Cases from cite.case.law:

B. KATZ B. P. A. a v. FRANK, WEINBERG BLACK, P. L. a C. P. A. a, 268 So. 3d 773 (Fla. App. Ct. 2019)

. . . Bar 4-7.17(b). . . .

SKIDMORE, FOR RANDY CRAIG WOLFE TRUST, v. LED ZEPPELIN v., 905 F.3d 1116 (9th Cir. 2018)

. . . published works, however, so this conclusion is not particularly instructive. 2 Nimmer on Copyright § 7.17 . . .

WILLIAMS, Jr. I UMG v. GAYE, III, Jr. I UMG v. III, I Jr. UMG v. III,, 885 F.3d 1150 (9th Cir. 2018)

. . . has the deposit copy" of the work at issue, which was registered in 1935); 2 Nimmer on Copyright § 7.17 . . .

WILLIAMS, Jr. DBA I UMG v. GAYE, III, Jr. DBA I UMG v. III, DBA I Jr. UMG v. III,, 895 F.3d 1106 (9th Cir. 2018)

. . . has the deposit copy" of the work at issue, which was registered in 1935); 2 Nimmer on Copyright § 7.17 . . .

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

. . . -7.13 (Deceptive and Inherently Misleading Advertisements); 4-7.16 (Presumptively Valid Content); 4-7.17 . . . Comment [No Change] RULE 4-7.17 PAYMENT FOR ADVERTISING AND PROMOTION (a) [No Change] (b) Payment for . . . See rule 4-7.17(b). . . .

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

. . . not—meeti-ngthat does not meet the requirements of subdivision (b) of this rule and rules 4-7.11 through 4-7.17 . . .

IN RE AMENDMENTS TO RULES REGULATING THE FLORIDA BAR BIENNIAL PETITION HOUSEKEEPING, 234 So. 3d 632 (Fla. 2017)

. . . Foreign or Federal Jurisdiction; Choice of’Law); 3-4.7 (Oath); 3-5.4 (Publication of Discipline); 3-7.17 . . . RULE 3-7.17 VEXATIOUS CONDUCT AND LIMITATION ON FILINGS ' (a) Definition. . . .

IN RE DPH HOLDINGS CORP. LP, Co. L. P. LLC, Re, LP, LP, III LP, AG L. P. LLC, v. PLC LLP, DPH, 553 B.R. 20 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2016)

. . . The Waiver and Release Agreement is attached as Exhibit 7.17 to the Plan and made a part thereof. . . .

RECORDINGS LIMITED, v. SONY MUSIC ENTERTAINMENT,, 165 F. Supp. 3d 156 (S.D.N.Y. 2016)

. . . LA ¶ 7.17. . . . As noted, paragraph 7.17 provides that any royalty payments made under the Licensing Agreement represent . . . Paragraph 7.17 makes clear that the “fruit or benefit” of the bargain obtained by 19 in the Licensing . . .

IN RE MOTORS LIQUIDATION COMPANY, f k a, 539 B.R. 676 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2015)

. . . is only by coincidence), the High Yield Index “Yield to Worst,” used in Tribune-Bankruptcy, would be 7.17% . . . would be 8.34% — figures in the former case very close, and in the latter case relatively close, to the 7.17% . . .

VAN NOPPEN, v. INNERWORKINGS, INC., 136 F. Supp. 3d 922 (N.D. Ill. 2015)

. . . his holdings); Garden City I, 2011 WL 1303387, at *31 (insider sold 1,045 shares amounting to only 7.17 . . .

IN RE BRIDGEVIEW AEROSOL, LLC, v. F. E. LLC,, 538 B.R. 477 (Bankr. N.D. Ill. 2015)

. . . Ex. 26 at 67, ¶7.17. McGonigle testified that the situation was dire. . . .

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

. . . . §§ 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.” ' . . . Id. § 7.17 (“employees shall ... earn and use sick time in . a comparable manner”) (emphasis added). . . .

GANN, v. W. COLVIN,, 92 F. Supp. 3d 857 (N.D. Iowa 2015)

. . . claimant has a severe impairment; (3) the impairment equals or exceeds a listed impairment; (4) the , . r 7.17 . . .

