Home
Menu
Call attorney Graham Syfert at 904-383-7448
Personal Injury Lawyer
Florida Statute 7.10 | Lawyer Caselaw & Research
F.S. 7.10 Case Law from Google Scholar
Statute is currently reporting as:
Link to State of Florida Official Statute Google Search for Amendments to 7.10

The 2023 Florida Statutes (including Special Session C)

Title II
STATE ORGANIZATION
Chapter 7
COUNTY BOUNDARIES
View Entire Chapter
F.S. 7.10
7.10 Clay County.The boundary lines of Clay County are as follows: Beginning at the west margin of the channel of the St. Johns River at its intersection with the southerly limited access right-of-way line of State Road 9-A, also known as Interstate 295; thence north 86°49′27″ west on said right-of-way line to a point where said right-of-way line intersects the westerly boundary of the St. Johns River; thence south 87°54′15″ west 816.30 feet; thence north 86°49′27″ west 228.51 feet; thence north 86°10′22″ west 891.45 feet to the beginning of a curve concave to the south and having a radius of 22,768.31 feet running westerly 1,466.89 feet along said curve through a central angle of 03°41′29″ to the end of said curve; thence south 83°23′50″ west 290.48 feet; thence south 64°29′41″ west 145.12 feet; thence south 49°31′32″ west 101.97 feet; thence south 38°21′40″ west 165.23 feet; thence south 08°45′26″ west 119.74 feet to an intersection with the easterly limited access right-of-way line of U.S. 17, being located south 88°33′33″ west 2.37 feet of the southwest corner of Lot 12, Block 11 of Island View Subdivision, according to the plat thereof recorded in Plat Book 6, page 10, Public Records of Duval County, Florida; thence west along the line dividing townships three south and four south to the range line dividing ranges twenty-two and twenty-three east; thence south on said range line, concurrent with the eastern boundary of Baker and Bradford Counties, to the southeast corner of section twelve, township nine south, range twenty-two east; thence east on the line dividing sections seven and eighteen, eight and seventeen, township nine south, range twenty-three east to the Bellamy or federal road leading from St. Augustine to Tallahassee; thence east along the north margin of said road to the point of intersection with such margin of a westerly extension of the south boundary line of Hillcrest on the Lake, a subdivision, as same appears of record in Plat Book 2, page 52, Public Records of Clay County; thence south 89°30′ east along the south boundary line of such subdivision to the southeast corner of such subdivision; thence north 0°05′ east along the east boundary line of such subdivision to a point intersecting the north margin of the Bellamy Road; thence east along the north margin of said road to its intersection with the south boundary line of township seven south; thence east along said line to the west margin of the channel of the St. Johns River; thence northerly along said west margin to the place of beginning. Clay County also includes the following described parcel of land. Begin at the intersection of the north line of township four south with the easterly right-of-way line of State Road 21, also known as Blanding Boulevard, said east right-of-way line bearing north 00°02′42″ west; thence north 52°48′22″ east 2,239.0 feet; thence north 40°33′35″ west 301.54 feet; thence north 24°10′22″ east 40.18 feet to an intersection with the southerly limited access right-of-way line of State Road 9-A, also known as Interstate 295; thence along the southerly and easterly right-of-way line of said State Road 9-A the following 6 courses; thence south 66°10′44″ east 1,883.20 feet to the point of curvature of a curve concave northerly and having a radius of 5,879.578 feet; thence southeasterly 2,592.53 feet along and around said curve through a central angle of 25°15′50″ to the point of tangency of said curve; thence north 88°33′33″ east 3,540.04 feet; thence south 78°13′41″ east 219.09 feet; thence south 61°03′20″ east 233.15 feet; thence south 52°38′29″ east 379.68 feet to an intersection with the northerly line of said township four south; thence departing said right-of-way line, run thence west along said north line of township four south to the point of beginning.
History.ss. 1, 2, ch. 866, 1858; s. 1, ch. 1039, 1859; s. 1, ch. 3469, 1883; RS 34; GS 32; s. 1, ch. 5978, 1909; RGS 34; s. 1, ch. 12489, 1927; CGL 36; s. 1, ch. 76-17; s. 1, ch. 78-421; s. 1, ch. 80-9; s. 1, ch. 84-211.

F.S. 7.10 on Google Scholar

F.S. 7.10 on Casetext

Amendments to 7.10


Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 7.10
Level: Degree
Misdemeanor/Felony: First/Second/Third

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 7.10.



Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases from cite.case.law:

IN RE MAREMONT CORPORATION,, 601 B.R. 1 (Bankr. Del. 2019)

. . . Limitation on Claim Interests for Securities Laws Purposes...162 7.9 Entire Agreement; No Waiver...162 7.10 . . . and remedies herein provided are cumulative and are not exclusive of rights under law or in equity. 7.10 . . .

IN RE LTC HOLDINGS, INC. T. v. T. v. LLC d b a, 597 B.R. 565 (Bankr. Del. 2019)

. . . D.I. 77-3, at § 7.10 ("This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the law of . . .

