The 2023 Florida Statutes (including Special Session C)

Title IV
EXECUTIVE BRANCH

Chapter 17
CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 17.12

17.12 Authorized to issue warrants to tax collector or sheriff for payment.—Whenever it shall appear to the satisfaction of the Chief Financial Officer from examination of the books of his or her office that the tax collector or the sheriff for any county in this state has paid into the State Treasury, through mistake or otherwise, a larger or greater sum than is actually due from such collector or sheriff, then the Chief Financial Officer may issue a warrant to such collector or sheriff for the sum so found to be overpaid.

History.—ch. 1762, 1870; RS 105; GS 109; RGS 121; CGL 151; s. 58, ch. 95-147; s. 29, ch. 2003-261.

F.S. 17.12 on Google Scholar

F.S. 17.12 on Casetext

Amendments to 17.12

Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 17.12

Level: Degree
Misdemeanor/Felony: First/Second/Third

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 17.12.

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases from cite.case.law:

BHASKER, v. KEMPER CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, 284 F. Supp. 3d 1191 (D.N.M. 2018)

. . . Financial Indemnity asserted that Section 17.12 "requires insurers to charge only the rates that are . . .

WILLIAMS II R. D. L. Jr. J. v. YAMAHA MOTOR CO. LTD. U. S. A., 851 F.3d 1015 (9th Cir. 2017)

. . . Code §§ 17.12, et seq.; Rhode Island Unfair Trade Practice and Consumer Protection Act, R.G.G.L. §§ 6 . . .

CORTLANDT STREET RECOVERY CORP. v. HELLAS TELECOMMUNICATIONS, S. R. L. I, S. r. l, Co- TCW HT- Co- I L. P. TCW HT- Co- II L. P., 790 F.3d 411 (2d Cir. 2015)

. . . See 4 Moore’s Federal Practice 3D § 17.12[l][c] (“If join-der or substitution of, or ratification by, . . .

HUMANE SOCIETY OF THE UNITED STATES, v. JEWELL, v., 76 F. Supp. 3d 69 (D.D.C. 2014)

. . . See § 17.12 Endangered Native Wildlife, 39 Fed. Reg. 1175, 1175 (Jan. 4, 1974). . . .

NATIONAL AUDUBON SOCIETY, INC. v. UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE M. U. S. U. S. P. U. S. E. U. S., 55 F. Supp. 3d 316 (E.D.N.Y. 2014)

. . . . § 17.11 and 17.12, respectively, see 50 C.F.R. § 402.01, including the piping plover. . . . determined to be endangered or threatened under section 4 of the [ESA] * * * [and] are found in 50 CFR 17.11-17.12 . . .

BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION ALLIANCE, f k a v. J. JIRON, v., 762 F.3d 1036 (10th Cir. 2014)

. . . . §§ 17.11-17.12 (listing species). . . . .

In MAMMOLA, P. v., 474 B.R. 23 (Bankr. D. Mass. 2012)

. . . See 4 American Law of Property § 17.12; 5 Tiffany’s Real Property § 1287. See also McCannon v. . . .

ESTATE OF GERASIMENKO v. CAPE WIND TRADING COMPANY,, 272 F.R.D. 385 (S.D.N.Y. 2011)

. . . Silberberg, Civil Practice in the Southern District of New York § 17.12 at 17-39 (2d ed. 2000) (citing . . .

D. CARLSON, v. CITY OF DELAFIELD, De, 779 F. Supp. 2d 928 (E.D. Wis. 2011)

. . . 1.05 of the Delafield Ordinances provides that “[appointed officials may be removed as provided in §§ 17.12 . . . Section 17.12(l)(c) of the Wisconsin Statutes states that city officers may be removed as follows: “[ . . . Stat. § 17.12. . . .

NORTHERN CALIFORNIA RIVER WATCH, a G. v. WILCOX R. H., 620 F.3d 1075 (9th Cir. 2010)

. . . . § 17.12 (listing Sebastopol meadowfoam as an endangered plant species). . . .

NORTHERN CALIFORNIA RIVER WATCH, a G. v. WILCOX R. H., 633 F.3d 766 (9th Cir. 2010)

. . . . § 17.12 (listing Sebastopol meadowfoam as an endangered plant species). . . .

C. L. OTTER, v. SALAZAR, 718 F. Supp. 2d 62 (D.D.C. 2010)

. . . . § 17.12 (2010)). . . .