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

. . . Nothing in Paragraph 20.1, however, limits the rule set forth in paragraph 7.17 that 19 is not “entitled . . . Otherwise, Sony remains free to bring suits “on a general or label basis” (LA ¶ 7.17)— and to retain . . .

IN RE DAIRY FARMERS OF AMERICA, INC., 80 F. Supp. 3d 838 (N.D. Ill. 2015)

. . . Nov. 27, 1996) (awarding class counsel one-third ($7.17 million) of a $21.5 million fund, plus $1,070,064.15 . . .

THE FLORIDA BAR, v. PETRANO,, 153 So. 3d 894 (Fla. 2014)

. . . Bar 3-7.17 (Vexatious Conduct and Limitation on Filings); see also Fla. R.App. . . . Bar 3-7.17 (“Vexatious conduct is conduct that amounts to abuse of the bar disciplinary process by use . . . Bar 3-7.17(d). . . .

DOBYNS, v. UNITED STATES,, 118 Fed. Cl. 289 (Fed. Cl. 2014)

. . . Allan Farnsworth, Farnsworth on Contracts § 7.17 (2004), the covenant gained increased acceptance upon . . .

In B. DICKERSON L., 510 B.R. 289 (Bankr. D. Idaho 2014)

. . . This garnishment netted $7.17 from Mr. . . .

BROWNSTEIN, v. LINDSAY, 742 F.3d 55 (3d Cir. 2014)

. . . A deposit copy does not necessarily limit the copyrightable work itself. 2 Nimmer on Copyright § 7.17 . . .

SIMKUS, v. CAVALRY PORTFOLIO SERVICES, LLC LLC,, 12 F. Supp. 3d 1103 (N.D. Ill. 2014)

. . . D, Cardholder Agreement § 7.17.) . . .

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

. . . See ECF Nos. 51-1, ¶¶ 1.7, 1.9, 1.12, 1.14-1.15, 7.13-7.14, 7.16-7.17; 63-1, ¶¶ 1.7, 1.9, 1.12, 1.14- . . . 1.15, 7.13-7.14, 7.16-7.17. . . .

KOURSA, INC. v. MANROLAND, INC., 971 F. Supp. 2d 765 (N.D. Ill. 2013)

. . . The parties further agreed in Section 7.17(a) that if Koursa cancelled the Machinery Contract, it would . . .

JAMES T. SCATUORCHIO RACING STABLE, LLC, v. WALMAC STUD MANAGEMENT, LLC,, 941 F. Supp. 2d 807 (E.D. Ky. 2013)

. . . Specifically, Section 7.17 states, in part, that “[n]o Dispute shall be submitted to the arbitration . . . The defendants cite to Section 7.17, the two-year limitations provision, of the COA and argue that the . . .

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

. . . ; 4-7.15 (Unduly Manipulative or Intrusive Advertisements); 4-7.16 (Presumptively Valid Content); 4-7.17 . . . RULE 4-7.17 PAYMENT FOR ADVERTISING AND PROMOTION (a) Payment by Other Lawyers. . . . recipient and not meeting the requirements of subdivision (b) of this rule and rules 4-7.11 through 4-7.17 . . . harassment, intimidation, or undue influence; (E) the communication violates rules 4-7.11 through 4-7.17 . . . following requirements: (A) Such communications are subject to the requirements of 4-7.11 through 4-7.17 . . .

PURCHASE PARTNERS, LLC, v. CARVER FEDERAL SAVINGS BANK, s Sr., 914 F. Supp. 2d 480 (S.D.N.Y. 2012)

. . . To the extent relevant here, Section 7.17(g) provides that Carver “makes no representation and shall . . . (Agreement, § 7.17(g)). . . . (Agreement §§ 7.17, 3.1; see also Transcript 59:15-19). . . . (Id. § 7.17) (emphases added). . . . (See, e.g., Agreement §§ 5, 7.17). . . .

S. PETRI, v. UNITED STATES,, 104 Fed. Cl. 537 (Fed. Cl. 2012)

. . . See AFI 36-3212, ¶ 7.17. . . .

In ITT EDUCATIONAL SERVICES, INC. SECURITIES AND SHAREHOLDER DERIVATIVES LITIGATION, 859 F. Supp. 2d 572 (S.D.N.Y. 2012)

. . . repayment rate of thirty-one percent at ESI, which allegedly caused the price of ESI stock to drop 7.17 . . .