IN RE AMENDMENTS TO RULES REGULATING THE FLORIDA BAR- BIENNIAL PETITION., 267 So. 3d 891 (Fla. 2019)

. . . Determination or Judgment of Guilt of Criminal Misconduct; Discipline on Removal from Judicial Office); 3-7.10 . . . We next amend subdivision (f)(4)(B) of Bar Rule 3-7.10 to make clear that attorneys seeking reinstatement . . . RULE 3-7.10 REINSTATEMENT AND READMISSION PROCEDURES (a) Reinstatement; Applicability. . . . Comment To further illuminate the community service requirements of Rule rule 3-7.10(f)(3)(G), bar members . . .

FLORIDA BAR, v. KINSELLA,, 260 So. 3d 1046 (Fla. 2018)

. . . Bar 3-7.10(f)(1) ("A record manifesting a deficiency in the honesty, trustworthiness, diligence, or reliability . . . Bar 3-7.10(f)(3)(E). . . .

B. NEWMAN, v. CRANE, HEYMAN, SIMON, WELCH CLAR,, 590 B.R. 457 (N.D. Ill. 2018)

. . . Further, Section 7.10 of the plan grants the Trustee, in all matters "arising in, arising under or related . . . Crane Heyman focuses on the language "other courts of competent jurisdiction" in Section 7.10 to argue . . .

ELORAC, INC. v. SANOFI- AVENTIS CANADA, INC., 343 F. Supp. 3d 789 (N.D. Ill. 2018)

. . . As in Callisto , the License Agreement protects against unpaid royalties (Section 7.10 spells out a detailed . . .

CANEDO, v. PACIFIC BELL TELEPHONE CO., 341 F. Supp. 3d 1116 (S.D. Cal. 2018)

. . . (Id. ) Both "Term" and "Regular" employees are job classifications under sections 4.03.B and 7.10.B of . . .

MILLER, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,, 346 F. Supp. 3d 1018 (E.D. Mich. 2018)

. . . Accordingly, the total number of hours expended by Plaintiff's counsel should be reduced by the 2.75 and 7.10 . . .

SEATTLE TIMES COMPANY, v. LEATHERCARE, INC. v. SLU LLC TB TS RELP LLC,, 337 F. Supp. 3d 999 (W.D. Wash. 2018)

. . . /ton $31.84/ton Premium Costs $4.75/ton $4.75/ton CTI Markup imbedded $3.36/ton Clean Soil Credit ($7.10 . . . /ton) ($7.10/ton) TOTAL $56.00/ton $56.00/ton [Editor's Note: The preceding image contains the reference . . . See Touchstone's Proposed Findings of Fact at ¶ 7.10 (docket no. 200); see also Ex. 538. . . . $25.00/ton), and the cost of rail container liners ($2.50/ton), minus the undisputed clean soil credit ($7.10 . . . the cost of liners for each truck and each pup ($5.00/ton), minus the undisputed clean soil credit ($7.10 . . .

UNITED STATES v. LEAVERTON,, 895 F.3d 1251 (10th Cir. 2018)

. . . Scott, Jr., Substantive Criminal Law § 7.10, at 252 (1986) ). . . .

IN RE STANDARD CRIMINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS IN CAPITAL CASES., 244 So. 3d 172 (Fla. 2018)

. . . Penalty Proceedings-Capital Cases), we amend the interim instruction by renumbering it from 7.11 to 7.10 . . .

UNITED STATES v. UNITED STATES BOARD OF WATER COMMISSIONERS, LLC M. A. GDA G. J. D. LLC LLC LLC N- LLC, v. LLC M. A. GDA G. J. D. LLC LLC LLC N- LLC, v. LLC M. A. GDA G. J. D. LLC LLC LLC N- LLC, v. LLC M. A. GDA G. J. D. LLC LLC LLC N- LLC, v. LLC M. A. GDA G. J. D. LLC LLC LLC N- LLC, v. LLC M. A. GDA G. J. D. LLC LLC LLC N- LLC,, 890 F.3d 1134 (9th Cir. 2018)

. . . . § 7.10 ("In reviewing any report of the Water Resources Control Board, the court ... shall not be limited . . .

UNITED STATES v. UNITED STATES BOARD OF WATER COMMISSIONERS, LLC M. A. GDA G. J. D. LLC LLC LLC N- LLC, v. LLC M. A. GDA G. J. D. LLC LLC LLC N- LLC, v. LLC M. A. GDA G. J. D. LLC LLC LLC N- LLC, v. LLC M. A. GDA G. J. D. LLC LLC LLC N- LLC, v. LLC M. A. G. J. D. LLC LLC LLC N- LLC, v. LLC M. A. GDA G. J. D. LLC LLC LLC N- LLC,, 893 F.3d 578 (9th Cir. 2018)

. . . . § 7.10 ("In reviewing any report of the Water Resources Control Board, the court ... shall not be limited . . .

O HARA, v. DIAGEO- GUINNESS, USA, INC., 306 F. Supp. 3d 441 (D. Mass. 2018)

. . . . § 7.10. . . .