R. MILDENBERGER, v. UNITED STATES,, 91 Fed. Cl. 217 (Fed. Cl. 2010)

. . . The lake reached a maximum elevation of 17.12 feet in 2005. Ferguson 2d Suppl. Deck Table 2. . . .

In BILL HEARD ENTERPRISES, INC. s, 400 B.R. 813 (Bankr. N.D. Ala. 2009)

. . . Pursuant to § 17.12 of the dealer franchise agreements, Michigan law governs the agreements. 11. . . . Pursuant to § 17.12 of the dealer franchise agreements, Michigan law governs the agreements. . . . Accordingly, GM asserts and the Court finds that pursuant to § 17.12 of the dealer franchise agreements . . .

RESOURCE INVESTMENTS, INC. v. UNITED STATES, 85 Fed. Cl. 447 (Fed. Cl. 2009)

. . . See PCC ch. 18E.30 (originally codified at PCC ch. 17.12). . . . .

MEDINA, v. CITY OF PHILADELPHIA, U. S. HUD U. S. HUD, 219 F. App'x 169 (3d Cir. 2007)

. . . . §§ 17.1-17.12 to the letter sent to Medina. . . .

HUBBARD AUTO CENTER, INC. v. GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION, 422 F. Supp. 2d 999 (N.D. Ind. 2006)

. . . B, "Standard Provisions," § 17.12; see Complaint ¶ 10. . . .

INTERNATIONAL EQUITY INVESTMENTS, INC. LLC, L. P. f. k. a. CVC L. P. v. OPPORTUNITY EQUITY PARTNERS, LTD. f. k. a. CVC, 411 F. Supp. 2d 458 (S.D.N.Y. 2006)

. . . timely fashion here—waives the point, at least where as here the failure has been prejudicial. 4 Moore § 17.12 . . .

PERRY, v. METROPOLITAN SUBURBAN BUS AUTHORITY a. k. a. MTA AFL- CIO,, 390 F. Supp. 2d 251 (E.D.N.Y. 2005)

. . . Operators 333 50.00% 341 50.44% AfricanAM Female Operators 9.91% 67 9.91% Total Female Operators 114 17.12% . . .

LOEFFEL STEEL PRODUCTS, INC. v. DELTA BRANDS, INC. d b a DBI F., 372 F. Supp. 2d 1104 (N.D. Ill. 2005)

. . . multi-blanking of coated, "hot-dipped” galvanized, .029 gauge prime steel on a 55" wide coil into 3 mults of 17.12 . . .

In ELECTRONIC DATA SYSTEMS CORPORATION SECURITIES LITIGATION, 226 F.R.D. 559 (E.D. Tex. 2005)

. . . Newberg & Alba Conte, Newberg on Class Actions, § 17.12 at 17-32 (3d ed.1992)). . . .

MICROMUSE, INC. v. MICROMUSE, PLC., 304 F. Supp. 2d 202 (D. Mass. 2004)

. . . of a property interest, must ordinarily be proved by clear and convincing evidence. 2 McCarthy, at § 17.12 . . .

RYAN, v. GENERAL MACHINE PRODUCTS,, 277 F. Supp. 2d 585 (E.D. Pa. 2003)

. . . Dixon’s starting pay in January 1996 was $16.62 per hour, and increased to $17.12 per hour in May 1996 . . .

CANE TENNESSEE, INC. v. UNITED STATES,, 57 Fed. Cl. 115 (Fed. Cl. 2003)

. . . value of timber or known income from land sales, defendant calculated the diminution of value to be 17.12% . . .

UNITED STATES v. CHERNABAEFF,, 40 F. App'x 519 (9th Cir. 2002)

. . . Eliah Chernabaeff appeals the judgment entered following his jury trial conviction for importation of 17.12 . . .

M. KEELS, v. STATE, 792 So. 2d 1249 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)

. . . alleged that Keels, on a particular date, obtained “goods and services” from the victim in the amount of $17.12 . . . Because the information alleged that Keels used the credit card to obtain $17.12 worth of goods and services . . .

GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION v. NEW A. C. CHEVROLET, INC. A. C., 263 F.3d 296 (3d Cir. 2001)

. . . This is because of the express choice of law provision contained in Article 17.12 of the Dealer Agreement . . .

PAPER SYSTEMS INCORPORATED, v. MITSUBISHI CORPORATION, Co. Co. v. Co. Co. v. Co. Co., 193 F.R.D. 601 (E.D. Wis. 2000)

. . . Newberg & Alba Conte, Newberg on Class Actions § 17.12 at 17-32 (3d ed.1992). . . .

