Cases from cite.case.law:

A. ALLEN, v. STATE, 261 So. 3d 1255 (Fla. 2019)

. . . (Crim.) 7.11 (2014). . . . decisions require that jury verdicts be unanimous and not advisory, rendering the Standard Jury Instruction 7.11 . . .

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

. . . ; Discipline on Removal from Judicial Office); 3-7.10 (Reinstatement and Readmission Procedures); 3-7.11 . . . RULE 3-7.11 GENERAL RULES OF PROCEDURE (a) Time is Directory. . . .

LOWE, v. STATE, 259 So. 3d 23 (Fla. 2018)

. . . In 2014, subsequent to Lowe's new penalty phase, Florida's Standard Criminal Jury Instruction 7.11 was . . .

ARMOR ALL STP PRODUCTS COMPANY, v. TSI PRODUCTS, INC., 337 F. Supp. 3d 156 (D. Conn. 2018)

. . . Article VII, Section 7.11 provides that it "is binding on [Michael Quest] and [IDQ] and their successors . . .

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

. . . See Touchstone's Proposed Findings of Fact at ¶ 7.11 (docket no. 200). . . .

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

. . . authorized for publication and use on an interim basis, on its own motion, amended existing instructions 7.11 . . . (Death Penalty Case) ), and adopted new instructions 3.12(e) (Jury Verdict Form-Death Penalty) and 7.11 . . . Next, with regard to instruction 7.11 (Preliminary Instructions in Penalty Proceedings-Capital Cases) . . . , we amend the interim instruction by renumbering it from 7.11 to 7.10; under "Give this instruction . . . it to 7.11. . . .

REYNOLDS, v. STATE, 251 So. 3d 811 (Fla. 2018)

. . . that the trial court instructed Reynolds's jury using Florida Standard Jury Instruction (Criminal) 7.11 . . . We have rejected similar Hurst claims where defendants received Standard Jury Instruction 7.11. . . . To date, we have not expressly addressed a Caldwell challenge to Standard Jury Instruction 7.11 brought . . . (Crim.) 7.11. . . . The mercy instruction is the portion of Standard Jury Instruction 7.11 that informs a jury that they . . .

IN RE TOWNSIDE CONSTRUCTION, INC. E. Jr. v. In E. Jr. v., 582 B.R. 407 (Bankr. W.D. Va. 2018)

. . . They will receive no discharge in Chapter 7.11 U.S.C. § 727(a)(1). . . .

IN RE AMENDMENTS TO RULES REGULATING THE FLORIDA BAR- SUBCHAPTER LAWYER REFERRAL SERVICES, 238 So. 3d 164 (Fla. 2018)

. . . CONTENT The following information in advertisements is presumed not to violate the provisions of rules 4-7.11 . . .

HAMILTON, v. STATE, 236 So. 3d 276 (Fla. 2018)

. . . (Crim.) 7.11 (2016). . . .

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)

. . . Section 7.11 ("Disputed Claims Reserve") also addresses the Section 7.20(b) Disputed Claims Reserve, . . . (Liquidation Plan § 7.11, 35.) . . .

IN RE AMENDMENTS TO RULES REGULATING THE FLORIDA BAR BIENNIAL PETITION, 234 So. 3d 577 (Fla. 2017)

. . . recipient and — not—meeti-ngthat does not meet the requirements of subdivision (b) of this rule and rules 4-7.11 . . .

MW BUILDERS, INC. f n a MW v. UNITED STATES,, 134 Fed. Cl. 469 (Fed. Cl. 2017)

. . . Allen Farnsworth, Farns-worth On Contracts § 7.11 at 293-94 (3d ed. 2004) (emphasis added). . . .

J. GREDE, v. FCSTONE, LLC,, 867 F.3d 767 (7th Cir. 2017)

. . . Section 7.11, which governs disputed claims reserves generally, similarly provides that “to the extent . . .

J. GREDE, v. FCSTONE, LLC,, 867 F.3d 767 (7th Cir. 2017)

. . . Section 7.11, which governs disputed claims reserves generally, similarly provides that “to the extent . . .