J. GREDE, v. FCSTONE, LLC, f k a GHCO, IFX IPGL, LP, ABN AMRO LLC f k a LLC,, 584 B.R. 238 (N.D. Ill. 2018)

. . . As the Trustee points out, "Section 7.10 of the Plan governs when the Trustee will make distributions . . . (Liquidation Plan § 7.10, 35.) . . . It does not obviously contradict Section 7.10. . . . The Plan accordingly outlines a procedure for what do to once those disputes end-in Section 7.10. . . . (Liquidation Plan § 7.10, 35.) . . .

FARLEY, v. EATON CORPORATION,, 697 F. App'x 450 (6th Cir. 2017)

. . . Section 7.10 of the Amended and Restated Payment Procedures Agreement provides that the "prevailing party . . .

JOHNSTON, v. DOW EMPLOYEES PENSION PLAN, 703 F. App'x 397 (6th Cir. 2017)

. . . (See DE 131-2, Plan § 7.10, Page ID 8107 (“In no event shall the determination [of the appeal] take longer . . .

IN RE ALLIED FINANCIAL, INC. v. WM LLC, 572 B.R. 45 (Bankr. D.P.R. 2017)

. . . The court does not quote from Article 7.10 of the Loan Sale Agreement because this particular contract . . .

HENSEL PHELPS CONSTRUCTION CO. v. COOPER CARRY INC., 861 F.3d 267 (D.C. Cir. 2017)

. . . See also Agreement Art. 7.10, J.A. 32. D.C. . . .

IN RE GALECTIN THERAPEUTICS, INC. SECURITIES LITIGATION, v. C. G. W. RCJ- WGC, D. F. L. P. RCJ- WGC, F. RCJ- WGC,, 843 F.3d 1257 (11th Cir. 2016)

. . . Galectin’s stock lost over half its value, falling from a price of $15.91 per share to $7.10 per share . . . one-day period from July 28, 2014 to July 29, 2014, Galectin’s stock price fell from $15.91 per share to $7.10 . . .

NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR FIXED ANNUITIES, v. E. PEREZ,, 217 F. Supp. 3d 1 (D.D.C. 2016)

. . . section 2.9.2.1 (pp. 68-72, AR 384-88) (describing the best-interest contract); and RIA sections 7.4-7.10 . . . The Department expressly considered NAFA’s proposed alternative in section 7.10 of the RIA, which is . . .

BORRELL, v. BLOOMSBURG UNIVERSITY, F., 207 F. Supp. 3d 454 (M.D. Pa. 2016)

. . . L.R. 7.10. Dr. . . .

ROGERS, v. PEARLAND INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT,, 827 F.3d 403 (5th Cir. 2016)

. . . Art. 42.13, § 3 (1979) (repealed by Acts 1995, 74th Leg., ch. 76, § 7.10, eff. . . .

HL INTERMEDIATE HOLDCO INC. v. N. B. LOVE INDUSTRIES PTY. LTD., 191 F. Supp. 3d 345 (D. Del. 2016)

. . . B at § 7.10(b)) . . . .

KHOJA, v. OREXIGEN THERAPEUTICS, INC. P. A. AND ALL CONSOLIDATED CASES, 189 F. Supp. 3d 998 (S.D. Cal. 2016)

. . . the price of Defendant Orexigen’s stock dropped to $6.76 per share in intraday trading and closed at $7.10 . . .

NITTANY OUTDOOR ADVERTISING, LLC, v. COLLEGE TOWNSHIP,, 179 F. Supp. 3d 436 (M.D. Pa. 2016)

. . . Specifically, Defendant argues that Local Rule 7.10— which provides that “any motion for reconsideration . . . Importantly, however, Middle District of Pennsylvania Local Rule 7.10 (“Motions for Reconsideration”) . . . Comply With Local Rule 7.10’s Fourteen-day Time Limitation And Is Therefore Denied Without Reaching The . . . must be denied for failing to comply with the fourteen-day time limitation set forth in Local Rule 7.10 . . . court to revise an interlocutory order at any time prior to entry of final judgment, but Local Rule 7.10 . . .

IN RE QUICKSILVER RESOURCES INC. v. N. A. As- AG, a As-, 544 B.R. 781 (Bankr. D. Del. 2016)

. . . Mortgages, Section 7.10. Governing Law. . . .

IN RE GALECTIN THERAPEUTICS, INC. SECURITIES LITIGATION, 157 F. Supp. 3d 1230 (N.D. Ga. 2015)

. . . Galectin’s stock price dropped from $15.91 per share at the opening of the markets on July 28, 2014, to $7.10 . . .

A. D AREZZO, M. A. v. PROVIDENCE CENTER, INC. A. D L. K. v., 142 F. Supp. 3d 224 (D.R.I. 2015)

. . . (c) Commencing March 1, 2006, the minimum wage is seven dollars and ten cents ($7.10) per hour. . . .

DMS IMAGING, INC. v. UNITED STATES,, 123 Fed. Cl. 645 (Fed. Cl. 2015)

. . . DX 7.8-7.10; PX L at 8; Tr. 392-93. . . .