BEAL BANK, S. S. B. v. WATERS EDGE LIMITED PARTNERSHIP,, 248 B.R. 668 (D. Mass. 2000)

. . . because on remand the bankruptcy court must reconsider the plan’s feasibility in light of the new $17.12 . . .

KEYCORP, v. KEY BANK TRUST,, 99 F. Supp. 2d 814 (N.D. Ohio 2000)

. . . McCarthy on Trademarks, supra at § 17.12. . . .

In W. DYGERT, No. v. W., 232 B.R. 155 (Bankr. D. Minn. 1999)

. . . substitution under Rule 7025, upon which the Committee previously relied. 4 Moore’s Federal Practioe § 17.12 . . .

HAWKSBILL SEA TURTLE A. M. E. E. W. II Jo Dr. A. G. III M. T. v. FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY, An Of A. A. M. E. E. W. II V. M. D. Jo Dr. A. G. III J. M. M. T., 126 F.3d 461 (3d Cir. 1997)

. . . . §§ 17.11 & 17.12. . . .

HAWKSBILL SEA TURTLE GREEN SEA TURTLE CHELONIA MYDAS VIRGIN ISLANDS TREE BOA EPICRATES MONENSIS GRANTI JEFFREY WEISS DAVID A. BRENER ALAIN M. BRIN GARY E. BRIN ROBERT COCKAYNE SALLY COCKAYNE ROBIN COCKAYNE FRANK DALY ANNETTE DALY JOAN E. DELUGO DOROTHY DRUMMEY EASTWIND ASSOCIATION JANET EGBERT W. HOUSTON EVAN, II WALTER FEDDERSEN DEBORAH FOSTER RICHARD FOSTER JOHN FREEMAN PATRICIA FREEMAN BONNIE GRAY SANFORD GRISHMAN LISA GAYE HALL IVERINE HEDRINGTON HARRY ILLINGWORTH KIMBERLY JONES GREGORY JOSEPH SUSAN KARDYS NELSON KELLER ANDREA KING CRAIG LUCAS ANDREW MARON CATHY MARON PAUL V. MAYNARD, M. D. ROSALYN MOSS WILLIAM MOSS JO NORTON LARRY NORTON DR. MAXINE A. NUNEZ EDMOND G. RAWSON, III SUSAN RAWSON ROBERT M. PETERSEN PAIGE SANTIAGO PASSANO MAXINE LAVITT JOSEPH SELFRIDGE ERIC SOLDIEW ELLEN STEWART CLARE TYSON JOHN T. WAGNER DELORES WAGNER RUSSELL WHITE v. FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY, An JAMES LEE WITT DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR, An BRUCE BABBIT, THE HAWKSBILL SEA TURTLE ERETMOCHELYS IMBRICATA THE GREEN SEA TURTLE CHELONIA MYDAS THE VIRGIN ISLANDS TREE BOA EPICRATES MONENSIS GRANTI A. JEFFREY WEISS DAVID A. BRENER ALAIN M. BRIN GARY E. BRIN ROBERT COCKAYNE SALLY COCKAYNE ROBIN COCKAYNE FRANK DALY ANNETTE DALY JOAN E. DELUGO DOROTHY DRUMMEY EASTWIND ASSOCIATION JANET EGBERT W. HOUSTON EVANS, II JANE FEDDERSEN WALTER FEDDERSEN DEBORAH FOSTER RICHARD FOSTER JOHN FREEMAN PATRICIA FREEMAN BONNIE GRAY SANFORD GRISHMAN LISA GAYE HALL IVERINE HEDRINGTON HARRY ILLINGWORTH KIMBERLY JONES GREGORY JOSEPH SUSAN KARDYS NELSON KEELER ANDREA KING CRAIG LUCAS ANDREW MARON CATHY MARON PAUL V. MAYNARD, M. D. ROSALYN MOSS WILLIAM MOSS JO NORTON LARRY NORTON DR. MAXINE A. NUNEZ EDMOND G. RAWSON, III SUSAN RAWSON SHARON J. PETERSEN ROBERT M. PETERSEN PAIGE SANTIAGO- PASSANO MAXINE LAVITT- SAWYER JOSEPH SELFRIDGE ERIC SOLDIEW ELLEN STEWART CLARE TYSON JOHN T. WAGNER DELORES WAGNER RUSSELL WHITE,, 37 V.I. 526 (3d Cir. 1997)

. . . . §§ 17.11 & 17.12. . . .

