Cases from cite.case.law:

HOGLE, v. STATE, 250 So. 3d 178 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . Additionally, the court imposed a $342.86 fine pursuant to section 775.083, as well as a related $17.14 . . .

LASATER v. DIRECTV, LLC, 322 F. Supp. 3d 988 (C.D. Cal. 2017)

. . . Incorrect Calculation of Pay Rate Plaintiff Hours Per Week Weekly Pay Regular Rate Lasater 70 $1200 $17.14 . . .

SIMMONS, v. STATE, 196 So. 3d 1287 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . judgment reflected a discretionary fee of $342.86 pursuant to section 775.083, Florida Statutes, and a $17.14 . . .

UNITED STATES v. ERVIN,, 198 F. Supp. 3d 1169 (D. Mont. 2016)

. . . Criminal Jury Instr. 2d 17.14) (emphasis added); People v. . . .

ODOM, v. STATE, 187 So. 3d 324 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . judgment reflected a discretionary cost of $342.86 pursuant to section 775.083 and a surcharge of $17.14 . . .

PARKER, v. WENDY S INTERNATIONAL, INC. d b a s, 41 F. Supp. 3d 487 (E.D. Va. 2014)

. . . Costello, Virginia Remedies § 17.14, at 17-98 (4th ed.2011) (“Of course, there can be no talk of negligence . . .

HYMAS d b a v. UNITED STATES,, 117 Fed. Cl. 466 (Fed. Cl. 2014)

. . . The August 20, 1986 version (Release 15) of sections 17 through 17.14 of the Refuge Manual, together . . .

ACTION INK, INCORPORATED, a v. NEW YORK JETS, L. L. C. a a v., 576 F. App'x 321 (5th Cir. 2014)

. . . Thomas MoCarthy, McCarthy on Trademarks and Unfair Competition § 17.14 (4th ed.1996). . . .

HUSSEY, v. MILWAUKEE COUNTY,, 740 F.3d 1139 (7th Cir. 2014)

. . . MCCGO § 17.14(7)(a) (1971). . . . MCCGO § 17.14(7) (1989). . . . MCCGO § 17.14(7) (1996). . . . See. e.g., MCCGO § 17.14(7)(a), (b) (2000); § 17.14(8)(d), (e) (2000). . . . MCCGO § 17.14(7) (1989). . . .

In BLUE PINE GROUP, INC., 448 B.R. 267 (Bankr. D. Nev. 2010)

. . . Conduct 1.13(f); 1 Hazard, Hodes & Jarvis, supra, at § 17.14. . . . .

G. SCHWAB, v. REILLY, 130 S. Ct. 2652 (U.S. 2010)

. . . property of the estate, and that he have such other and further relief as is just.” 13A Collier § CS 17.14 . . .

R. RASMUSON S. v. UNITED STATES,, 91 Fed. Cl. 204 (Fed. Cl. 2010)

. . . Dodge Railroad established a 15.14-mile right-of-way between milepost 2.0 near Flint, Iowa and milepost 17.14 . . . subject right-of-way at issue are described as located between milepost 2.0 near Flint to milepost 17.14 . . .

FRANKLIN MEMORIAL HOSPITAL, v. M. HARVEY,, 575 F.3d 121 (1st Cir. 2009)

. . . Laws § 23-17.14-15(a). . . . Laws § 23-17.14-30. . . . .

SUNTRUST BANK, v. DEN- MARK CONSTRUCTION, INC. In M D LLC, LLC SC,, 406 B.R. 683 (E.D.N.C. 2009)

. . . concedes, that the bankruptcy court erred in finding an increase in SunTrust’s equity cushion from 11% to 17.14% . . .

MEIJER, INC. v. ABBOTT LABORATORIES, v. v. v. d b a v. v., 544 F. Supp. 2d 995 (N.D. Cal. 2008)

. . . Abbott charges $17.14 for 200 milligrams of Norvir, while charging $18.78 for a dose of Kaletra containing . . . The cumulative discount represented by Kaletra would then be x + $17.14 — $18.78, or x — $1.64, all of . . .