READING INTERNATIONAL, INC. a v. MALULANI GROUP, LIMITED, a, 694 F. App'x 571 (9th Cir. 2017)

. . . Nor does § 7.11(x) of the Mortgage create a general right to cure any Event of Default under the Mortgage . . . Rather than modifying all the preceding Events of Default, the plain language of § 7.11(x) creates an . . .

BARBOSA, v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY,, 263 F. Supp. 3d 207 (D.D.C. 2017)

. . . . §§ 7.11-7.14. . . .

C. POLLITZER, v. G. GEBHARDT,, 860 F.3d 1334 (11th Cir. 2017)

. . . than two years but then exercised his right under § 1307 of the Code to convert his case to Chapter 7.11 . . .

COZZIE, v. STATE, 225 So. 3d 717 (Fla. 2017)

. . . (Crim.) 7.11 Penalty Proceedings—Capital Cases (2014) (emphasis added). . . . .

IN RE STANDARD CRIMINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS IN CAPITAL CASES, 214 So. 3d 1236 (Fla. 2017)

. . . interim basis, we authorize for publication and use amended Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases 7.11 . . . addition, we propose, on our own motion, new instructions 3.12(e) (Jury Verdict Form—Death Penalty) and 7.11 . . . , 7.11(a), and 7.12, as set forth in the appendix to this opinion. . . . Certain language that previously appeared in jury instruction 7.11, unrelated to the portion of Florida . . . example, the definitions of statutory aggravating factors— has been transferred to new instruction 7.11 . . . (Signature of foreperson') 7.11 PRELIMINARY INSTRUCTIONS IN PENALTY PROCEEDINGS — CAPITAL CASES §921.141 . . . 690 So. 2d 1263], 1998 [723 So. 2d 123], 2009 [22 So. 3d 17], and 2014 1146 So. 3d 11101. and 2017. 7.11 . . .

MIDDLETON, v. STATE, 220 So. 3d 1152 (Fla. 2017)

. . . (Crim.) 7.11. . . .

TRUEHILL, v. STATE, 211 So. 3d 930 (Fla. 2017)

. . . (Crim.) 7.11 (“If ... you determine that no aggravating circumstances are found to exist, or that the . . .

UNITED STATES v. COLLINS,, 859 F.3d 1207 (10th Cir. 2017)

. . . On November 6, 2003, the agent purchased 7.11 grams of crack cocaine at a roadside park near Baxter Springs . . .

D. HALL, v. STATE D. v. L., 212 So. 3d 1001 (Fla. 2017)

. . . (Crim.) 7.11 (2009) (“[T]he final decision as to what punishment shall be imposed is the responsibility . . . (Crim.) 7.11 (2009) ("A mitigating circumstance need not be proved beyond a reasonable doubt by the defendant . . .

KACZMAR, III, v. STATE, 228 So. 3d 1 (Fla. 2017)

. . . Crim. 7.11). . . . Crim. 7.11). . . . Crim. 7.11). . . .

KNIGHT, v. STATE v. L., 225 So. 3d 661 (Fla. 2017)

. . . (Crim.) 7.11). . . . (Crim.) 7.11). . . . (Crim.) 7.11). To be sure, Knight’s jury and the Davis jury were not identically instructed. . . . (Crim.) 7.11). . . .

BARRY, M. D. v. MEDTRONIC, INC., 230 F. Supp. 3d 630 (E.D. Tex. 2017)

. . . The relevant provision regarding standing under the EBI/Barry Agreement is Section 7.11, which provides . . . : Section 7.11 Third Party Infringers (a) EBI shall have the right, but not the obligation, to pursue . . . Section 7.11 of the license provides for rights to sue third party infringers to both Dr. . . . Reading Section 7.11 in context of other clauses does not show a demonstrative party intent to requiring . . . Barry’s right vested when his “enforcement right” (a term found in Section 7.11(b)) was “executed,” i.e . . .

WILLIAMS, v. STATE, 209 So. 3d 543 (Fla. 2017)

. . . (Crim.) 7.11 Penalty Proceedings — Capital Cases). . . .

DAVIS, Jr. v. STATE, 207 So.3d 142 (Fla. 2016)

. . . (Crim.) 7.11 (“If ... you determine that no aggravating circumstances are found to exist, or that the . . .

