Cases from cite.case.law:

O HARA, v. DIAGEO- GUINNESS, USA, INC., 370 F. Supp. 3d 204 (D. Mass. 2019)

. . . , device, or graphic, pictorial, or emblematic representation that is prohibited by §§ 7.20 through 7.29 . . .

BELLION SPIRITS, LLC, v. UNITED STATES, 335 F. Supp. 3d 32 (D.D.C. 2018)

. . . . §§ 4.39(a)(1), 7.29(a)(1). . . .

J. KINDLE v. DEJANA, LLC, F. Jr. LLC, 308 F. Supp. 3d 698 (E.D.N.Y. 2018)

. . . experience Linda Lam Associate - 4 $200.00 9.90 $1,980.00 years experience Danica Li Law Clerk $100.00 7.29 . . .

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

. . . . §§ 7.29(a)(1). . . . production" of Extra Stout without "creat[ing] a misleading impression." 27 C.F.R. § 25.142(a) ; 27 C.F.R. § 7.29 . . . or untrue in any particular, or that ... tend[ed] to create a misleading impression." 27 C.F.R. §§ 7.29 . . . The court relied on 27 C.F.R. § 7.29(a)(1) and a COLA issued by the TTB to find that the allegedly deceptive . . .

B. MAY, v. MORGAN COUNTY GEORGIA,, 878 F.3d 1001 (11th Cir. 2017)

. . . Regulation 15.35 has since been recodified as § 7.29 of the Zoning Ordinance, but we will follow the . . .

IN RE LEAPFROG ENTERPRISE, INC. SECURITIES LITIGATION, To, 200 F. Supp. 3d 987 (N.D. Cal. 2016)

. . . Following these announcements, the price of the company’s stock increased from $6.83 to $7.29 per share . . .

In ANHEUSER- BUSCH BEER LABELING MARKETING AND SALES PRACTICES LITIGATION, 644 F. App'x 515 (6th Cir. 2016)

. . . . § 7.29(a)(1), that forbids any statement on a malt-beverage label that is “false or untrue in any particular . . . Labeling & Advertising of Malt Beverages, 1 Fed.Reg. 2013, 2015 (1936); 27 C.F.R. § 7.29(a)(1). . . . beverage label which is ‘false or untrue in any particular.’ ” Appellant Br. 37 (quoting 27 C.F.R. § 7.29 . . . We can easily reconcile § 7.29(a)’s general prohibition against false or misleading statements with § . . . What is more, 27 C.F.R. § 7.29(a)’s prohibition against “[a]ny statement ... that, irrespective of falsity . . .

COOK Jr. L. J. J. v. ROCKWELL INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION, 790 F.3d 1088 (10th Cir. 2015)

. . . damages and $549 million in prejudgment interest — for a total of $926 million — we still come only 7.29% . . .

ALABAMA LEGISLATIVE BLACK CAUCUS, v. ALABAMA, v., 989 F. Supp. 2d 1227 (M.D. Ala. 2013)

. . . 4.96 percent and would have a total population that is 42.02 percent white, 48.36 percent black, and 7.29 . . .

v., 140 T.C. 294 (T.C. 2013)

. . . Industrial development 9 July 03 2,251,177 5.44 236,966 9.50 IL Industrial development 10 Sept. 04 2,200,000 7.29 . . .

KOCH INDUSTRIES, INC. KoSa B. V. S. A. R. L. S. A. R. L. v. AKTIENGESELLSCHAFT, CNA s, 727 F. Supp. 2d 199 (S.D.N.Y. 2010)

. . . APA §§ 7.9(b), 7.12(a), 7.29. . . . APA § 7.29 (emphasis in original). . . . APA § 7.29 (emphasis in original). . . . APA §§ 7.29, 19.10. . . . APA §§ 7.29, 19.7, 19.10. . . .

UNITED STATES v. HEILMAN, a k a A. a k a a k a, 377 F. App'x 157 (3d Cir. 2010)

. . . From Heilman’s residence, law enforcement recovered 7.29 grams of crystal methamphetamine. . . .

S. A. S. A. v., 31 Ct. Int'l Trade 1776 (Ct. Int'l Trade 2007)

. . . then recalculated Mittal’s weighted-average margin for the period of review, reducing it from 13.5% to 7.29% . . .