UNITED STATES v. KING,, 467 F. App'x 499 (6th Cir. 2012)

. . . The district court also read to the jury Sixth Circuit Pattern Jury Instruction 7.17 which instructs . . . court instructed the jury with both a limiting instruction and Sixth Circuit Pattern Jury Instruction 7.17 . . .

LOWER FEES, INC. v. BANKRATE, INC., 74 So. 3d 517 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2011)

. . . At issue in this case is the effect of Section 7.17 of the asset purchase agreement, titled “Entire Agreement . . . Lower Fees argues that Section 7.17 of the asset purchase agreement does not bar its claim for rescission . . .

AMBASE CORPORATION v. UNITED STATES,, 100 Fed. Cl. 548 (Fed. Cl. 2011)

. . . Carteret shrank its assets from $7.17 billion as of June 30, 1989 to $6.1 billion by December 31, 1989 . . . Shrank Assets As a result of the breach, Carteret shrank its total assets by almost $1.1 billion, from $7.17 . . .

KUPERMAN, v. L. WRENN, M. A. E., 645 F.3d 69 (1st Cir. 2011)

. . . . § 1983, alleging that the prison shaving regulation (sometimes referred to as “PPD 7.17”) violated . . . Although the record is sparse on this point, PPD 7.17 itself states that “[a]ll inmates shall have access . . . So the battle is over whether they showed that PPD 7.17 furthers a compelling governmental interest and . . . Compare PPD 7.17 with Gooden v. . . . The section of the New Hampshire Department of Corrections Policy and Procedure Directive 7.17 which . . .

In R. MATEYKO, v. R. R. d b a, 437 B.R. 313 (Bankr. N.D. Ill. 2010)

. . . Section 7.17 of the Agreement provided that the franchisee would not be allowed to use the franchise . . . location for a purpose other than the operation of an ExpressDrop franchise in violation of section 7.17 . . .

BARRUS, v. DICK S SPORTING GOODS, INC. s, 732 F. Supp. 2d 243 (W.D.N.Y. 2010)

. . . Newberg & Alba Conte, Newberg on Class Actions § 7.17 (3d ed. 1992). . . .

NORTHROP GRUMMAN COMPUTING SYSTEMS, INC. v. UNITED STATES,, 93 Fed. Cl. 144 (Fed. Cl. 2010)

. . . Allan Farnsworth, Farnsworth On Contracts § 7.17 (2d ed.1998). . . .

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

. . . of Florida); 3-7.11 (General Rules of Procedure); 3-7.13 (Incapacity Not Related to Misconduct); 3-7.17 . . . RULE 3-7.17 VEXATIOUS CONDUCT AND LIMITATION ON FILINGS (a) Definition. . . .

DETROIT INTERNATIONAL BRIDGE COMPANY, v. FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION, 666 F. Supp. 2d 740 (E.D. Mich. 2009)

. . . . § 7.17(a). . . . complains that it was not given reasonable notice of FHWA’s intent to disclose as required by 49 C.F.R. § 7.17 . . .

KAHN, v. FEDERAL MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY ADMINISTRATION,, 648 F. Supp. 2d 31 (D.D.C. 2009)

. . . . § 7.17(a). Celadon and P.A.M. submitted objections. . . .

MACCHARULO v. GOULD, 643 F. Supp. 2d 587 (S.D.N.Y. 2009)

. . . Law § 7.17 (McKinney’s 2006) (CNYPC “shall be in the [OMH] ... for the care, treatment, and rehabilitation . . .

FAIR ISAAC CORPORATION v. EXPERIAN INFORMATION SOLUTIONS INC. LLC LLC I X,, 645 F. Supp. 2d 734 (D. Minn. 2009)

. . . Classic Agreement § 7.17; Horizon Agreement § 13.13; NextGen Agreement § 13.13. . . . .

UNITY COMMUNICATIONS, INC, v. AT T MOBILITY, LLC,, 643 F. Supp. 2d 829 (S.D. Miss. 2009)

. . . Farnsworth, Contracts, § 7.17, 526-27 (1982). Cenac v. Murry, 609 So.2d at 1272. . . .