M. SEGARRA, v. FEDERAL RESERVE BANK OF NEW YORK,, 802 F.3d 409 (2d Cir. 2015)

. . . the Federal Reserve ... should have effective compliance risk management programs[,]” Joint App. at 7.10 . . .

D. M. L. M. E. M. v. NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, 801 F.3d 205 (3d Cir. 2015)

. . . Admin.Code § 6A:14-7.10(b)(l)(i). . . .

BRUNO, v. BOZZUTO S, INC., 127 F. Supp. 3d 275 (M.D. Pa. 2015)

. . . Local Rule 7.10 provides that any “motion for reconsideration ... must be ... filed within fourteen ( . . . As previously noted, Local Rule 7.10 requires that a motion for reconsideration be filed within fourteen . . .

RHODES, v. OLSON ASSOCIATES, P. C. d b a, 308 F.R.D. 664 (D. Colo. 2015)

. . . the settlement guarantees all Class Members an equal cash payment, which could equal anywhere from $7.10 . . .

In AMENDMENTS TO RULES REGULATING THE FLORIDA BAR BIENNIAL PETITION, 167 So. 3d 412 (Fla. 2015)

. . . Misconduct); 3-5.3 (Diversion of Disciplinary Cases to Practice and Professionalism Enhancement Programs); 3-7.10 . . . We make several amendments to Bar Rule 3-7.10 (Reinstatement and Readmission Procedures), as proposed . . . We also amend Bar Rule 3-7.10 to require: that a petition for reinstatement be filed with the Court in . . . (e) — (f> [No Change] RULE 3-7.10 REINSTATEMENT AND READMISSION PROCEDURES (a) [No Change] (b) Petitions . . .

PENNSYLVANIA NATIONAL MUTUAL CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, v. Jo A. LEWIS, W. LLC,, 105 F. Supp. 3d 573 (D.S.C. 2015)

. . . the Parties submitted proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law to the Court pursuant to Rule 7.10 . . .

In CLEMENTS MANUFACTURING LIQUIDATION COMPANY, LLC LLC LLC LLC, L. III, v. THB LLC, LLC, LLC, a LLC, a S. R. L. a v. a Co. a a A THB LLC, A v. Co. LLC, f k a LLC, a L. III,, 521 B.R. 231 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 2014)

. . . view of the transaction, the Trustee points to the integration clause in the Sakoma APA, which states: 7.10 . . . No. 10-6423) at 11 ¶ 7.10. . See THB/TENA Reply Br. (Docket # 142) at 3 (citing examples). . . . .

F. ADAMS, v. UNITED STATES,, 117 Fed. Cl. 628 (Fed. Cl. 2014)

. . . The Commission included as part of its “Short-Term Recommendations:” Recommendation 7.10 VA and DoD should . . .

BENIHANA OF TOKYO, INC. v. BENIHANA, INC., 59 F. Supp. 3d 654 (D. Del. 2014)

. . . Section 7.10 of the ARA further provided that [BI] will own the Trademarks in the Territory and BOT will . . . A at § 7.10) (emphasis added) Further, defendants argue that plaintiff cannot demonstrate any proof of . . . (D.I. 83 at 24, § 7.10) While plaintiff argues that the term “use” should be broadly construed to include . . .

BENIHANA OF TOKYO, LLC, v. BENIHANA INC., 73 F. Supp. 3d 238 (S.D.N.Y. 2014)

. . . ARA §§ 1.01(d), 7.10. . . . ARA §§ 1.01(d), 7.10. . . . .

In AMENDMENTS TO RULES REGULATING THE FLORIDA BAR BIENNIAL REPORT, 140 So. 3d 541 (Fla. 2014)

. . . Determination or Judgment of Guilt of Criminal Misconduct; Discipline on Removal From Judicial Office); 3-7.10 . . . RULE 3-7.10 REINSTATEMENT AND READMISSION PROCEDURES (a)Reinstatement; Applicability. . . . Comment To further illuminate the community service requirements of Rule 3-7.10(f)(3)(G), bar members . . .

THE FLORIDA BAR, v. K. W. ERLENBACH,, 138 So. 3d 369 (Fla. 2014)

. . . Bar 3-7.10 (providing the procedure through which a “lawyer who is ineligible to practice due to a court-ordered . . .

CLARK DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS, INC. v. ALG DIRECT, INC. v. ALG v., 12 F. Supp. 3d 702 (M.D. Pa. 2014)

. . . court to revise an interlocutory order at any time prior to entry of final judgment, but Local Rule 7.10 . . .

CONSOLIDATED ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT, INC. NUCOR STEEL LOUISIANA v. ZEN- NOH GRAIN CORPORATION, 981 F. Supp. 2d 523 (E.D. La. 2013)

. . . limits: Source Maximum lb/hr Average lb/hr Identification limit PM10 limit PM10 TPY limit PM10 SHIPLDR1 7.10 . . . 6.4 10.84 SHIPLDR2 7.10 6.4 10.84 SHIPLDR3 7.10 6.4 10.84 SHIPLDR4 7.10 6.4 10.84 B-UNLDR 1.9 1.8 1.9 . . .