In FAGAN,, 376 B.R. 81 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2007)

. . . Date Amt Rec’d Amt Applied Applied To Unused Suspense 10/12/04 $2,977.00 $2,959.83 10/01/04 $ 17.17 $ 17.14 . . .

CHAMPLIN B. v. BURLINGTON NORTHERN SANTA FE CORPORATION, a, 385 F. Supp. 2d 720 (N.D. Ill. 2005)

. . . Prac., Personal Injury Torts and Insurance § 17.14 (2d ed.) . . .

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

. . . business with no intent to resume, good will is ended and the marks are abandoned.” 2 McCarthy, at § 17.14 . . .

BOEING CO. v. UNITED STATES, 537 U.S. 437 (U.S. 2003)

. . . Eustice, Federal Income Taxation of Corporations and Shareholders ¶ 17.14 (5th ed. 1987). . . .

FRIENDS OF NASSAU COUNTY, INC. E. A, v. NASSAU COUNTY, St., 752 So. 2d 42 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

. . . According to data submitted with the application, the design high water elevation is 17.14, while the . . .

ROZEMA, v. THE MARSHFIELD CLINIC V. MALEK, v. THE MARSHFIELD CLINIC, S. C. HALIDA, a v. THE MARSHFIELD CLINIC, S. C., 174 F.R.D. 425 (W.D. Wis. 1997)

. . . Monsanto Company, 164 F.R.D. 234, 239 (S.D.Ind.1995) (citing Newberg & Conte § 17.14 (“The fact that . . .

L. P. HURD, O. a v. MONSANTO COMPANY, a a, 164 F.R.D. 234 (S.D. Ind. 1995)

. . . re Dennis Greenman Securities Litigation, 829 F.2d 1539, 1545 (11th Cir.1987); Newberg, supra, at § 17.14 . . .

J. TAYLOR M. v. CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA DRUG AND ALCOHOL SERVICES CORPORATION L., 890 F. Supp. 360 (M.D. Pa. 1995)

. . . 2) less other earnings $ 3,890.17 (3) net back pay due 9/1/91 pay — $571.28 (21/14 3 x $3,890.17) $ 17.14 . . .

POLYCHROME INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION v. RUDOLPH E. KRIGGER, COMMISSIONER OF FINANCE, ERIC DAWSON, COMMISSIONER OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND AGRICULTURE, GOVERNMENT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS CAMCO INTERNATIONAL, LIMITED v. RUDOLPH E. KRIGGER, COMMISSIONER OF FINANCE, CLEMENT MAGRAS, COMMISSIONER OF LICENSING AND CONSUMER AFFAIRS, DEREK M. HODGE, LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR, ERIC DAWSON, COMMISSIONER OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND AGRICULTURE, 29 V.I. 311 (3d Cir. 1993)

. . . Eustice, Federal Income Taxation of Corporations and Shareholders, ¶ 17.14(3) (3d ed. 1987). . . .

POLYCHROME INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION v. E. KRIGGER, CAMCO INTERNATIONAL, LIMITED v. E. KRIGGER, M. E. M., 5 F.3d 1522 (3d Cir. 1993)

. . . Eustice, Federal Income Taxation of Corporations and Shareholders, ¶ 17.14(3) (3d ed. 1987). . . .

In IVAN F. BOESKY SECURITIES LITIGATION. FMC CORPORATION, v. F. BOESKY,, 825 F. Supp. 623 (S.D.N.Y. 1993)

. . . Únderlying the new opinion was a projected value for the stub equity of $17.14 per share. . . . The new FMC shares which were projected under the revised recapitalization to trade at about $17.14 per . . . This suit was terminated after the plan was adjusted. . $80 cash plus $17.14 stub equity for public shareholders . . . = $25 plus 4.29 x $17.14 for Thrift Plan = 5.667 x $17.14 for the management shareholders = $97.14. . . .

In WANG LABORATORIES, INC. STEEL HECTOR DAVIS v. WANG LABORATORIES, INC., 155 B.R. 289 (Bankr. D. Mass. 1993)

. . . Agreement, § 17.14. . . .