MITTAL STEEL GALATI S. A. S. A. v. UNITED STATES, IPSCO, 521 F. Supp. 2d 1409 (Ct. Int'l Trade 2007)

. . . then recalculated Mittal’s weighted-average margin for the period of review, reducing it from 13.5% to 7.29% . . .

DEAN, v. UNITED STATES,, 418 F. Supp. 2d 149 (E.D.N.Y. 2006)

. . . . § 7.29(c). Id. The officer issued Dean a Violation Notice and released him. Id. . . . indicate that Dean did not challenge as a matter of law whether the federal regulation, 36 C.F.R. § 7.29 . . . Dean’s ticket was for a violation under 36 C.F.R. § 7.29(c), a National Park regulation. . . . parts of his body in a lewd manner or commits any other lewd act [ ] in a public place.” 36 C.F.R. § 7.29 . . .

THE LONG ISLAND SAVINGS BANK, FSB, FSB, v. UNITED STATES,, 67 Fed. Cl. 616 (Fed. Cl. 2005)

. . . The 30-year Treasury rate on the date of Long Island Baneorp’s IPO was 7.29%. PX 423 at 13. . . . the benefit received from the replacement capital, based upon the amount of goodwill replaced, the 7.29% . . .

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

. . . (PX III — 24; JPTO ¶ 7.29.) That cashless stock purchase agreement was filed with the SEC. . . . (JPTO ¶7.29.) . . .

NEUBERGER BERMAN REAL ESTATE INCOME FUND, INC. v. LOLA BROWN TRUST NO., 230 F.R.D. 398 (D. Md. 2005)

. . . See also Rice, supra, § 7.29 and cases cited therein, ("Courts have held that communications to and from . . .

ASTRA AKTIEBOLAG, v. ANDRX PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. v. v. v. Co. In, 222 F. Supp. 2d 423 (S.D.N.Y. 2002)

. . . Davies, Genp-harm’s active drug layer has a microenvi-ronment pH of about 7.39 and 7.29, within the 7 . . .

COLLETON COUNTY COUNCIL Dr. a H. F. P. K. F. I. N. M. A. L. Jr. V. M. R. W. v. F. McCONNELL, H. H. K. H. W. Jr. v. F. H. F. H. v. H. F. H. F., 201 F. Supp. 2d 618 (D.S.C. 2002)

. . . collapsed, the court rejected the House proposal to collapse District 80 in Richland County, which was only 7.29% . . .

CANNADY, K. K. v. UNITED STATES, 155 F. Supp. 2d 1379 (M.D. Ga. 2001)

. . . . § 7.29 (2001). At the time of the accident here, the County Executive Director was Thomas B. . . .

ROBINSON L. J. L. L. Jr. L. v. SEARS, ROEBUCK AND CO., 111 F. Supp. 2d 1101 (E.D. Ark. 2000)

. . . White employees’ pay for all sales associates, and a statistically significant disparity of 7.83 and 7.29 . . .

In CIENA CORPORATION SECURITIES LITIGATION, 99 F. Supp. 2d 650 (D. Md. 2000)

. . . Lawrence Huang 60,000 1,061,250 5.65% Joseph Chinnici 6,000 271.750 2.21% Stephen Alexander 30,000 411.750 7.29% . . .

In BONHAM, a In a, 251 B.R. 113 (Bankr. D. Alaska 2000)

. . . crashed, in 1995): MacPhee’s Calculation of Gross Margins 1988 $1,227,825.00 $1,138,345.00 $ 89,480.00 7.29% . . .

BUCHHOLZ, v. ALDAYA W. O, 210 F.3d 862 (8th Cir. 2000)

. . . . § 7.29. . . . Consistent with 7 C.F.R. §§ 7.28 and 7.29, these separations are limited to specified grounds, they must . . .

MILLER, v. U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE FARM SERVICES AGENCY, USDA,, 143 F.3d 1413 (11th Cir. 1998)

. . . . §§ 7.28, 7.29. . . .

THOMAS BETTS CORPORATION v. PANDUIT CORPORATION,, 935 F. Supp. 1399 (N.D. Ill. 1996)

. . . configuration disclosed in a utility patent is automatically classified as primarily functional. 1 McCarthy § 7.29 . . . reaily primarily functional or just incidentally appears in the disclosure of the patent. 1 McCarthy § 7.29 . . .