ASSOCIATION OF PUBLIC AGENCY CUSTOMERS, v. BONNEVILLE POWER ADMINISTRATION, No. No. No., 733 F.3d 939 (9th Cir. 2013)

. . . For example, pursuant to section 7.10 of the Settlement, signers may not “directly or indirectly challenge . . .

GONZALEZ, s v. SEARS HOLDING COMPANY a k a s, 980 F. Supp. 2d 170 (D.P.R. 2013)

. . . See ECF Nos. 35-1, ¶ 50; 51-1, ¶¶ 7.10, 7.18, 52; 63-1, ¶¶ 7.10, 7.18. . . .

In DOCTORS HOSPITAL OF HYDE PARK, INC. A. v. f k a LLC,, 507 B.R. 558 (Bankr. N.D. Ill. 2013)

. . . ratifications were permitted, in lieu of annual meetings, by the Illinois Business Corporation Act, 805 ILCS 5/7.10 . . .

KAMENOV, v. HIGHWOOD USA, 531 F. App'x 253 (3d Cir. 2013)

. . . by order dated August 17, 2012, for failure to comply with the requirements of Local Rules 7.1 and 7.10 . . .

ASARCO, LLC, a a v. MONTANA RESOURCES, INC. a LLP, a, 514 B.R. 168 (S.D. Tex. 2013)

. . . In Section 7 of the Disclosure Statement, titled “Litigation Trust Under the Parent’s Plan,” Section 7.10 . . . Conversely, the continuing validity of Section 7.10 of the Disclosure Statement at the conclusion of . . . In the instant case, if Section 7.10 of the Disclosure Statement is read together with Article 10.13 . . . In light of this series of events, Section 7.10 is inherently ambiguous. . . . Accordingly, even if the Court were to take into consideration Section 7.10 of the Disclosure Statement . . .

POLICE AND FIRE RETIREMENT SYSTEM OF CITY OF DETROIT, LACERA, PERS, v. INDYMAC MBS, INC. USA LLC,, 721 F.3d 95 (2d Cir. 2013)

. . . Hazen, Law of Securities Regulation § 7.10[4] (6th ed. 2011) (“Section 13 is not only a statute of limitations . . .

BYRD, v. SHANNON, SCI- V. SCI- SCI- H. SCI- PA, 715 F.3d 117 (3d Cir. 2013)

. . . LR 7.10). . . .

OKLAHOMA CORRECTIONS PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION INC. a v. DOERFLINGER,, 521 F. App'x 674 (10th Cir. 2013)

. . . January 1, 2008,” id., § 34.70(D), when the numerosity threshold was only 1,000 employees, see id., § 7.10 . . . The statute was renumbered from § 7.10 to § 34.70 in 2009. . . . .

J. ROGERS, v. UNITED STATES,, 109 Fed. Cl. 280 (Fed. Cl. 2013)

. . . vote of three-fourths of SONA’s members before SONA could initiate an action such as a takings case: 7.10 . . . Covenants ¶ 7.10; see also Rogers, 95 Fed.Cl. 513, 516 (2010) (construing the same provision as requiring . . .

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

. . . First, we delete existing rules 4-7.1 through 4-7.10 and replace them with new rules, which will be renumbered . . .

CONSOLIDATED EDISON COMPANY OF NEW YORK, INC. SUBSIDIARIES, v. UNITED STATES,, 703 F.3d 1367 (Fed. Cir. 2013)

. . . equity payment of $39,320,000.00 and borrowing the remaining $80,792,270.36 as a nonrecourse loan, at 7.10% . . . The Debt Defeasance Account was structured to earn 7.10% interest, which was the same interest rate as . . .

CONSOLIDATED EDISON COMPANY OF NEW YORK, INC. SUBSIDIARIES, v. UNITED STATES,, 703 F.3d 1367 (Fed. Cir. 2013)

. . . equity payment of $39,320,000.00 and borrowing the remaining $80,792,270.36 as a nonrecourse loan, at 7.10% . . . The Debt Defeasance Account was structured to earn 7.10% interest, which was the same interest rate as . . .

PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. a EFC LLC, a LLC, a LLC, a LLC, a LLC, a v. U. S. GLOBAL, LLC, a, 102 So. 3d 768 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2012)

. . . The asset purchase agreement contained the following general limitation-on-damages provision: 7.10 General . . . asset purchase agreement contained the following unambiguous general limitation-on-damages provision: 7.10 . . .

F. HATCH L. v. TRAIL KING INDUSTRIES, INC., 699 F.3d 38 (1st Cir. 2012)

. . . . § 7.10. . See, e.g., Duane Reade, Inc. v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. . . .

THE FLORIDA BAR, v. WINTERS, v., 104 So. 3d 299 (Fla. 2012)

. . . his recommendation that Respondents be found guilty of violating Rules Regulating the Florida Bar 4-7.10 . . . The referee recommended that Winters and Yonker be found guilty of violating rule 4-7.10(f) (lawyers . . . Here, the referee recommended that Respondents be found guilty of violating only rule 4 — 7.10(f) and . . .