TSI INCORPORATED TSI v. UNITED STATES, 977 F.2d 424 (8th Cir. 1992)

. . . Eustice 17.14. . . .

AMERICA WEST AIRLINES, INC. R. J. v. NATIONAL MEDIATION BOARD,, 986 F.2d 1252 (9th Cir. 1992)

. . . . § 17.14 (discussing NLRB notices). . . . .

AMERICA WEST AIRLINES, INC. R. J. v. NATIONAL MEDIATION BOARD,, 969 F.2d 777 (9th Cir. 1992)

. . . . § 17.14 (discussing NLRB notices). • . . . .

F. KNIGHT, Jr. S. T. D. S. S. Jr. L. Dr. W. Y. N. S. Dr. Jr. v. STATE ALABAMA M. Jr. S. Jr. B. H. J. P. Dr. D. III, F. A. A. Sr. A. G. A M W. Dr. A M Jr. W. M. H. B. L. A. R. C. Dr. V. Dr. E. B. F. W. Jr. W. T. Jr. R. R. E. W. A. C. J. D. Jr. T. B. Jr. O. H. Jr. T. Jr. E. G. Jr. S. H. Jr. B. Dr. A. UNITED STATES v. STATE OF ALABAMA A M a a a a a a a a a a, 787 F. Supp. 1030 (N.D. Ala. 1991)

. . . Race Other Missing All U of No Alabama 13.24 18.33 16.43 15.35 17.55 Jacksonville St U 11.37 17.75 17.14 . . .

In D. BYBEE, Sr. J. E. KROMMENHOEK, v. A- MARK PRECIOUS METALS, INC. A-, 945 F.2d 309 (9th Cir. 1991)

. . . See 3 Cowans, Bankruptcy Law and Practice § 17.14, at 67 (1989) (listing sections of Bankruptcy Code . . .

In D. BYBEE, Sr. J. E. KROMMENHOEK, v. A- MARK PRECIOUS METALS, INC. A-, 945 F.2d 309 (9th Cir. 1991)

. . . See 3 Cowans, Bankruptcy Law and Practice § 17.14, at 67 (1989) (listing sections of Bankruptcy Code . . .

WAYNE AUTOMATION CORP. a v. R. A. PEARSON CO. a, 790 F. Supp. 1505 (E.D. Wash. 1991)

. . . Chisum, Patents §§ 17.14[2], [3] (1984)). In Oak Industries, Inc. v. . . .

In JOINT EASTERN AND SOUTHERN DISTRICT ASBESTOS LITIGATION. In JOHNS- MANVILLE CORPORATION, K. FINDLEY, C. Jr. v. M. BLINKEN, H. Jr. E. Jr. C., 129 B.R. 710 (E.D.N.Y. 1991)

. . . New-berg, Newberg on Class Actions § 17.14, at 381 (2d ed. 1985). . . . Newberg, New-berg on Class Actions § 17.14, at 381 (2d ed. 1985). . . .

STOKELY- VAN CAMP, INC. v. UNITED STATES,, 21 Cl. Ct. 731 (Ct. Cl. 1990)

. . . Eustice, Federal Income Taxation of Corporations and Shareholders, if 17.14, at 17-43 (4th ed. 1979). . . .

L F INTERNATIONAL SALES CORPORATION, v. UNITED STATES, 912 F.2d 377 (9th Cir. 1990)

. . . Eustice, Federal Income Taxation of Corporations and Shareholders ¶ 17.14, at 17-43 (4th ed. 1979). . . . Eustice, Federal Income Taxation of Corporations and Shareholders ¶ 17.14 (4th ed.1979). .The parties . . .

PROVIDENT LIFE AND ACCIDENT INSURANCE COMPANY, v. LINTHICUM,, 743 F. Supp. 662 (W.D. Ark. 1990)

. . . requires reimbursement in the event of recovery from a third party creates a conflict with paragraph 17.14 . . .

FMC CORPORATION, v. F. BOESKY, L. P. F. L. P. IFB L. P. P. L. C. L. P. F. Co. S. B. B., 727 F. Supp. 1182 (N.D. Ill. 1989)

. . . The new estimate was $17.14 per share. . . .