VORNADO AIR CIRCULATION SYSTEMS, INC. a v. DURACRAFT CORPORATION,, 58 F.3d 1498 (10th Cir. 1995)

. . . But see McCarthy, supra, § 7.29 (“Functional patent protection and trademark protection are mutually . . .

RUBIN, SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY v. COORS BREWING CO., 514 U.S. 476 (U.S. 1995)

. . . .” § 7.29(f). . . . Secretary has proscribed the use of various colorful terms suggesting high alcohol levels, 27 CFR § 7.29 . . .

DOGLOO, INC. a v. DOSKOCIL MANUFACTURING CO. INC. a, 893 F. Supp. 911 (C.D. Cal. 1995)

. . . configuration disclosed in a utility patent is automatically classified as primarily functional. 1 McCarthy § 7.29 . . . really primarily functional or just incidentally appears in the disclosure of the patent. 1 McCarthy § 7.29 . . . configurations happen to be described or pictured as an incidental detail in functional patents. 1 McCarthy § 7.29 . . .

In C. SMITH R., 178 B.R. 946 (Bankr. D. Vt. 1995)

. . . Following the evidentiary hearing, we fixed interest to Bank at a rate of 7.29 percent, which was the . . .

INTERACTIVE NETWORK, INC. a v. NTN COMMUNICATIONS, INC. a, 875 F. Supp. 1398 (N.D. Cal. 1995)

. . . Thomas McCarthy, McCarthy on Trademarks and Unfair Competition § 7.29 (3d ed. 1994) (stating that valid . . .

UNITED STATES v. DOE,, 884 F. Supp. 78 (E.D.N.Y. 1995)

. . . . § 7.29(c). . . . BACKGROUND John Doe was charged with a violation of 36 C.F.R. § 7.29(e), which prohibits public lewdness . . . The Statute John Doe was convicted of violating 36 C.F.R. § 7.29(c), which expressly adopts and incorporates . . . As previously noted, 36 C.F.R. § 7.29(c) expressly adopts and incorporates New York Penal Law § 245.00 . . . Accordingly, the Court will follow McNamara’s guidance in interpreting 36 C.F.R. § 7.29(c), the regulation . . .

ZN, v. BROWN,, 6 Vet. App. 183 (Vet. App. 1994)

. . . DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS, Department of VeteRans Benefits Manual; Adjudication PROCEDURE, Part VI, § 7.29 . . .

ADOLPH COORS COMPANY, v. BENTSEN, U. S., 2 F.3d 355 (10th Cir. 1993)

. . . Coors is not challenging § 7.29(f), which provides that "[ljabels shall not contain the words 'strong . . . Nor does it challenge § 7.29(g), which provides that "[Ijabels shall not contain any statements, designs . . .

WHITE, v. NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE PDB KMS B B NFL, 836 F. Supp. 1458 (D. Minn. 1993)

. . . . ¶ 7.29, at 1431-32. . . . Cf White, 822 F.Supp. ¶ 7.29(d), at 1432 (original Settlement Agreement is not per se illegal)! . . . any claim, complaint, grievance, or dispute in the absence of fraud or duress. 29 U.S.C. § 186(c)(2). 7.29 . . .

H. KOCH, v. UNITED STATES, 824 F. Supp. 996 (D. Colo. 1993)

. . . 23.68 acres, island 10 is 66.63 acres, island 14 is 43.11 acres, island 20 is 19.51 acres, island 21 is 7.29 . . .

DAVIS, v. KANSAS CITY HOUSING AUTHORITY,, 822 F. Supp. 609 (W.D. Mo. 1993)

. . . Davis was employed by the defendant, her rate of pay went from $7.29 per hour to $7.54 per hour. . . .

WHITE, v. NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE PDB KMS B B NFL, 822 F. Supp. 1389 (D. Minn. 1993)

. . . of the objections raised, the court nonetheless declines to sanction the Eagles at the present time. 7.29 . . .

HORNELL BREWING CO. INC. v. BRADY, E. T., 819 F. Supp. 1227 (E.D.N.Y. 1993)

. . . of or relating to any guarantee which the Director finds likely to mislead the consumer. 27 C.F.R. 7.29 . . . (1), 7.29(4), 7.29(5). . . .