HURST, v. STATE, 202 So. 3d 40 (Fla. 2016)

. . . (Crim.) 7.11 Penalty Proceedings—Capital Cases. . . .

PROCESS AMERICA, INC. v. CYNERGY HOLDINGS, LLC,, 839 F.3d 125 (2d Cir. 2016)

. . . Section 7.11 of the ISO Agreement further provides that both Section 2.6 and Section 3.8 survive termination . . . And, as Process America itself argues, Section 7.11’s survival clause would allow it to transfer the . . .

PLOTNICK, v. COMPUTER SCIENCES CORPORATION DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN FOR KEY EXECUTIVES,, 182 F. Supp. 3d 573 (E.D. Va. 2016)

. . . a result of these procedural deficiencies, they may seek relief under § 1132(a)(3) because Plan §§ 7.11 . . .

UNITED STATES v. DOMINGUEZ- RODRIGUEZ,, 817 F.3d 1190 (10th Cir. 2016)

. . . The defendant subsequently met with the Cl and was found in possession of 7.11 net grams of methamphetamine . . .

MYERS INDUSTRIES, INC. v. SCHOELLER ARCA SYSTEMS, INC. B. V. f k a N. V., 171 F. Supp. 3d 107 (S.D.N.Y. 2016)

. . . C §§ 7.11-.12.) . . .

RALEIGH WAKE CITIZENS ASSOCIATION, v. WAKE COUNTY BOARD OF ELECTIONS, v., 166 F. Supp. 3d 553 (E.D.N.C. 2016)

. . . both redistricting plans, the maximum population deviation in the seven single-member districts is 7.11% . . . The maximum population deviation for the seven single-member districts is 7.11% and for the two super . . .

E. T. PRODUCTS, LLC, v. D. E. MILLER HOLDINGS, INC., 154 F. Supp. 3d 755 (N.D. Ind. 2016)

. . . Here is the language of the restrictive covenant .from Section 7.11(b) of the Asset Purchase Agreement . . . with its obligations under the Note and this Agreement (the “Restricted Period”), subject to Section 7.11 . . . “and its Affiliates,” which is conduct specifically excepted from the restrictive covenant in § 7.11( . . . from E-.T.’s counsel to the Millers’ attorneys contained the text of the restrictive covenant in § 7.11 . . .

OTSUKA PHARMACEUTICAL CO. LTD. v. TORRENT PHARMACEUTICALS LIMITED, INC. Co. v. SA, Co. v. USA, Co. v. USA, LLC, Co. v. Co. v. FZE, USA, Co. v. Co. v. Co. v. Co. US U. S. LLC, Co. v. USA Co. v. USA, Co. v. Co. v. FZE, USA, Co. v. USA, Co. v. USA, LLC, Co. v. Sa, Co. v. USA Co. v. SA, Co. v. Co. v. Co. v. LLC, MSN Co. v. USA,, 151 F. Supp. 3d 525 (D.N.J. 2015)

. . . 6.43 ppm (d, J-2.4 Hz, HI); 6.49 ppm (dd, J-8.4 Hz, J-2.4 Hz, 11.1), 7.04 ppin 7.11 . . .

GLOBAL FITNESS HOLDINGS, LLC, v. FEDERAL RECOVERY ACCEPTANCE, INC., 127 F. Supp. 3d 1228 (D. Utah 2015)

. . . See also APA § 7.11(d). . . . .

CAMP, v. CITY OF PELHAM,, 625 F. App'x 422 (11th Cir. 2015)

. . . City of Pelham Civil Service Law §§ 7.11-.12, 7.18, Doc. . . . Id. §§ 7.11, 7.17. . . . Civil Service Law §§ 7.11 (vacation time), 7.17 (sick time). . . . Sections 7.11 and 7.17 of the Civil Service Law require leave to accrue in a “comparable' manner.” ' . . .

In AMENDMENTS TO RULES REGULATING THE FLORIDA BAR BIENNIAL PETITION HOUSEKEEPING, 164 So. 3d 1217 (Fla. 2015)

. . . (Committees); 1-13.1 (Time); 2-7.3 (Creation of Sections and Divisions); 3-7.1 (Confidentiality); 3-7.11 . . . (b)-(m) [No Change] RULE 3-7.11 GENERAL RULES OF PROCEDURE (a) [No Change] (b) Process. . . .