In NORRIS, d b a a k a SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, v. NORRIS,, 107 B.R. 592 (Bankr. E.D. Tenn. 1989)

. . . Moore, Collier on Bankruptcy ¶ 17.14[9] (14th ed. 1988). . . .

BAXTER, a By BAXTER v. F. LYNN, 886 F.2d 182 (8th Cir. 1989)

. . . The issue in this case involves the interpretation of the Fund’s subrogation provision in paragraph 17.14 . . . The Baxters argue that neither common law nor paragraph 17.14 allows subrogation against uninsured motorist . . . requires reimbursement in the event of recovery from a third party creates a conflict with paragraph 17.14 . . . The subrogation provision, paragraph 17.14 of the plan, provides: In the event the Fund pays benefits . . . court with regard to the preemption issue and reverse with regard to the interpretation of paragraph 17.14 . . .

Co. v., 91 T.C. 434 (T.C. 1988)

. . . Eustice, Federal Income Taxation of Corporations and Shareholders, par. 17.14, p. 17-54 (5th Ed. 1987 . . .

In INLAND SHOE MANUFACTURING COMPANY, INC. L. MANN, v. MICHAEL INDUSTRIES, INC. K., 90 B.R. 981 (Bankr. E.D. Mo. 1988)

. . . See Collier Bankruptcy Practice Guide, ¶ 17.14 at 17-17; In re Leonard, 55 B.R. 106 (Bkrtcy.D.D.C.1985 . . .

FMC CORPORATION, v. F. BOESKY,, 852 F.2d 981 (7th Cir. 1988)

. . . shareholders was based upon Goldman’s revised estimate that each share of new FMC stock would be worth $17.14 . . .

v. J. T. v., 89 T.C. 1156 (T.C. 1987)

. . . Eustice, Federal Income Taxation of Corporations and Shareholders, par. 17.14, at 17-44 (4th ed. 1979 . . .

UNITED STATES v. WESTERN ELECTRIC COMPANY, INC., 673 F. Supp. 525 (D.D.C. 1987)

. . . See Huber Report at 17.14; Department of Justice Report at 205. . . .

STATE OF NEW YORK, v. CEDAR PARK CONCRETE CORP. STATE OF NEW YORK, v. CENTURY- MAXIM CONSTRUCTION CORP., 665 F. Supp. 238 (S.D.N.Y. 1987)

. . . Lucas, Moore’s Federal Practice, ¶ 17.14 (2d ed. 1986). . . .

FMC CORPORATION, v. F. BOESKY L. P. F. L. P. IFB L. P. p. l. c. L. P. F. Co. S. B. B., 673 F. Supp. 242 (N.D. Ill. 1987)

. . . The new estimate was $17.14 per share. . . .

GEHL COMPANY, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE,, 795 F.2d 1324 (7th Cir. 1986)

. . . Bittker & Eustice U 17.14.-2. . . .

SOUTH AFRICAN MARINE CORPORATION, LTD. v. UNITED STATES,, 640 F. Supp. 247 (Ct. Int'l Trade 1986)

. . . See Notes of the Advisory Committee on 1966 amendment to Fed.R.Civ.P. 17 and Moore, supra, ¶ 17.14 at . . . Moore, supra, ¶ 17.14 at 17-168, indicates that Fed.R.Civ.P. 17(a), mandating suit by the real party . . .

v., 10 Ct. Int'l Trade 415 (Ct. Int'l Trade 1986)

. . . P. 17 and Moore, supra, ¶17.14 at 17-168 to 17-169 and ¶17.15-1 at 17-182. . . .

TELEVISION ENTERPRISE NETWORK, INC. a v. ENTERTAINMENT NETWORK, INC. a, 630 F. Supp. 244 (D.N.J. 1986)

. . . Callman, § 17.14, at 57-58. . . .

THOMAS INTERNATIONAL LIMITED, v. UNITED STATES,, 773 F.2d 300 (Fed. Cir. 1985)

. . . Eustice, Federal Income Taxation of Corporations and Shareholders ÍI 17.14 (4th ed. 1979). . . .