PRYCE, v. A. SCISM, L. S. C. I., 477 F. App'x 867 (3d Cir. 2012)

. . . that the motion was untimely, noting that Pryce had fourteen days under Middle District Local Rule 7.10 . . . We note that Middle District Local Rule 7.10 provides that its terms do not apply to motions filed pursuant . . .

In AMENDMENTS TO RULES REGULATING THE FLORIDA BAR BIANNUAL REPORT, 101 So. 3d 807 (Fla. 2012)

. . . 3-6.1 (Generally); 3-7.7 (Procedures Before Supreme Court of Florida); 3-7.9 (Consent Judgment); 3-7.10 . . . RULE 3-7.10. REINSTATEMENT AND READMISSION PROCEDURES (a) Reinstatement; Applicability. . . .

CARROLL COMPANY v. SHERWIN- WILLIAMS COMPANY, 848 F. Supp. 2d 557 (D. Md. 2012)

. . . Connors, 312 Md. 428, 540 A.2d 783, 796 (1988) and Fowler Vincent Harper et al., The Law of Torts § 7.10 . . .

MARTSOLF, v. Lt. BROWN Lt. Lt., 457 F. App'x 167 (3d Cir. 2012)

. . . Local R. 7.10. . . .

BENIHANA OF TOKOYO, INC. v. BENIHANA, INC., 828 F. Supp. 2d 720 (D. Del. 2011)

. . . (D.I. 13, ex. 1, Schedule L01(d)) Section 7.10 of the ARA further provided that [Bl] will own the Trademarks . . . (D.I. 13, ex. 1 at § 7.10) On or about April 23, 2010, defendants initiated an application for international . . .

ELLINGTON CREDIT FUND, LTD. v. SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVICING, INC., 837 F. Supp. 2d 162 (S.D.N.Y. 2011)

. . . (See e.g., PSA §§ 7.08-7.10). Accordingly, Count Eighteen is dismissed. 13. . . .

GORSUCH, LTD. a B. C. a a a LLC, a v. WELLS FARGO NATIONAL BANK ASSOCIATION,, 830 F. Supp. 2d 1202 (D. Colo. 2011)

. . . (citations omitted); see also Docket No. 9-3 at 15, § 7.10 ("This Agreement shall be governed by and . . .

THOMPSON, v. UNITED STATES,, 101 Fed. Cl. 416 (Fed. Cl. 2011)

. . . words such as 'until,' ‘during,’ and so long as.’ ”) (quoting Cameron, Michigan Real Property Law, § 7.10 . . .

THE FLORIDA BAR, s v. HUDSON, s, 75 So. 3d 215 (Fla. 2011)

. . . and convincing evidence that he has met the criteria set forth in Rule Regulating the Florida Bar 3-7.10 . . . Bar 3-7.10(f). . . . Bar 3 — 7.10(f)(1). . . . Bar 3-7.10(f)(l)(A), (G). . . .

A. PALUCH, Jr. v. SECRETARY PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT CORRECTIONS S. D. J. S. P. A. P. P. L. S. D. SCI, 442 F. App'x 690 (3d Cir. 2011)

. . . Relying on Local Rule 7.10, the District Court denied the motion as untimely. . . . note first that, although Paluch’s pro se motion to reconsider cited only Middle District Local Rule 7.10 . . . Until December 1, 2009, both Rule 59(e) and Local Rule 7.10 afforded a litigant 10 days following an . . . Rule 59(e) was changed to impose a 28-day time limit, whereas Local Rule 7.10 afforded only 14 days to . . . Next, we turn to the District Court’s application of Local Rule 7.10’s 14-day limitations period. . . .

MIDAMERICAN DISTRIBUTION, INC. v. CLARIFICATION TECHNOLOGY, INC., 807 F. Supp. 2d 646 (E.D. Ky. 2011)

. . . The following is Filtercorp’s basic distribution model; FCMA — $7.10 per ctn. discount FCSE — $5.00 per . . . The minutes provided each RDW’s container discount: Plaintiff would receive $7.10, Filtercorp Southeast . . . When asked at his deposition about the 2006 minutes Goble answered: “I don’t recall how 7.10, 5.25, and . . . First, it quoted a $7.00 discount to Plaintiff instead of the $7.10 that had been quoted in the August . . .

CLARK, v. J. ASTRUE,, 769 F. Supp. 2d 1172 (N.D. Iowa 2011)

. . . He also stated that he had noticed increased back pain, which he rated at 7.10. . . .

J. ROGERS, v. UNITED STATES,, 95 Fed. Cl. 513 (Fed. Cl. 2010)

. . . Section 7.10 of the “Declaration of Protective Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions for Silver Oak . . . Second, Section 7.10 of the Declaration makes clear that the Bredas may only sue on behalf of the Homeowners . . .