COTTINGHAM Co. v. GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION,, 119 F.3d 373 (5th Cir. 1997)

. . . Article 17.12 of the Dealer Agreement clearly states that Michigan law governs the Agreement. . . . Jury Interrogatories, Questions 1-5. . 17.12 Applicable Law. . . .

OLYMPIC CHEVROLET, INC. v. GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION,, 959 F. Supp. 918 (N.D. Ill. 1997)

. . . Article 17.12 of the parties’ agreement provides that the Dealer Agreement "is governed by the laws of . . .

VALENTINO A. S. S. O v. CARTER- WALLACE, INC. a, 97 F.3d 1227 (9th Cir. 1996)

. . . See, e.g., 3 Newberg & Conte, supra, § 17.12 at 17-31. . . .

WILLIAMS, v. CHRANS F., 50 F.3d 1358 (7th Cir. 1995)

. . . Stern et al., Supreme Court Practice § 17.12 at 675 (7th ed. 1993). . . .

WOLF, v. CITY OF FITCHBURG G., 870 F.2d 1327 (7th Cir. 1989)

. . . . § 17.12(1)(c). Due to this statute, should Ms. . . .

R. AKERS v. HODEL, In WILL OF AKERS, AKERS, v. UNITED STATES, 871 F.2d 924 (10th Cir. 1989)

. . . . § 17.12. . . .

In RYAN, M. STERN, v. CONTINENTAL ASSURANCE COMPANY,, 851 F.2d 502 (1st Cir. 1988)

. . . See 4 American Law of Property § 17.12; 5 Tiffany’s Real Property § 1287. See also McCannon v. . . .

In RYAN, M. STERN, v. CONTINENTAL ASSURANCE COMPANY,, 851 F.2d 502 (1st Cir. 1988)

. . . See 4 American Law of Property § 17.12; 5 Tiffany’s Real Property § 1287. See also McCannon v. . . .

CEMENTOS ANAHUAC GOLFO, S. A. v. UNITED STATES,, 689 F. Supp. 1191 (Ct. Int'l Trade 1988)

. . . Anahuac del Golfo, S.A., 1.64%; (2) Cementos Guadalajara, S.A., 5.13%; (3) Cementos de Chihuahua, S.A., 17.12% . . .

S. A, v., 12 Ct. Int'l Trade 525 (Ct. Int'l Trade 1988)

. . . Anahuac del Golfo, S.A., 1.64%; (2) Cementos Guadalajara, S.A., 5.13%; (3) Cementos de Chihuahua, S.A., 17.12% . . .

CEMENTOS GUADALAJARA, S. A. S. A. S. A. S. A. v. UNITED STATES,, 686 F. Supp. 335 (Ct. Int'l Trade 1988)

. . . Guadalajara, S.A., 5.13%; (2) Cementos Anahuac del Golfo, S.A., 1.64%; (3) Cementos de Chihuahua, S.A., 17.12% . . .

S. A. S. A. S. A. S. A. v., 12 Ct. Int'l Trade 307 (Ct. Int'l Trade 1988)

. . . Guadalajara, S.A., 5.13%; (2) Cementos Ana-huac del Golfo, S.A., 1.64%; (3) Cementos de Chihuahua, S.A., 17.12% . . .

UNITED STATES v. M. DWYER,, 843 F.2d 60 (1st Cir. 1988)

. . . See, also, Devitt & Blackmar, Federal Jury Practice and Instructions: Criminal § 17.12 (3d ed. 1977), . . .

In RYAN, M. STERN, v. CONTINENTAL ASSURANCE COMPANY,, 70 B.R. 509 (Bankr. D. Mass. 1987)

. . . See 4 American Law of Property § 17.12 (1952). . . . Kelly, 100 Vt. 318, 137 A. 196 (1926); see American Law of Property § 17.12 (1952). . . .

REPUBLIC OF NEW AFRIKA, v. FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION,, 656 F. Supp. 7 (D.D.C. 1985)

. . . relates to "possible future targets for retaliation.” 2 O'Reilly, Federal Information Disclosure § 17.12 . . .

WHITTENBERG, Mr. P. NAACP, Dr. T. H. v. SCHOOL DISTRICT OF GREENVILLE COUNTY, SOUTH CAROLINA,, 607 F. Supp. 289 (D.S.C. 1985)

. . . 29.76 23.91 10.68 51.96 6.95 13.95 37.50 36.26 27.33 37.35 5.45 22.01 25.65 26.81 36.16 22.68 33.08 17.12 . . .