Z. BROOKS, v. STATE Z. v. L., 175 So. 3d 204 (Fla. 2015)

. . . Homicide 7.11 (“Should you find sufficient aggravating circumstances do exist to justify recommending . . .

RECORDINGS LIMITED, v. SONY MUSIC ENTERTAINMENT,, 97 F. Supp. 3d 433 (S.D.N.Y. 2015)

. . . Indeed, paragraph 7.11 of the Licensing Agreement specifically envisions royalty payments for joint performance . . .

MILLER, v. STATE v. L., 161 So. 3d 354 (Fla. 2015)

. . . Homicide 7.11 (“Should you find sufficient aggravating circumstances do exist to justify recommending . . .

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

. . . Recommendation 7.11 DoD should reassess the ratings of service members who were discharged as unfit but . . .

K. KIVISTO, v. SOIFER,, 587 F. App'x 522 (11th Cir. 2014)

. . . Florida Bar Rules 3-7.3 and -7.11. . . .

ANDERSEN Jr. A. O S. M. v. DHL RETIREMENT PENSION PLAN DPWN USA DHL DPWN USA, 766 F.3d 1205 (9th Cir. 2014)

. . . The transfer option was described in section 7.11 of Airborne’s Retirement Income Plan: A Participant . . . It did so by amending section 7.11 of the Retirement Income Plan to “add[ ] the following to the end . . . Section 7.11 is contained within Article VII, entitled “Payment of Benefits.” . . . Neither of the provisions Plaintiffs cite indicates that the transfer option described in section 7.11 . . . Section 7.11 provides, in full: [a] Participant may transfer his/her nonfor-feitable Employer Profit . . .

P. SMITH, v. STATE, 151 So. 3d 1177 (Fla. 2014)

. . . trial are not identical to the instructions contained in Florida Standard Jury Instruction (Criminal) 7.11 . . .

In STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTIONS IN CRIMINAL CASES REPORT NO., 146 So. 3d 1110 (Fla. 2014)

. . . Felony Murder — First Degree; 7.5— Felony Murder — Second Degree; 7.6— Felony Murder — Third Degree; 7.11 . . . 782.065, Florida Statutes (2013); (2) amendment of the aggravating circumstances section of instruction 7.11 . . . publication and use new instructions 11.18, 12.9, 14.10, and 29.3, and amended instructions 7.3, 7.5, 7.6, 7.11 . . . instruction was adopted in 1981 and amended in 1992 [603 So.2d 1775], and 1994 [639 So.2d 6021, and 2014. 7.11 . . .

FLORIDA BAR, v. M. P. DAVIS,, 149 So. 3d 1121 (Fla. 2014)

. . . Bar 3 — 7.11(b) (“Mailing of registered or certified papers or notices prescribed in these rules to the . . .

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

. . . considered as a matter of contempt and process in the manner provided in Subdivision (d) and (f) of rule 3-7.11 . . .

THE FLORIDA BAR, v. TOWNSEND, Jr., 145 So. 3d 775 (Fla. 2014)

. . . Bar 3-7.11(f)(l)(F). . . .

READING INTERNATIONAL, a v. MALULANI GROUP, LIMITED, a, 16 F. Supp. 3d 1185 (D. Haw. 2014)

. . . For example, the Mortgage provides: Section 7.11 Event of Default defined. . . . No. 40-5, Def.’s Ex. 4 § 7.11. . . . No. 40-5, Def.’s Ex. 4 § 7.11. . . .

IN RE WILMINGTON TRUST SECURITIES LITIGATION, 29 F. Supp. 3d 432 (D. Del. 2014)

. . . acquired by M & T for approximately $3.84 per share, only half its trading price of the previous day, $7.11 . . .

WRIGHT, v. NORTH CAROLINA,, 975 F. Supp. 2d 539 (E.D.N.C. 2014)

. . . Here the plaintiffs allege that the maximum deviation of the numbered districts is 7.11% and that the . . .