In LEE L. L. J., 167 B.R. 417 (Bankr. S.D. Miss. 1992)

. . . Simpson was $7.29 in arrears in his payments to the Trustee, and that although the Trustee had not yet . . .

MITCHELL, v. JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION,, 936 F.2d 539 (11th Cir. 1991)

. . . step increase, she was automatically advanced one grade to Apprentice, step 2, with an hourly wage of $7.29 . . .

V. KRUEGER, Jr. v. E. LYNG, J. J. D., 927 F.2d 1050 (8th Cir. 1991)

. . . Administrator, State and County Operations, of the Department of Agriculture (“Deputy Administrator”). 7 CFR §§ 7.29 . . . or suspended CED is to be given a written statement of the reasons for the adverse action, 7 CFR §§ 7.29 . . . , and if fired or suspended by the state or county committee, he may challenge that action. 7 CFR § 7.29 . . .

HEDMAN, v. UNITED STATES,, 21 Cl. Ct. 385 (Ct. Cl. 1990)

. . . . § 7.29. AR, p. 225. . . . Many of those provisions are codified in general terms in 7 C.F.R. §§ 7.29-7.31. . . . .

V. KRUEGER, Jr. v. E. LYNG,, 733 F. Supp. 75 (E.D. Mo. 1990)

. . . . § 7.29-7.34, Krueger appealed his termination to the Deputy Administrator of the ASCS. . . .

In CONVENT GUARDIAN CORP. In N. WENIGER,, 103 B.R. 937 (Bankr. N.D. Ill. 1989)

. . . Federal Express Charges 19.50 6/19/87 Federal Express Charges 2.44 6/19/87 Federal Express Charges 7.29 . . .

ITT CORPORATION, v. UNITED STATES,, 17 Cl. Ct. 199 (Cl. Ct. 1989)

. . . 14.80 7/82-6/83 12.80 12.74 14.25 7/83-6/84 8.89 8.85 9.61 7/84-6/85 11.11 11.09 12.23 7/85-6/86 7.33 7.29 . . .

HEDMAN, v. UNITED STATES,, 15 Cl. Ct. 304 (Cl. Ct. 1988)

. . . . §§ 7.29 to 7.31 (1984). . 7 C.F.R. § 7.34 (1984) provides that the determination of the Deputy Administrator . . .

J. HAMLET, v. UNITED STATES,, 14 Cl. Ct. 62 (Cl. Ct. 1988)

. . . Hamlet in accordance with USDA regulations codified at 7 CFR §§ 7.29-.34 and relevant ASCS regulations . . .

HON, M. v. STROH BREWERY CO., 835 F.2d 510 (3d Cir. 1987)

. . . . §§ 7.20-7.29, 7.50-7.55 (1987). Compare Abernathy v. . . .

W. BOEKELOO, A. S. M. M. L. v. HODEL,, 828 F.2d 727 (Fed. Cir. 1987)

. . . . § 7.29 (Callaghan 1984)), and concluded by endorsement upon the assessment roll. . . .

M. LeDOUX, v. CONTINENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY, INC. a, 666 F. Supp. 178 (D. Alaska 1987)

. . . See Punitive Damages §§ 7.11-7.14, 7.29-7.30; see generally Annotation, Liability Insurance Coverage . . .

In McGOHAN, S. E. NICHOLS, INC. v. McGOHAN,, 75 B.R. 10 (Bankr. N.D.N.Y. 1986)

. . . The form receipts total $1,212.53, but the corresponding sales slips total $7.29. . . .

BUENO By By Jr. By Jr. By v. MATTNER d b a, 633 F. Supp. 1446 (W.D. Mich. 1986)

. . . The Court finds that each of these plaintiffs suffered a minimum wage violation of $7.29 for the third . . . $300.00 $300.00 Consuelo Salmas — — $300.00 $300.00 Frank Martinez — — $300.00 $300.00 Rosario Moreno $7.29 . . . $7.29 $300.00 $314.58 Rafael Moreno $7.29 $7.29 $300.00 $314.58 Raul Jasso — — $300.00 $300.00 Aracelia . . .

CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA, v. FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION,, 774 F.2d 1205 (D.C. Cir. 1985)

. . . If one takes the test year interest (7.29 percent), rounds it down to the nearest one-tenth of one percent . . . reflected in the settlement rate of return study, the parent was composed of 56.80 percent debt (at 7.29 . . .

