States v. 1002.35 Acres of Land, 942 F.2d 733 (10th Cir.1991), for example, the merits had . . .

J. RESARE, v. RAYTHEON COMPANY,, 981 F.2d 32 (1st Cir. 1992)

. . . See also United States v. 1002.35 Acres of Land, 942 F.2d 733, 736 (10th Cir.1991) (“Where ... . . .

UNITED STATES v. ACRES OF LAND, MORE OR LESS, SITUATE IN WASHINGTON COUNTY, STATE OF OKLAHOMA G. UNITED STATES v. ACRES OF LAND, MORE OR LESS, SITUATE IN WASHINGTON COUNTY, STATE OF OKLAHOMA a UNITED STATES v. ACRES OF LAND, MORE OR LESS, SITUATE IN WASHINGTON COUNTY, STATE OF OKLAHOMA G. III L. Dr. Jr. G. R. M., 942 F.2d 733 (10th Cir. 1991)

. . . UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. 1002.35 ACRES OF LAND, MORE OR LESS, SITUATE IN WASHINGTON . . .

DE LA RAMA S. S. CO. v. PIERSON, 174 F.2d 84 (9th Cir. 1949)

. . . effect at the time of the alleged agreement (T.D. 5295, 8 F.R. 12429, 29 C.F.R. 1943 Supp.Secs. 1002.1-1002.35 . . . Secs. 1002.1 to 1002.35), or it would have noted that the Commissioner, in his later regulation, Sec. . . .