HOLLAND, v. HOLT, 409 F. App'x 494 (3d Cir. 2010)

. . . The Court explained that Holland had ten days under Middle District Local Rule 7.10 to seek reconsideration . . . The motion, however, was untimely under both Middle District Local Rule 7.10 and Federal Rule of Civil . . .

MENKES, v. STOLT- NIELSEN S. A. G. J. R., 270 F.R.D. 80 (D. Conn. 2010)

. . . On that day, the price of SNSA ADRs fell 16.3% from $7.10 per share to close at $5.94 per share. . . .

WILLISTON BASIN INTERSTATE PIPELINE COMPANY, v. FACTORY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY,, 270 F.R.D. 456 (D.N.D. 2010)

. . . .); Farnsworth on Contracts §§ 7.10-7.14 (3rd ed.2004). . . . Sears Pension Plan, 144 F.3d 461, 466 (7th Cir.1998); see generally Farnsworth on Contracts, §§ 7.10- . . .

In S. WILLIAMS, Sr. L. W. Jr. IV, v. S. Sr. L., 424 B.R. 207 (Bankr. W.D. Va. 2010)

. . . miscellaneous telecommunication services: $25.45 for “Em-barq Solutions”; $8.42 for “Local Services”; $7.10 . . .

THE FLORIDA BAR, v. BITTERMAN,, 33 So. 3d 686 (Fla. 2010)

. . . ninety-one-day period did Bitterman seek reinstatement as required by Rule Regulating the Florida Bar 3-7.10 . . .

In AMENDMENTS TO THE RULES REGULATING THE FLORIDA BAR, 24 So. 3d 63 (Fla. 2009)

. . . Electronic Media Other Than Computer-Accessed Communications); 4-7.7 (Evaluation of Advertisements): 4-7.10 . . . pay the usual fees charged by such programs, subject, however, to the limitations imposed by rule 4-7.10 . . . RULE 4-7.10 LAWYER REFERRAL SERVICES (a) When Lawyers May Accept Referrals. . . .

CONSOLIDATED EDISON COMPANY OF NEW YORK, INC. v. UNITED STATES,, 90 Fed. Cl. 228 (Fed. Cl. 2009)

. . . combining CEL Trust’s equity commitment of $39,320,000.00, with an $80,792,270.36 nonrecourse loan, at 7.10% . . . Deposit by transferring and assigning its rights in an ABN AMRO Account, which had an interest rate of 7.10% . . . HBU’s commitment was in the form of a nonrecourse loan in the amount of $80,792,270.36 at 7.10% interest . . . $80,792,270.36 by transferring and assigning its rights in the ABN AMRO Account at an interest rate of 7.10% . . .

THE SCOTTS COMPANY LLC, v. FARNAM COMPANIES, INC., 659 F. Supp. 2d 913 (S.D. Ohio 2009)

. . . Section 7.10 of the APA (“Take or Pay Provision”) Section § 7.10 of the APA, entitled “AGREVO SUPPLY . . . Scotts argues that even if Section 7.10 is ambiguous as to how Farnam’s obligation is to be calculated . . . Section 7.10 of the APA specifically provides: PURCHASER shall have the right, but not the obligation . . . Farnam does admit, however, that APA Section 7.10 obligates it to pay an amount equal to fifty percent . . . The Court finds that Scotts is not entitled to the full $518,436 it seeks for breach of Section 7.10. . . .

In BLACKBURN s J. J. s v. s, 415 B.R. 668 (Bankr. N.D. Ill. 2009)

. . . shareholders affirmatively voted in favor dissolution in accordance with the provisions of Section 7.10 . . . , had been given written notice of the meeting at which action was taken in accordance with Section 7.10 . . .

D. WEST, v. AK STEEL CORPORATION RETIREMENT ACCUMULATION PENSION PLAN,, 657 F. Supp. 2d 914 (S.D. Ohio 2009)

. . . The Court also discounts McKee’s conference hours (which Plaintiffs state are 7.10 hours) by 50%, or . . .

In PLAZA DE RETIRO, INC., 417 B.R. 632 (Bankr. D.N.M. 2009)

. . . exhibits show: Net Taxable Exhibits Year Income Cash Flow Before NOL 6.9 2005 (630,781) (57,068) (620,060) 7.10 . . .

EXECUTIVE RISK INDEMNITY, INC. v. CHARLESTON AREA MEDICAL CENTER, INC., 681 F. Supp. 2d 694 (S.D.W. Va. 2009)

. . . Windt, Insurance Claims and Disputes § 7.10 (2d ed. 1998)). . . . Windt, Insurance Claims and Disputes § 7.10)); see also In re Liquidation of Union Indent. Ins. . . .

THE FLORIDA BAR WOLF, 21 So. 3d 15 (Fla. 2009)

. . . and convincing evidence that he has met the criteria set forth in Rule Regulating the Florida Bar 3-7.10 . . . Bar 3-7.10(f)(3)(A) (an element of rehabilitation is “strict compliance with the specific conditions . . . Bar 3-7.10(f)(1)(G). . . . Bar 3-7.10(k). . . .