PAVAO, v. MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD,, 762 F.2d 988 (Fed. Cir. 1985)

. . . See, 7 CFR 7.26, 7.29-7.34 (1983). . . .

F. FLINT, Jr. v. E. HAYNES, L. STOVER, v. CARTER, a MARKS, v. A. CALENDINE,, 651 F.2d 970 (4th Cir. 1981)

. . . When Stover filed suit he had $7.29 of assets. The record does not show what assets he now has. . . . .

SYLVANE v. WHELAN, D., 506 F. Supp. 1355 (E.D.N.Y. 1981)

. . . . § 7.29, worded the same as the existing New York State Law, N.Y.Penal Code § 245.00 (McKinney 1980) . . .

NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, v. SLOTKOWSKI SAUSAGE COMPANY,, 620 F.2d 642 (7th Cir. 1980)

. . . employer to interfere with, restrain, or coerce employees in the exercise of rights guaranteed by section 7.29 . . .

PISTENTIS, v. IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE,, 611 F.2d 483 (3d Cir. 1979)

. . . Davis, Administrative Law Treatise § 7.29, at 156 (2d ed. 1979). . . . .

SEATTLE SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, a v. STATE Ci. V. I. C., 473 F. Supp. 996 (W.D. Wash. 1979)

. . . has traditionally adhered to a policy of the assignment of children to their neighborhood schools. 7.29 . . .

BURLINGTON NORTHERN, INC. v. UNITED STATES By, 555 F.2d 637 (8th Cir. 1977)

. . . Kansas City, Mo. 765 9,000 800,000 5.53 500.000 7.29 300.000 9.66 4 10 800.000 4.89 4 10 500.000 6.46 . . .

a v., 66 T.C. 566 (T.C. 1976)

. . . 9,596.88 3/31/69 $8,347.07 14,223.98 13,050.97 35,622.02 1,206.70 3,600.00 1,216.90 84.00 1,344.27 16.73 7.29 . . .

ABBOTTS DAIRIES DIVISION OF FAIRMONT FOODS, INC. v. L. BUTZ,, 389 F. Supp. 1 (E.D. Pa. 1975)

. . . Class I Price 1970 1971 $7.44 7.58 7.29 7.44 6.52 6.68 There are various reasons for this differential . . .

ICM REALTY, v. CABOT, CABOT FORBES LAND TRUST,, 378 F. Supp. 918 (S.D.N.Y. 1974)

. . . approximately $239.7 billion in 1972, mortgage loans of $76.9 billion and real estate ownership of $7.29 . . .

J. BRENNAN, v. BILL KIRK S VOLKSWAGEN W., 497 F.2d 892 (4th Cir. 1974)

. . . government’s computation, Rheubottom’s base rate becomes $4.52 per hour, and his overtime rate becomes $7.29 . . .

MILLER v. IOWA STATE ASCS COMMITTEE, 374 F. Supp. 415 (S.D. Iowa 1974)

. . . The charges made against plaintiff McLaughlin pursuant to 7 CFR 7.29, include forging the signature of . . . The Court is of the further opinion, however, that those portions of 7 CFR 7.28, and 7 CFR 7.29, which . . . process plaintiffs are entitled to prior to any disqualification or removal under Sections 7.28 and 7.29 . . . Section 7.29 concerns the removal from office of county executive directors and other employees of the . . . (Emphasis supplied) 7 CFR 7.28(c); 7 CFR 7.29(c). . . .

McNEILL, v. L. BUTZ, S. CANADY, v. L. BUTZ,, 480 F.2d 314 (4th Cir. 1973)

. . . effectiveness of ASCS program operations . and for failure to perform the duties of your employment.” 7 C.F.R. 7.29 . . . him from future employment as an ASCS committeeman or employee of the ASCS county committee. 7 C.F.R. 7.29 . . . See 7 C.F.R. 7.28-7.29. . . .

UNITED STATES v. STATE OF MICHIGAN, 346 F. Supp. 1277 (E.D. Mich. 1972)

. . . . § 7.29, et seq.) . Sec. 30 of 1893, P.A. 206, as amended (M.C.L.A. § 211.30; M.S.A. § 7.30) . . . .