BEAR STEARNS INVESTMENT PRODUCTS, INC. v. HITACHI AUTOMOTIVE PRODUCTS USA INC. USA, 401 B.R. 598 (S.D.N.Y. 2009)

. . . Tractebel, 487 F.3d at 98 (quoting Farnsworth on Contracts § 7.17 (2d ed.2001)). . . .

HENRICKSEN v. CONOCOPHILLIPS COMPANY,, 605 F. Supp. 2d 1142 (E.D. Wash. 2009)

. . . cumulative benzene exposure in the category “>8” (ranging from 7.88 to 57.31 ppm-years), the odds ratio was 7.17 . . .

SAMICA ENTERPRISES, LLC, v. MAIL BOXES ETC. USA, INC., 637 F. Supp. 2d 712 (C.D. Cal. 2008)

. . . at its disposal and of the other party’s justifiable expectations .... ” 2 Farnsworth on Contracts § 7.17 . . .

BOWLING v. PBG LONG- TERM DISABILITY PLAN VPA,, 584 F. Supp. 2d 797 (D. Md. 2008)

. . . The estimated hourly wages for these four jobs were $7.93, $8.74, $11.82, and $7.17, respectively. . . .

RUDNICKI, v. WPNA AM,, 580 F. Supp. 2d 690 (N.D. Ill. 2008)

. . . Nimmer on Copyright § 7.17[A], pp. 7-190.3-90.4. . . . Id. § 7.17[A], p. 7-190.4. . . . Id. at § 7.17[E][2][b], p. 7-196. . . .

RODRIGUEZ, v. FARM STORES GROCERY, INC. v., 518 F.3d 1259 (11th Cir. 2008)

. . . That would yield an hourly rate between $7.17 and $8.26 per hour. . . .

TORRES- NEGR N, v. J N RECORDS, LLC,, 504 F.3d 151 (1st Cir. 2007)

. . . . § 7.17[2][b] (“It has been held on occasion that the deposit failed to satisfy the registration requirements . . .

TRACTEBEL ENERGY MARKETING, INC. NA, TEMI S. A. S. A. TSA v. AEP POWER MARKETING, INC., 487 F.3d 89 (2d Cir. 2007)

. . . FaRNSworth on Contracts § 7.17 (2d ed.2001). . . .

SHURKIN, On v. GOLDEN STATE VINTNERS INC. J. B. O Co. LLC,, 471 F. Supp. 2d 998 (N.D. Cal. 2006)

. . . On March 25, 2004, the price of GSV’s stock dropped from $7.40 per share to $7.17 per share, on an increased . . .

AGRIZAP, INC. v. WOODSTREAM CORPORATION,, 450 F. Supp. 2d 562 (E.D. Pa. 2006)

. . . Allan Farnsworth, Contracts, § 7.17 (4th ed.2004) (stating that “the duty of good faith must be connected . . . supply the goods and by the buyer to use best efforts to promote their sale.”); Farnsworth, swpra, at § 7.17 . . .

In ARMSTRONG WORLD INDUSTRIES, INC., 348 B.R. 223 (D. Del. 2006)

. . . Pursuant to Section 7.17 of the Plan, except for purposes of evidencing a right to Distributions under . . .

In ARMSTRONG WORLD INDUSTRIES, INC., 348 B.R. 136 (D. Del. 2006)

. . . Date ........................204 7.16 Occurrence of the Effective Date............................205 7.17 . . . Bankruptcy Court, at which time the Plan and the Confirmation Order shall be deemed null and void. 7.17 . . .

ARCADIA PETROLEUM LIMITED, v. SUN INTERNATIONAL LIMITED, 192 F. App'x 164 (3d Cir. 2006)

. . . bilateral in form, there is consideration to support the substituted contract. 2 Corbin on Contracts § 7.17 . . .

In LINEBERRY,, 344 B.R. 487 (Bankr. W.D. Va. 2006)

. . . Further, the Debtors’ total monthly expenses exceed their total combined monthly income by $7.17. . . .

SHARIFF, v. GOORD,, 235 F.R.D. 563 (W.D.N.Y. 2006)

. . . Newberg & Alba Conte, Newberg on Class Actions § 7.17 (3d ed.1992). . . .

