Cases from cite.case.law:

MEYER, v. FAY SERVICING, LLC LLC,, 385 F. Supp. 3d 1235 (M.D. Fla. 2019)

. . . In Fields , the plaintiff incurred a $122.06 bill for veterinarian services. Id. at 563. . . . sent the plaintiff a letter that stated the account balance was $388.54, which reflected the original $122.06 . . .

LEMKE, v. ESCALLATE, LLC,, 374 F. Supp. 3d 727 (N.D. Ill. 2019)

. . . In Fields , the plaintiff had failed to pay a $ 122.06 veterinarian's bill. . . .

D. WILSON, v. TROTT LAW, P. C., 118 F. Supp. 3d 953 (E.D. Mich. 2015)

. . . The consumer incurred $122.06 in charges at an animal hospital. . . . plaintiff a dunning letter that stated that the account, balance was $388.54, which reflected the original $122.06 . . .

R. HARRISON, v. XTO ENERGY, INC., 705 F. Supp. 2d 572 (N.D. Tex. 2010)

. . . Mullenix, Moore’s Federal Practice, § 122.06[1] (3d ed.2009)). . . .

ACIK, v. I. C. SYSTEM, INC., 640 F. Supp. 2d 1019 (N.D. Ill. 2009)

. . . In Fields, the plaintiff had incurred a debt of $122.06 at an animal hospital, did not pay the debt, . . .

KINGSWAY FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC. v. PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS, LLP. L. W. J. J. Jr. A., 420 F. Supp. 2d 228 (S.D.N.Y. 2005)

. . . .”); 17A Moore’s Federal Practice, § 122.06[1] (Matthew Bender 3d ed.) . . . Colorado River abstention is therefore inappropriate”); 17A Moore’s Federal Practice, § 122.06[5][b]; . . .

MILLER BREWING COMPANY v. ACE U. S. HOLDINGS, INC. ACE Co. ACE INA Co. AIU PA, ABC DEF GHI JKL MNO PQR STU XYZ, 391 F. Supp. 2d 735 (E.D. Wis. 2005)

. . . Moore, 17A Moore’s Federal Practice § 122.06[6] (3d ed.2005) (stating that “Brillhart analysis applies . . .

FIELDS, v. WILBER LAW FIRM, P. C. a L. P. C. a, 383 F.3d 562 (7th Cir. 2004)

. . . On March 16, 2002, Jodi Fields incurred $122.06 in charges at Kruger Animal Hospital in Bloomington, . . . The account balance reflected the original $122.06, plus interest and service charges assessed pursuant . . . Wilber’s fees were more than double the original obligation, $122.06. . . .

HYATT, v. TOWN OF LAKE LURE H. M. III, 225 F. Supp. 2d 647 (W.D.N.C. 2002)

. . . and whether the parties’ claims could be adjudicated satisfactorily.” 17A Moore’s Federal Practice, § 122.06 . . .

W. TILLER, Jr. v. AMERADA HESS CORPORATION, J. COOLEY, Jr. v. AMERADA HESS CORPORATION, FLOYD, v. AMERADA HESS CORPORATION, D. McALISTER, v. AMERADA HESS CORPORATION,, 540 F. Supp. 160 (D.S.C. 1981)

. . . This represents an increase of 122.06%. . . .

In MISKE, Jr., 159 F. Supp. 677 (E.D. Wis. 1958)

. . . the consignment agreement shall be in writing and filed in accordance with the provisions of sections 122.06 . . .

In CLARK SUPPLY CO. HELLER v. JOURNAL CO., 172 F.2d 363 (7th Cir. 1949)

. . . affidavit pertaining to the generator filed in the office of the register of deeds as provided by § 122.06 . . . the consignment agreement shall be in writing and filed in accordance with the provisions of sections 122.06 . . .