STEWART INFORMATION SERVICES CORPORATION v. GREAT AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY,, 997 F. Supp. 2d 650 (S.D. Tex. 2014)

. . . See Doc. 138-7.11, Ex. E-ll to Def.’s Mot. for Partial Summ. . . .

HOMEOWNERS CHOICE, INC. v. AON BENFIELD, INC., 550 F. App'x 311 (7th Cir. 2013)

. . . Allan Farnsworth, Farnsworth on Contracts § 7.11 (3d. ed. 2004). . . . .

UNITED STATES v. GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY,, 986 F. Supp. 2d 79 (D. Mass. 2013)

. . . Farnsworth, Contracts § 7.11 (1982) and 4 S. Williston, Contracts § 601 (3d ed. 1962)). . . .

MARIANO, v. GHARAI, SGA v. LLC,, 999 F. Supp. 2d 167 (D.D.C. 2013)

. . . The Contract also defines the word “Claim” as follows: 7.11 CLAIMS AND DISPUTES: Definition. . . .

In E. McINERNEY,, 499 B.R. 574 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 2013)

. . . Debtor’s claims were subject to binding arbitration, and that the claims were time barred, under Section 7.11 . . .

FOSTER, v. STATE, 132 So. 3d 40 (Fla. 2013)

. . . denying his claim that his death sentence is unconstitutional because Standard Jury Instruction (Crim.) 7.11 . . . ineffective assistance of counsel claim because there was no error in giving Standard Jury Instruction 7.11 . . . litigate the sufficiency of the jury instructions that were virtually identical to Jury Instruction 7.11 . . .

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

. . . Id. at 8; see also id. at 17-18; ECF No. 58-1, at 116; see ECF Nos. 51-1, ¶¶ 7.4-7.6, 7.8-7.9, 7.11; . . . 63-1, ¶¶ 7.4-7.6, 7.8-7.9, 7.11. . . .

CRESCENT RESOURCES LITIGATION TRUST BENSIMON, v. DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION LLC LLC f k a LLC LLC B. W. W. R., 500 B.R. 464 (W.D. Tex. 2013)

. . . C-l (Credit Agreement), §§ 1.01, 5.01, 7.11 (disclosing and requiring the term loan proceeds be distributed . . .

KOLBE, v. BAC HOME LOANS SERVICING, LP, d b a N. A., 738 F.3d 432 (1st Cir. 2013)

. . . .”); 2 Farnsworth, Farnsworth on Contracts, § 7.11, at 304-OS (3d ed.2004) (“This rule plainly subordinates . . . See 2 Farnsworth on Contracts § 7.11, at 297 (“If, however, two provisions in a contract so clearly conflict . . .

THE FLORIDA BAR, v. V. PALMER,, 149 So. 3d 1118 (Fla. 2013)

. . . Florida Bar rule 3-7.11(f)(1)(F) authorizes this Court to review petitions for contempt and to issue . . .

In G. OBERDICK, v. G. LLC, v. G., 490 B.R. 687 (Bankr. W.D. Pa. 2013)

. . . See Exhibit L at Section 7.11. It has been well-recognized since Patterson v. . . .

In STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTIONS IN CRIMINAL CASES- REPORT NO., 109 So. 3d 721 (Fla. 2013)

. . . , 2012, the Court granted the Committee's motion to withdraw its proposal to amend jury instruction 7.11 . . .

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

. . . RULE 4-7.11 APPLICATION OF RULES (a) Type of Media. . . . overreaching, harassment, intimidation, or undue influence; (E) the communication violates rules 4-7.11 . . . subject to the following requirements: (A) Such communications are subject to the requirements of 4-7.11 . . . Evaluation of advertisements is limited to determination of facial compliance with rules 4-7.11 through . . . lawyer may not use a firm name, letterhead, or other professional designation that violates rules 4-7.11 . . . existing precedent to be understood and applied in future cases, we number the new rules as follows: 4-7.11 . . .

BRADDY, v. STATE, 111 So. 3d 810 (Fla. 2012)

. . . (Crim.) 7.11 (Penalty Proceedings — Capital Cases); In re Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases . . .

KOLBE, v. BAC HOME LOANS SERVICING, LP, d b a N. A., 695 F.3d 111 (1st Cir. 2012)

. . . See Farnsworth, 2 Farnsworth on Contracts § 7.11, at 297 (3d ed. 2004). . . .