BRANDAID MARKETING CORPORATION. v. S. S. v., 418 F. Supp. 2d 329 (S.D.N.Y. 2005)

. . . obtained $225,000 in bridge financing from Mel Stewart and Howard Borenstein (Tr. at 189, 276; JPTO ¶ 7.17 . . .

UNITED STATES v. SELWYN,, 398 F.3d 1064 (8th Cir. 2005)

. . . some of the methamphetamine was used rather than sold and concluded that Sel-wyn possessed a total of 7.17 . . . The district court determined at sentencing that Selwyn possessed 7.17 grams for distribution, which . . .

B. BRUCATO, v. EZENIA INC., 351 F. Supp. 2d 464 (E.D. Va. 2004)

. . . See 2-7 Corbin on Contracts § 7.17 (describing majority position that when one party claims large amount . . . Wickham, 141 U.S. 564, 577, 12 S.Ct. 84, 35 L.Ed. 860 (1891)); 2-7 Corbin on Contracts § 7.17 ("If one . . .

Q. McADAMS D. v. MASSACHUSETTS MUTUAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, 391 F.3d 287 (1st Cir. 2004)

. . . Allan Farnsworth, -Farnsworth on Contracts § 7.17, at 365 (3d ed.2004) (covenant is often used-to limit . . .

BERNDT v. FAIRFIELD RESORTS, INC., 339 F. Supp. 2d 1064 (W.D. Wis. 2004)

. . . Cox & Hazen, Corporations, § 7.17 at 309 (2d ed.2003). . . .

UNION OIL COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA, v. TERRIBLE HERBST, INC. a v. a, 331 F.3d 735 (9th Cir. 2003)

. . . Bender, 2 Corbin on Contracts § 7.17, p. 420 (rev. ed.1995); R. . . .

ADAMS v. STANLEY,, 237 F. Supp. 2d 136 (D.N.H. 2003)

. . . See NHDOC Policy and Procedure Directives (“PPD”) 7.17, V(J)(1) (“The Chaplain shall schedule celebration . . . See NHDOC PPD 7.17, V(C). . . .

HUNTERSON v. DISABATO, N. J. Bd. R. S. S. C. F., 308 F.3d 236 (3d Cir. 2002)

. . . N.J.A.C. 10A:71-7.17(b) and (c). . . . N.J.A.C. 10A:71-7.17(p). . . .

D. JOHNSON, v. HONDA OF AMERICA MANUFACTURING, INC., 221 F. Supp. 2d 853 (S.D. Ohio 2002)

. . . wrongful discharge claim. [2 Perritt, Employee Dismissal Law and Practice (4th Ed.1998)] at 44, Section 7.17 . . .

CBS CORPORATION, v. WAK ORIENT POWER LIGHT LTD., 168 F. Supp. 2d 403 (E.D. Pa. 2001)

. . . (Partial Award, ¶ 7.17). . . .

BROTHERHOOD OF LOCOMOTIVE ENGINEERS, v. SPRINGFIELD TERMINAL RAILWAY COMPANY,, 210 F.3d 18 (1st Cir. 2000)

. . . Hodge O’Neal, Corporations § 7.8 at 7.17 (1995); cf. . . .

B. GLICK K. v. UNITED STATES, 96 F. Supp. 2d 850 (S.D. Ind. 2000)

. . . ■_ Partnerships $111,300,571 $115,419,009 GBG_$12,681,134_$13,010,769 Percentage of 7.62% to 10.15% 7.17% . . .

EMERSON RADIO CORP. v. ORION SALES, INC., 80 F. Supp. 2d 307 (D.N.J. 2000)

. . . duty of good faith and fair dealing may be implied to protect. 2 Farnsworth on Contracts, supra, § 7.17 . . .

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, v. R. J. GALLAGHER COMPANY,, 181 F.3d 645 (5th Cir. 1999)

. . . Allan Farnsworth, Contracts § 7.17, at 553 (2d ed.1990). . . . .

IBJ SCHRODER BANK TRUST COMPANY, v. FAIRFIELD COMMUNITIES, INC. St. B. Co. Co., 178 F.3d 78 (2d Cir. 1999)

. . . The value of the collateral real estate plummeted: the appraised value at the maturity date was $7.17 . . .