O. BROCKERT, Jr. v. SKORNICKA, a, 711 F.2d 1376 (7th Cir. 1983)

. . . . § 17.12. . . . Section 17.12(1), Wis.Stats., provides in relevant part: Officers of cities ... may be removed as follows . . .

In D. H. OVERMYER TELECASTING CO. INC. HADAR LEASING INTERNATIONAL CO. INC. v. D. H. OVERMYER TELECASTING CO. INC., 23 B.R. 823 (Bankr. N.D. Ohio 1982)

. . . Evans, Raible Ex. 737) 17.12.Unpaid Vendors. . . . (Findings of Fact 17.11, 17.12, supra pp. 71-73) ix. . . .

HOEL- STEFFEN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY v. UNITED STATES, 684 F.2d 843 (Ct. Cl. 1982)

. . . Flack chose not to exercise his authority under paragraph 17.12 of the subcontractor listing clause and . . . Paragraph 17.12 of the clause states (in part): The Contracting Officer shall have the right to require . . . The contracting officer testified clearly at trial that he was aware of the provisions of paragraph 17.12 . . . have questioned Rock Hill regarding the sequence of events pursuant to his authority under paragraph 17.12 . . . Officer’s refusal to approve a substitution pursuant to the provisions of subparagraphs (17.10) and (17.12 . . .

HOEL- STEFFEN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY v. THE UNITED STATES, 231 Ct. Cl. 128 (Ct. Cl. 1982)

MITSUI CO. U. S. A. INC. v. PUERTO RICO WATER RESOURCES AUTHORITY,, 528 F. Supp. 768 (D.P.R. 1981)

. . . 17(a) which “goes far beyond any common law notion of trustee”, 3A Moore’s Federal Practice, Section 17.12 . . .

BROAD v. ROCKWELL INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION, 642 F.2d 929 (5th Cir. 1981)

. . . Section 17.12 of the Indenture provides in pertinent part as follows: This Indenture and each and every . . .

In PILLOW, Jr. L. PILLOW, Jr. v. AVCO FINANCIAL SERVICES, In W. GEIGLE, W. GEIGLE, v. AVCO FINANCIAL SERVICES, In W. HORTON J. W. HORTON, v. AVCO FINANCIAL SERVICES, In J. REVELLO O. J. REVELLO O. v. AVCO FINANCIAL SERVICES,, 8 B.R. 404 (Bankr. D. Utah 1981)

. . . Murphy, Creditors’ Rights in Bankruptcy, §§ 17.12 et seq. (1980); Aaron, “The Bankruptcy Reform Act of . . .

UNITED STATES v. MORRONE, a k a a k a a k a a k a a k a L. a k a, 502 F. Supp. 983 (E.D. Pa. 1980)

. . . Blackmar, Federal Jury Practice and Instructions, § 17.12 (3d ed. 1977), and cases cited therein. . . . .

BROAD v. ROCKWELL INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION, 614 F.2d 418 (5th Cir. 1980)

. . . See § 17.12. . . .

J. FISCHER, v. ROSENTHAL COMPANY, 481 F. Supp. 53 (N.D. Tex. 1979)

. . . of 1933; (3) § 4b of the Commodity Exchange Act; (4) § 33 A(2) of the Texas Securities Act; (5) §§ 17.12 . . .

J. McCARTHY, A. H. F. E. v. J. GARRAHY, F., 460 F. Supp. 1042 (D.R.I. 1978)

. . . voters reside in Bristol County; 8.06% reside in Newport County; 8.79% reside in Washington County; 17.12% . . .

v., 60 T.C. 569 (T.C. 1973)

. . . such cowhide gloves had a Carla Trading price of $16.75 per dozen pairs and an appraisal value of $17.12 . . .

TRANS OCEAN VAN SERVICE v. THE UNITED STATES, 200 Ct. Cl. 122 (Ct. Cl. 1972)

. . . delivery from SIT to the residence, less the credit to the defendant referred to in paragraph (b) for the $17.12 . . .

BACHE CO. v. INTERNATIONAL CONTROLS CORP., 324 F. Supp. 998 (S.D.N.Y. 1971)

. . . Cavalliotis, 276 F. 565 (E.D.N.Y.1921); Cf. 3A Moore’s Federal Practice ¶ 17.12, n. 20. . . .