In PHILADELPHIA NEWSPAPERS, LLC, H., 690 F.3d 161 (3d Cir. 2012)

. . . See Plan §§ 5.04, 7.09, 7.11, 7.13 (establishing the distribution account, and detailing powers and duties . . .

In PHILADELPHIA NEWSPAPERS, LLC, H., 690 F.3d 161 (3d Cir. 2012)

. . . See Plan §§ 5.04, 7.09, 7.11, 7.13 (establishing the distribution account, and detailing powers and duties . . .

HAMPTON, v. STATE, 103 So. 3d 98 (Fla. 2012)

. . . Jury Instr. 7.11 (Penalty Proceedings — Capital Cases) (explaining it is up to the jury to determine . . .

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

. . . considered as a matter of contempt and process in the manner provided in subdivision (d) and (fj of rule 3-7.11 . . .

In DANG,, 467 B.R. 227 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 2012)

. . . be less than the amount that would be paid on the claim if the estate were liquidated under Chapter 7.11 . . .

UNITED STATES a a Nu a v. CITY OF NEW YORK, A, 847 F. Supp. 2d 395 (E.D.N.Y. 2012)

. . . and 3.7.2004 fire academy classes and data listed for same fire academy classes on Table A-7.5 & A-7.11 . . .

ELLERBEE, Jr. v. STATE, 87 So. 3d 730 (Fla. 2012)

. . . Jury Instr. 7.11 (Penalty Proceedings — Capital Cases) (explaining that it is up to jury to determine . . .

PERRY v. NEW HAMPSHIRE, 565 U.S. 228 (U.S. 2012)

. . . No. 7.11 (CA6 2011); Fed. Crim. Jury Instr. No. 3.08 (CA7 1999); Model Crim. . . .

BARION PERRY, v. NEW HAMPSHIRE, 181 L. Ed. 2d 694 (U.S. 2012)

. . . No. 7.11 (CA6 2011); Fed. Crim. Jury Instr. No. 3.08 (CA7 1999); Model Crim. . . .

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

. . . Defendant seeks to compel arbitration of those claims pursuant to § 7.11 of the October 2008 Credit Agreement . . . Docket No. 9-3 at 15, § 7.11(a). . . . Gorsuch concedes that § 7.11 requires arbitration of its claims against defendant. . . . costs and expenses it has incurred in the filing of this Motion to Compel Arbitration” pursuant to § 7.11 . . .

McCRAY, II, v. STATE, 71 So. 3d 848 (Fla. 2011)

. . . McCRAY asserts that the trial court erred in instructing the penalty-phase jury using “Jury Instruction 7.11 . . . litigate the sufficiency of the jury instructions that were virtually identical to Jury Instruction 7.11 . . . .2d 516, 530 (Fla.2008) (acknowledging that this Court has “consistently rejected challenges” to the 7.11 . . .

Ed ABREU, v. NEW MEXICO CHILDREN, YOUTH AND FAMILIES DEPARTMENT CYFD CYFD,, 797 F. Supp. 2d 1199 (D.N.M. 2011)

. . . Code tit. 1, § 7.11. 10 (only non-disabled employees). . . .

HALEBIAN, v. J. BERV, M. A. T. R. B. G. R. III,, 644 F.3d 122 (2d Cir. 2011)

. . . Operation of Section 7.11 As stated by the Supreme Judicial Court, the business judgment rule embodied . . .

v., 136 T.C. 294 (T.C. 2011)

. . . Id. sec. 34A.07[6]; see also 2 Restatement, Property 3d (Servitudes), sec. 7.11 (2000). . . . Doctrine of Changed Conditions”, 40 Hastings L.J. 1187, 1221 (1989)); see also 2 Restatement, supra sec. 7.11 . . .

CONTECH CONSTRUCTION PRODUCTS, INC. v. HEIERLI, RBW, 764 F. Supp. 2d 96 (D.D.C. 2011)

. . . A (Stockholders’ Agreement) ¶ 7.11, Ex. B (Management Services Agreement) ¶ 10(b), Ex. . . . Heierli’s Opp’n, Ex. 9 (Stockholders’ Agreement) ¶ 7.11; Ex. 10 (Management Services Agreement) ¶ 10( . . . (citing Stockholders Agreement ¶ 7.11). . . . Section 7.11 of the Stockholders’ Agreement reads: “Any mediation or arbitration proceedings shall occur . . .