EPL, INC. v. USA FEDERAL CREDIT UNION, a, 173 F.3d 1356 (11th Cir. 1999)

. . . The district court supported this conclusion through harmonizing paragraph 1.03(h) with paragraph 7.17 . . . selling or marketing USA’s VISION A product, and (2) paragraph 1.03(h), when harmonized with paragraph 7.17 . . .

In MODERN DAIRY OF CHAMPAIGN, INC. v. No. No., 171 F.3d 1106 (7th Cir. 1999)

. . . Allan Farnsworth, Contracts § 7.17, pp. 509-11 (3d ed.1999)) for the same reason: the dealer could “hold . . .

In MODERN DAIRY OF CHAMPAIGN, INC. v. No. No., 171 F.3d 1106 (7th Cir. 1999)

. . . Allan Farnsworth, Contracts § 7.17, pp. 509-11 (3d ed.1999)) for the same reason: the dealer could “hold . . .

UNITED CANCER COUNCIL, INC. v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE,, 165 F.3d 1173 (7th Cir. 1999)

. . . Allan Farnsworth, Contracts § 7.17, pp. 509-11 (3d ed.1999). . . .

In PLAYMOBIL ANTITRUST LITIGATION, 35 F. Supp. 2d 231 (E.D.N.Y. 1998)

. . . Id. at § 7.17. . . .

UNITED STATES v. REYES, El, 157 F.3d 949 (2d Cir. 1998)

. . . Lilly, An Introduction to the Law of Evidence § 7.17, at 306-07 (3d ed.1996). B. . . .

U. AKA, v. WASHINGTON HOSPITAL CENTER,, 156 F.3d 1284 (D.C. Cir. 1998)

. . . CBA § 7.17. Section 14.5, by contrast, is directed solely at disabled employees. . . .

BLUE DIAMOND, INC. v. LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY,, 21 F. Supp. 2d 631 (S.D. Miss. 1998)

. . . Cenac, 609- So.2d at 1272 (quoting Farnsworth, Contracts, § 7.17, 526-27 (1982)). . . .

BROUSSARD v. MEINEKE DISCOUNT MUFFLER SHOPS, INCORPORATED GKN GKN, D. S. I. J. J. Sr. J. Jr. M. A. T. M. ATL s s s D. PS F BROUSSARD v. MEINEKE DISCOUNT MUFFLER SHOPS, INCORPORATED GKN GKN, D. S. I. J. J. Sr. J. Jr. M. A. T. M. ATL s s s PS F D., 155 F.3d 331 (4th Cir. 1998)

. . . amount equal to the total of all sums collected from all franchisees under and pursuant to Section 7.17 . . . Section 7.17 of the FTA describes payments to the WAC account. . . . As we earlier discussed, the topic of advertising is addressed in Sections 3.1 and 7.17 of the FTAs. . . .

TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE INTERNATIONAL, INC. v. UNITED STATES,, 41 Fed. Cl. 1369 (Fed. Cir. 1998)

. . . . § 7.17, at 312. . . . See Weistart, supra, at 619, 648; see also Farnsworth, supra, § 7.17 n. 10 (1990). . . .

TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE INTERNATIONAL, INC. v. UNITED STATES,, 150 F.3d 1369 (Fed. Cir. 1998)

. . . . § 7.17, at 312. . . . See Weistart, supra, at 619, 648; see also Farnsworth, supra, § 7.17 n. 10 (1990). . . .

ACKERLEY COMMUNICATIONS OF MASSACHUSETTS, INC. v. CITY OF CAMBRIDGE, 135 F.3d 210 (1st Cir. 1998)

. . . . § 7.17. . . . the Ordinance prospectively regulating the aesthetic features of future signs. .Although Ordinance § 7.17 . . .

In BIG RIVERS ELECTRIC CORPORATION,, 233 B.R. 726 (Bankr. W.D. Ky. 1998)

. . . Finally, and most importantly, the Agreement provided in Sections 7.17 and 8.18 that, as a condition . . . (See Attachment A at Sections 7.17 and 8.18). . . .