ADVISORY OPINION TO GOVERNOR RE COMMISSION OF ELECTED JUDGE, 17 So. 3d 265 (Fla. 2009)

. . . Bar 3-7.10(b)(l). . . . Bar 3-7.10(d), (f). . . . Bar 3-7.10(f). . . . Bar 3-7.10(h). . . .

FLORIDA BOARD OF BAR EXAMINERS RE WEBSTER, 3 So. 3d 1058 (Fla. 2009)

. . . Bar 3-7.10. We also note that Utterback, Case No. . . .

HARKER S DISTRIBUTION, INC. v. REINHART FOODSERVICE, L. L. C., 597 F. Supp. 2d 926 (N.D. Iowa 2009)

. . . have intended by using the words in question in the circumstances. 2 Farnsworth on Contracts §§ 7.9, 7.10 . . .

RAZZOLI, v. DIRECTOR, BUREAU OF PRISONS N. E. R. O. BOP FCI U. S. Mr. A Mr. A Mr., 293 F. App'x 852 (3d Cir. 2008)

. . . consequences of Rule 56 summary judgment, as well as their responsibilities pursuant to Local Rules 7.1-7.10 . . .

In AMENDMENTS TO THE RULES REGULATING THE FLORIDA BAR AND THE RULES OF JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION- MULTIJURISDICTIONAL PRACTICE OF LAW, 991 So. 2d 842 (Fla. 2008)

. . . availability of their services to prospective clients in Florida is governed by rules 4-7.1 through 4-7.11 4-7.10 . . .

GOLDMAN, v. HEALTHCARE MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS, INC. E., 628 F. Supp. 2d 748 (W.D. Mich. 2008)

. . . See generally 2 Nimmer on Copyright § 7.10[A][1], citing E.F. Johnson v. . . .

C. YOUNG, v. DIVERSIFIED CONSULTANTS, INC., 554 F. Supp. 2d 954 (D. Minn. 2008)

. . . Introduction Young claims that Thomas Lyons, Sr. spent 7.10 hours in this matter, Thomas Lyons, Jr. spent . . .

M. NOLFI, v. OHIO KENTUCKY OIL CORP., 562 F. Supp. 2d 904 (N.D. Ohio 2008)

. . . See also Thomas Lee Hazen, Law of Securities Regulation, § 7.10[3] (“Notwithstanding ... scattered decisions . . .

BANK OF NEW YORK, v. TYCO INTERNATIONAL GROUP, S. A. S. A., 545 F. Supp. 2d 312 (S.D.N.Y. 2008)

. . . Harper, Attorney for BNY, to the Court (citing 1998 Indenture § 5.9(d); 2003 Indenture § 7.10(d)). . . . .

UNITED STATES v. SCHWARTZ,, 511 F.3d 403 (3d Cir. 2008)

. . . Calamari & Per-illo, CONTRACTS § 3.13 (5th ed. 2003), see also Farnsworth on CONTRACTS § 7.10 (4th ed . . .

In WOODS AUTO GALLERY, INC., 379 B.R. 875 (Bankr. W.D. Mo. 2007)

. . . 169.00 4/23/07 Murie Bolen .50 $ 65.00 5/30/07 Kathryn Bussing 8.10 $ 2,227.50 5/30/07 Richard Beheler 7.10 . . . 1,952.50 5/31/07 Kathryn Bussing 7.10 1,952,50 5/31/07 Terry Summers 7.10 $ 2,094.50 Total disallowed . . .

In AMENDMENTS TO THE RULES REGULATING THE FLORIDA BAR- ADVERTISING, 971 So. 2d 763 (Fla. 2007)

. . . 4-7.7 (Evaluation of Advertisements); 4-7.8 (Exemptions From the Filing and Review Requirement); 4-7.10 . . . provisions of subdivision- (b)(l-)- of-this-raleT (A) subject to the requirements — of this-rale, and rule 4-7.10 . . . usual fees charged by such programs, subject, however, to the limitations imposed by rule 4-7:1-14-7.10 . . . RULE 1-7-4,14-7.10 LAWYER REFERRAL SERVICES (а) When Lawyers May Accept Referrals. . . .

LEE, v. JAVITCH, BLOCK RATHBONE, LLP,, 522 F. Supp. 2d 945 (S.D. Ohio 2007)

. . . Analogous formulations can be found, for example, in Ohio Jury Instruction § 7.10 defining reasonable . . .

In ENRON CREDITORS RECOVERY CORP. v. K. K. v. AWS a k a AWS f k a, 376 B.R. 442 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2007)

. . . Martin argues that a writing is required to effectuate the assignment because section 7.10 of the Employment . . .

S. A. LITMAN, v. UNITED STATES, B. S. v. f k a v., 78 Fed. Cl. 90 (Fed. Cl. 2007)

. . . adjusted pursuant to Section 3.3 below); (ii) the Quarterly Deferred Payments, if any, provided in Section 7.10 . . . determined exceeds 25% of the target Adjusted Gross Profit for such quarter as reflected on Schedule 7.10 . . .