THE FLORIDA BAR, v. LOBASZ,, 64 So. 3d 1167 (Fla. 2011)

. . . Subsequently, in June 2008, pursuant to Rule Regulating the Florida Bar 3 — 7.11(f) (Contempt), The Florida . . .

TROY, v. STATE, 57 So. 3d 828 (Fla. 2011)

. . . trial are not identical to those instructions contained in Florida Standard Jury Instruction (Criminal) 7.11 . . .

R. TASKER, v. DHL RETIREMENT SAVINGS PLAN, 621 F.3d 34 (1st Cir. 2010)

. . . separate estimate of what his benefit might be if he exercised the transfer option permitted under Section 7.11 . . . eliminate the transfer option and prohibit transfers of the kind previously permitted under Section 7.11 . . . Without amending any other language in Section 7.11, the amendment stated that the retirement plan “shall . . .

BROWN BROWN, INC. v. COLA,, 745 F. Supp. 2d 588 (E.D. Pa. 2010)

. . . Finally, in Section 7.11, the Agreement specifies that: Promptly after the Closing, each Seller agrees . . . (Id. § 7.11 (emphasis added).) . . . Moreover, Defendants make a misplaced attempt to read Section 7.11 as expressly recognizing a release . . . (Id. § 7.11.) . . . They go on to reason that, “[r]ead in conjunction with Section 7.11, this inclusion signified that the . . .

AULT, v. STATE, 53 So. 3d 175 (Fla. 2010)

. . . (Crim.) 7.11, at 132-33). . . .

MILLER, v. STATE, 42 So. 3d 204 (Fla. 2010)

. . . (Crim.) 7.11 (Penalty Proceedings — Capital Cases); see also In re Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal . . .

WADE, v. STATE, 41 So. 3d 857 (Fla. 2010)

. . . (Crim.) 7.11 (Penalty Proceedings — Capital Cases); see also In re Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal . . .

W. McWATTERS, v. STATE, 36 So. 3d 613 (Fla. 2010)

. . . This Court repeatedly has found Florida Standard Criminal Jury Instruction 7.11(9) to be constitutional . . .

ZOMMER, v. STATE, 31 So. 3d 733 (Fla. 2010)

. . . (Crim.) 7.11 (Penalty Proceedings — Capital Cases); see also In re Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal . . .

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

. . . Subsequently, on June 11, 2007, pursuant to Rule Regulating the Florida Bar 3-7.11(f) (contempt), The . . .

DOMINO, v. DIDION ETHANOL, LLC,, 670 F. Supp. 2d 901 (W.D. Wis. 2009)

. . . On September 23, 2008, defendant reported a positive chronic whole effluent toxicity test of 7.11 rTUc . . .

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

. . . Procedures); 3-7.6 (Procedures Before a Referee); 3-7.7 (Procedures Before Supreme Court of Florida); 3-7.11 . . . petition may be filed in and determined by the Supreme Court of Florida or as provided under rule 3 — 7.11 . . . RULE 3-7.11 GENERAL RULE OF PROCEDURE (a) Time is Directory. . . . inquiry with no good cause shown may be a matter of contempt and processed in accordance with rule 3 — 7.11 . . . considered as a matter of contempt and process in the manner provided in subdivision (d) and (f) of rule 3-7.11 . . .

In MARTIN, D. v. LLC,, 419 B.R. 772 (Bankr. E.D. Tenn. 2009)

. . . Section 7.11 of the operating agreement allowed the debtor to buy out Class B member by paying it the . . . In the event of any conflict, this Section 7.11 shall take priority over Exhibit B. . . . The amendment made some changes in the buyout section, Section 7.11. . . .

THE FLORIDA BAR, v. D AMBROSIO,, 25 So. 3d 1209 (Fla. 2009)

. . . FACTS In July 2007, pursuant to Rule Regulating the Florida Bar 3 — 7.11(f) (contempt), The Florida Bar . . .