L. I. v., 49 T.C. 140 (T.C. 1967)

. . . Id. sec. 7.29. The tax rate is established not later than the first Monday in June. Id. sec. 7.76. . . .

D. KELLY, v. J. HERAK, Jr., 252 F. Supp. 289 (D. Mont. 1966)

. . . office or employment or disqualified for future office or employment under the provisions of * * * § 7.29 . . . fraud in the conduct of his employment”, another ground for suspension and removal under 7 C.F.R. § 7.29 . . . Action was taken pursuant to section 7.29(a) of the Regulations governing county and community committees . . . It was, however, contained in 7 C.F.R. § 7.29, as read at the hearing on January 12, 1965. . . .

LAITRAM CORPORATION, v. KING CRAB, INC. a, 244 F. Supp. 9 (D. Alaska 1965)

. . . See also Toulmin’s Anti-Trust Laws, Volume 4, Chapters 7 and 24, and especially Sections 7.29 and 24.2 . . .

UNITED STATES v. H. RASMUSSEN,, 222 F. Supp. 430 (D. Mont. 1963)

. . . defendant a letter notifying him that the state committee “pursuant to the authority contained in section 7.29 . . . county committee; and (2) even if the facts had been furnished, under the express wording of section 7.29 . . . Defendant argues that this result is required by the express provision of regulation 7.29(a), which reads . . . not to suspend, the word “suspend” rather than “act” should have been used in the portion of section 7.29 . . . A strict reading of section 7.29 (a) standing alone might well support defendant’s contentions. . . .

UNITED STATES v. KENNY,, 247 F.2d 139 (2d Cir. 1957)

. . . United States, 2 Cir., 200 F.2d 730, 732, certiorari denied 345 U.S. 918, 73 S.Ct. 7.29, 97 L.Ed. 1351 . . .

MOOG INDUSTRIES, v. FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION,, 238 F.2d 43 (8th Cir. 1956)

. . . sixth, who was the largest purchaser of the six, but not a member of a group, received a rebate of 7.29% . . .

UNITED STATES v. SHAW, SAVILL ALBION CO., 178 F.2d 849 (2d Cir. 1949)

. . . her heading 28° to starboard, so that she was headed 295° true when she first made out The Seger at 7.29 . . . , the vessels were approaching at a joint speed of sixteen knots, and were about two miles apart at 7.29 . . . This must have been true, even though The Waipawa is right that when she first made out The Seger at 7.29 . . . On the whole evidence we find that, when at 7.29 The Waipawa first made out The Seger, The Seger was . . .

MISSISSIPPI RIVER FUEL CORPORATION v. FEDERAL POWER COMMISSION, 163 F.2d 433 (D.C. Cir. 1947)

. . . Those ratios varied in 1943 from 7.29% to 29.71%, and the trend between 1937 and 1943 varied, among companies . . .

RAILWAY EXPRESS CO. v. UNITED STATES, 56 F.2d 687 (Ct. Cl. 1932)

. . . Bonds and mortgages/..., 720.00 Certificates of time deposit 20,465.03 Miscellaneous ............. ' 7.29 . . .

CITY OF CHICAGO v. PROCTER GAMBLE CO., 9 F.2d 286 (6th Cir. 1925)

. . . The contract price of 7.29 cents per pound was “based on grease containing not to exceed 3 per centum . . .

JOHN K. JOICE v. THE UNITED STATES, 59 Ct. Cl. 1 (Ct. Cl. 1923)

. . . forth in Finding VII, the market value of said rail, with accessories, was $49.11 per gross ton, or $7.29 . . .

v., 12 Ct. Cl. 98 (U.S. 1877)

. . . at which fuel was commuted by the Department at New York City during February and March, 1870, was $7.29 . . .

GUTTMAN AND STUART S CASE. S. v., 9 Ct. Cl. 71 (Ct. Cl. 1873)

. . . Where the price of corn is $1.25, and its transportation $7.29 per bushel, a contract to deliver is six-sevenths . . .

S. v., 7 Ct. Cl. 374 (Ct. Cl. 1871)

. . . to be paid for the corn, $1.25 per bushel was intended to cover its value at Fort Leavenworth and $7.29 . . .

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases from cite.case.law:

The 2023 Florida Statutes (including Special Session C)