BELCHER, v. BIRMINGHAM TRUST NATIONAL BANK, a, 348 F. Supp. 61 (N.D. Ala. 1968)

. . . 1960 560,972.02 23.5 1961 543,233.18 19.79 1962 547,472.81 18.2 1963 574,797.20 16.74 1964 552.114.92 17.12 . . .

HALL v. PACIFIC MARITIME ASSOCIATION, a, 281 F. Supp. 54 (N.D. Cal. 1968)

. . . the following provisions relating to this question of the jurisdiction of the Joint Port Committee: “17.12 . . .

BLUEBERRY LAND COMPANY, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE,, 361 F.2d 93 (5th Cir. 1966)

. . . See generally 2 Mertens §§ 17.05-.05a, 17.12; 3 Id. §§ 20.161-.163, 20.165; 7 Id. §§ 38.11-.13. . . . .

STATE OF MARYLAND, S. GEILS, W. W. M. S. W. Jr. S. W. Jr. v. BALTIMORE TRANSIT COMPANY, a M., 37 F.R.D. 34 (D. Md. 1965)

. . . Acme Poultry Corporation, supra; 3 Moore’s Federal Practice, ¶ 17.12 and ¶ 17.14; 2 Barron and Holtzoff . . .

MACHOVER v. ABDALLAH, 329 F.2d 800 (3d Cir. 1964)

. . . IV, § 17.12; Tiffany, Real Property, 3d ed., Vol. 5, § 1287. . Pond v. . . .

ISAAC MACHOVER LOLA MACHOVER v. ABDRHMIN ABDALLAH MENRAH ABDALLAH MOHAMMED ABDALLAH,, 4 V.I. 518 (3d Cir. 1964)

. . . IV, § 17.12; Tiffany, Real Property, 3d ed., Vol. 5, § 1287. Pond v. . . .

v., 38 T.C. 957 (T.C. 1962)

. . . Lilleberg_ 77, 040 17.12 Jake Graybeal_ 77,040 17.12 Total_ 450, 000 100 In February 1959, 200,000 shares . . .

M. LOEGERING, v. COUNTY OF TODD, a, 185 F. Supp. 134 (D. Minn. 1960)

. . . representative normally controls for diversity purposes. 3 Moore, Fed.Pract., Parags. 17.03, 17.04, 17.12 . . .

UNITED STATES v. DE HAVEN, 13 F.R.D. 435 (W.D. Mich. 1953)

. . . In 6 Cyclopedia of Federal Procedure, 3d Ed., § 17.12, page 86, it is stated: “The impleading of third . . .

v. AMERICAN CAPITAL CORPORATION, 51 F. Supp. 462 (D. Del. 1943)

. . . . § 4.39‡ § 12.61 def § 20.48 § 36.23 § 39.17* 3Y2 shares new Common............. 11.20 def 17.12 28.98 . . .

HIGGINS v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, 129 F.2d 237 (1st Cir. 1942)

. . . . § 17.12. . . .

VINEYARD LAND STOCK CO. v. TWIN FALLS SALMON RIVER LAND WATER CO., 245 F. 9 (9th Cir. 1917)

. . . of the season, running from 10.08 to 19.44 per cent., except that in the fourth division there was 17.12 . . .

UNITED STATES v. READING COMPANY TEMPLE IRON COMPANY v. UNITED STATES READING COMPANY v. UNITED STATES, 226 U.S. 324 (U.S. 1912)

. . . this matter, 29.96%; the Lehigh Valley Railroad Company, 22.88%; the Central Railroad of New Jersey, 17.12% . . .

UNITED STATES v. READING CO., 183 F. 427 (C.C.E.D. Pa. 1910)

. . . contracted with tire Guaranty Trust Company and the Temple Iron Company to buy at par 29.96 per cent., 17.12 . . . the Lehigh Valley, 22.88 per cent.; the Delaware, Lackawanna & Western, 19.52 per cent.; the Central, 17.12 . . .

COLUMBIA DREDGING CO. v. SANFORD BROOKS CO., 163 F. 362 (E.D. Va. 1908)

. . . illustration of this is found in the charge of $873.12 for 51 days’ loss of work on scow No. 10 at $17.12 . . . aggregating $465.04; in other words, an allowance of 51 days to do $465 of work, and charging lor such time $17.12 . . .

BROWN v. UNITED STATES, 146 F. 219 (8th Cir. 1906)

. . . Brown proceeded to act and informed him that he had closed it out at $17.12. . . .