THOMAS INTERNATIONAL LIMITED, v. UNITED STATES,, 773 F.2d 300 (Fed. Cir. 1985)

. . . Eustice, Federal Income Taxation of Corporations and Shareholders ¶ 17.14 (4th ed. 1979). . . .

LeCROY RESEARCH SYSTEMS CORPORATION, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE,, 751 F.2d 123 (2d Cir. 1984)

. . . Eustice, Federal Income Taxation of Corporations and Shareholders II 17.14 (4th ed. 1979). . . .

AMENDOLA, v. SCHLIEWE,, 732 F.2d 79 (7th Cir. 1984)

. . . thereafter have indefinite tenure and may be removed or suspended only for the reasons named in s. 17.14 . . .

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)

. . . Klein, 29 Tr. 2835; Bond, 14 Tr. 1336^0) 17.14. Leases of Financed Equipment. . . . Klein, 29 Tr. 2847-48; Findings of Fact 17.14, supra pp. 74-75) vii. . . . (Findings of Fact 17.14, supra pp. 74-75) viii. . . .

In PENNETTA,, 19 B.R. 794 (Bankr. D. Colo. 1982)

. . . Accord: Collier on Bankruptcy, 14th Ed., 1A:17.14, at 1614; Matter of DiVicenzo, 20 C.B.C. 393 (Bkrtcy . . .

INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE, v. NORTON,, 18 B.R. 380 (D. Md. 1982)

. . . Sotelo, 436 U.S. 268, 98 S.Ct. 1795, 56 L.Ed.2d 275 (1978); 1A Collier on Bankruptcy ¶ 17.14[6] (14th . . .

H. ALBRECHT a v. UNITED STATES, 529 F. Supp. 135 (D. Wyo. 1981)

. . . Said lot covers 17.14 acres. . . .

G. DAIL, v. UNITED STATES, 635 F.2d 315 (4th Cir. 1980)

. . . The taxpayer cites 1A Collier on Bankruptcy, ¶ 17.14(4) (14th ed. 1978) in support of the proposition . . .

G. DAIL, v. UNITED STATES, 635 F.2d 315 (4th Cir. 1980)

. . . The taxpayer cites 1A Collier on Bankruptcy, ¶ 17.14(4) (14th ed. 1978) in support of the proposition . . .

UNITED STATES v. E. METZ,, 625 F.2d 775 (8th Cir. 1980)

. . . not call witnesses or produce evidence on his own behalf, and a fifth instruction based on Section 17.14 . . .

MANCHESTER PREMIUM BUDGET CORPORATION, v. MANCHESTER INSURANCE INDEMNITY COMPANY,, 612 F.2d 389 (8th Cir. 1980)

. . . Malone, 190 F.2d 756, 759-60 (5th Cir. 1951); 3A Moore’s Federal Practice fl 17.14, at 17,168 (2d ed. . . .

PAN AMERICAN VAN LINES, v. UNITED STATES, 607 F.2d 1299 (9th Cir. 1979)

. . . See 1A Collier on Bankruptcy, ¶ 17.14 at 1615 (14th ed. 1978); Kingsmill, When and How is a Bankrupt . . . See 1A Collier on Bankruptcy, supra, ¶ 17.14 at 1615; Marsh, Triumph or Tragedy? . . . See 1A Collier on Bankruptcy, supra, ¶ 17.14 at 1615; Kingsmill, supra, 31 J.Tax. at 180. . . . . See 1A Collier on Bankruptcy, supra, ¶ 17.14 at 1616.1. . . .

PAN AMERICAN VAN LINES, v. UNITED STATES, 607 F.2d 1299 (9th Cir. 1979)

. . . See 1A Collier on Bankruptcy, ¶ 17.14 at 1615 (14th ed. 1978); Kingsmill, When and How is a Bankrupt . . . See 1A Collier on Bankruptcy, supra, ¶ 17.14 at 1615; Marsh, Triumph or Tragedy? . . . See 1A Collier on Bankruptcy, supra, ¶] 17.14 at 1615; Kingsmill, supra, 31 J.Tax. at 180. . . . . See 1A Collier on Bankruptcy, supra, ¶ 17.14 at 1616.1. . . .