WHITE STONE PARTNERS, LP, v. PIPER JAFFRAY COMPANIES, INC., 978 F. Supp. 878 (D. Minn. 1997)

. . . See Farnsworth on Contracts § 7.17 at 370. (1996 Supp.) . . .

ANDRITZ SPROUT- BAUER, INC. v. BEAZER EAST, INC., 174 F.R.D. 609 (M.D. Pa. 1997)

. . . Education, 105 F.R.D. 49 (D.N.J.1985), quoting Shepard’s, Discovery Proceedings in Federal Court, § 7.17 . . .

ATLANTIC COAST DEMOLITION RECYCLING, INC. v. BOARD OF CHOSEN FREEHOLDERS OF ATLANTIC COUNTY A. L. P. C A CARBONE, INC. v. C. SHINN, Jr. J. P. C. R. C A A. C. Jr. CMCMUA, 112 F.3d 652 (3d Cir. 1997)

. . . . § 48:13A-7.16 & 7.17 (enabling Board of Public Utilities to compel “any person engaged in the business . . .

BROUSSARD, v. MEINEKE DISCOUNT MUFFLER SHOPS, INC. GKN GKN PLC,, 958 F. Supp. 1087 (W.D.N.C. 1997)

. . . As the Defendants note, sections 3.1(d) and 7.17(b) of FTAs executed after March 1995 expressly provide . . .

GREENWOOD, M. D. v. STATE OF NEW YORK,, 939 F. Supp. 1060 (S.D.N.Y. 1996)

. . . Law § 7.17(a), (b) (establishing MPC as a hospital within OMH whose “organization, administration, and . . .

ACKERLEY COMMUNICATIONS OF MASSACHUSETTS, INC. v. CITY OF CAMBRIDGE,, 88 F.3d 33 (1st Cir. 1996)

. . . Article 7.000, § 7.17. . . .

PAISA, INC. a v. N G AUTO, INC. a, 928 F. Supp. 1009 (C.D. Cal. 1996)

. . . Under Local Rule 7.17, “When a TRO is sought, application for a preliminary injunction shall be made . . .

PAISA, INC. a v. N G AUTO, INC. a, 928 F. Supp. 1004 (C.D. Cal. 1996)

. . . Under Local Rule 7.17, “When a TRO is sought, application for a preliminaiy injunction shall be made . . .

OLD COLONY VENTURES I, INC. v. SMWNPF HOLDINGS, INC., 918 F. Supp. 343 (D. Kan. 1996)

. . . Allan Farnsworth, Contracts § 7.17 (2d ed. 1990); see In re Estate of Moe, 240 Kan. 242, 245, 729 P.2d . . .

SKF USA SKF v. Co., 20 Ct. Int'l Trade 94 (Ct. Int'l Trade 1996)

. . . SKF's margins in the original Final Results were 14.81% for BBs, 7.17% for CEBs and 8.37% for SPBs. . . .

KNAPP SHOES, INC. v. SYLVANIA SHOE MANUFACTURING CORPORATION,, 72 F.3d 190 (1st Cir. 1995)

. . . Allan Farnsworth, Contracts § 7.17 (2d ed. 1990), and the magistrate judge’s finding here is not clearly . . .

LIBMAN COMPANY, v. VINING INDUSTRIES, INCORPORATED,, 69 F.3d 1360 (7th Cir. 1995)

. . . of decoration—a way, here, of jazzing up the humblest of utilitarian products. 1 McCarthy, supra, ¶ 7.17 . . .

ACKERLEY COMMUNICATIONS OF MASSACHUSETTS, INC. v. CITY OF CAMBRIDGE He, 902 F. Supp. 11 (D. Mass. 1995)

. . . Section 7.17 of Article 7.000 states that “Any sign permitted under this Article may contain, in lieu . . .

M D INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION, v. CHAN CHAN v. M D INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION,, 901 F. Supp. 1502 (D. Haw. 1995)

. . . Marycana, Inc., 662 F.Supp. 1339, 1342-43 (S.D.N.Y.1987); see also, Nimmer on Copyright § 7.17[A]. . . .

UNITED STATES v. WHITE,, 893 F. Supp. 1423 (C.D. Cal. 1995)

. . . . § 248, Fed.R.Civ.P. 65, and Local Rule 7.17. . . .