A. SEARS K. v. UNITED STATES, 474 F. Supp. 988 (S.D. Tex. 1979)

. . . Bankruptcy, which both parties have treated as the definitive treatise in this area, states at Vol. 1A, ¶ 17.14 . . .

In DI VINCENZO, DI VINCENZO, v. NEW YORK CITY INCOME TAX BUREAU,, 1 B.R. 528 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 1979)

. . . E.D.N.Y.1969); In re Fox, 3 Bankr.Ct.Dec. 1192, 1194 (N.D.N.Y.1977); see, 1A Collier on Bankruptcy § 17.14 . . .

UNITED STATES v. E. SOUTHERS,, 583 F.2d 1302 (5th Cir. 1978)

. . . failure” in such instructions appears in Devitt and Blackmar, Federal Jury Practice and Instructions, § 17.14 . . .

In WUKELIC, v. UNITED STATES, 544 F.2d 285 (6th Cir. 1976)

. . . See also 1A Collier, Bankruptcy (14th ed., 1976), Sec. 17.14[4] at 1620-22; In re Cohan, 68-1 U.S.T.C . . . distinguished from the information giving rise to the liability. 1A Collier, Bankruptcy (14th ed., 1976), Sec. 17.14 . . .

REED, III, v. A. RHODES, 422 F. Supp. 708 (N.D. Ohio 1976)

. . . In 1955, Tom Johnson (0%, 455/350) was constructed drawing its students from Longmead (17.14%, 998/770 . . .

M. v., 64 T.C. 415 (T.C. 1975)

. . . complaint, and beyond which the bankruptcy court may refuse to entertain it. [1A Collier, Bankruptcy, sec. 17.14 . . .

WALKER v. HALL,, 399 F. Supp. 1304 (W.D. Okla. 1975)

. . . preference. 1972 Beer: 114 53.77% Wine: 30 14.15% Liquor: 68 32.08% 1973: Beer: 93 44.29% Wine: 36 17.14% . . .

In DUKENSKY,, 377 F. Supp. 798 (N.D. Tex. 1974)

. . . See also 1A Collier, Bankruptcy ¶ 17.14 at 1614 (14th ed. rev. 1974). . . .

In SOUTHWEST AREA RATE CASE OSWA I SHELL OIL COMPANY v. FEDERAL POWER COMMISSION,, 484 F.2d 469 (5th Cir. 1973)

. . . 28.92 Texas District 5 1.9 13.91 12.27-17.64 1.0 18.50 18.50 9.9 21.80 18.00-27.45 Texas District 6 1.6 17.14 . . .

In MICHAUD E. UNITED STATES, 458 F.2d 953 (3d Cir. 1972)

. . . See 1 Collier, Bankruptcy § 17.14(4), at 1620 (14th ed. 1967); Plumb, “Federal Liens and Priorities— . . .

HORTMAN, B. v. W. HENDERSON, 434 F.2d 77 (7th Cir. 1970)

. . . of the Humanitarian Doctrine as contained in the Missouri approved jury instructions, Instructions 17.14 . . .

In MICHAUD E., 317 F. Supp. 1002 (W.D. Pa. 1970)

. . . Indian Lakes Estates, supra, also found support in 1 Collier on Bankruptcy, 14th ed., Sec. 17.14(4), . . .

In INDIAN LAKE ESTATES, INC. UNITED STATES v. L. STEWART,, 428 F.2d 319 (5th Cir. 1970)

. . . A leading text reaches a similar conclusion. 1 Collier, Bankruptcy, ¶ 17.14[4] (14th ed. 1967). . . .

UNITED STATES v. FRASER,, 314 F. Supp. 1262 (D. Ariz. 1970)

. . . part of the world; but I have chosen you out of the world, on this account the world hates you John 17.14 . . .

In ABLE ROOFING SHEET METAL COMPANY. UNITED STATES v. A. GORDON,, 425 F.2d 699 (5th Cir. 1970)

. . . See 1 Collier, Bankruptcy, Par. 17.14 (14th Ed.1969). . . .

UNITED STATES v. R. WINTERS F., 424 F.2d 113 (5th Cir. 1970)

. . . See 1 Collier, Bankruptcy § 17.14 [8] (14th rev. ed. 1967). . . .

In A. KOPF,, 299 F. Supp. 182 (E.D.N.Y. 1969)

. . . amended, to the dischargeability of priority tax claims, Collier (Collier on Bankruptcy, Yol. 1, [[ 17.14 . . .

PACIFIC MARITIME ASSOCIATION, v. INTERNATIONAL LONGSHOREMEN S AND WAREHOUSEMEN S UNION, 304 F. Supp. 1315 (N.D. Cal. 1969)

. . . Agreement as provided herein and shall investigate and adjudicate grievances as herein provided.” (17.14 . . .

NORWALK CORE, a k a v. NORWALK BOARD OF EDUCATION, a k a, 298 F. Supp. 213 (D. Conn. 1969)

. . . 14.9 17.06 17.66 16.46 22.26 West Avenue 60.1 66.9 68.50 Winnipuak 5.7 Wolf pit 10.1 8.65 9.94 10.21 17.14 . . .

WILLIAMS, v. UNITED STATES, 292 F. Supp. 327 (E.D. Mo. 1968)

. . . Morris & Co., 302 Mo. 254, 257 S.W.2d 482 (1924), and Missouri Approved Instructions Nos. 17.14 and 17.15 . . .

In, 16 Ohio Misc. 146 (N.D. Ohio 1968)

. . . Collier (14th Ed., Vol. 1, Section 17.14, pages 1613-17) in naming “inherent ambiguities” in 17a (1) . . .

In Co., 16 Ohio Misc. 176 (N.D. Ohio 1968)

. . . Collier (14th Ed., Vol. 1, Sec. 17.14, pages 1613-14) describes the phrase “legally due and owing” as . . .

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 . . .

ELLIOTT, Jr. v. DAY, M. STEVENSON, A. v. DAY,, 218 F. Supp. 90 (D. Or. 1962)

. . . Co., 153 F.2d 841, 163 A.L.R. 1281 (2nd Cir. 1946); 3 Moore’s Federal Practice, §§ 17.14 and 17.10 at . . .

F. KIM, v. MICHIGAN LADDER COMPANY, a v. KEYSTONE FLOORS, INC., 208 F. Supp. 298 (W.D. Pa. 1962)

. . . From May 1, 1959 to December 31, 1959, the plaintiff’s earning power was $17.14 per week ($600.00 35 . . . weeks = $17.14 his average weekly wage). 13. . . . Applying the statutory formula for the year 1959 (66%% x ($110.00 - $17.14) x 35 weeks), plaintiff’s . . .

GONZALES v. GONZALES, 83 F. Supp. 496 (E.D. Pa. 1949)

. . . accordingly the only amount due and payable as of the date of the decree was for the two day period, or $17.14 . . . in the sum of $5,042.50, and it must therefore be assumed that included therein was the amount of $17.14 . . .

FREDRICK v. UNITED STATES, 163 F.2d 536 (9th Cir. 1947)

. . . Second Revised Ration Order No. 3, 9 F.R. 13641, 13662, contained the following provisions: “Sec. 17.14 . . .

PORTER v. BARRETT, 89 F. Supp. 35 (E.D. Pa. 1946)

. . . Section 17.14(b) provides: "No person, unless expressly permitted by this order or otherwise authorized . . .

NORTHUMBERLAND COUNTY v. PHILADELPHIA AND READING COAL IRON CO., 53 F. Supp. 278 (E.D. Pa. 1943)

. . . Township, for the year 1938, taxes in the amount of $61.20, with a penalty of $3.06 and interest of $17.14 . . .

v., 17 Ct. Cl. 55 (Ct. Cl. 1881)

. . . For his services subsequent to that date he received $17.14 by collections from postmasters on the route . . .