Cases from cite.case.law:

CHAVEZ, v. STATE, 132 So. 3d 826 (Fla. 2014)

. . . Florida Parole Commission/Office of Executive Clemency — Finally, Chavez relies upon section 14.28, Florida . . . I of the State Constitution.” § 14.28, Fla. Stat. (2013) (emphasis supplied). . . . Thus, to the extent section 14.28 could be read to exclude certain clemency materials from confidentiality . . .

CITY OF PONTIAC RETIRED EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION C. v. SCHIMMEL,, 498 F.3d 767 (6th Cir. 2013)

. . . Laws § 14.28. . . .

CITY OF PONTIAC RETIRED EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION C. v. SCHIMMEL,, 726 F.3d 767 (6th Cir. 2013)

. . . Laws § 14.28. . . .

In D. BLIXSETH, J. v. LLC,, 489 B.R. 154 (Bankr. D. Mont. 2013)

. . . WCP then divided 29% by 730 and then multiplied that result by 365 to obtain an interest rate of 14.28% . . .

In J. ABBALE, v. J. LLC, B., 475 B.R. 334 (Bankr. E.D.N.Y. 2012)

. . . lists Haller as a general unsecured creditor in his bankruptcy schedules as having a claim relating to 14.28 . . .

INCLUSIVE COMMUNITIES PROJECT, INC. v. TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY AFFAIRS,, 860 F. Supp. 2d 312 (N.D. Tex. 2012)

. . . ; developments in high opportunity neighborhoods have suffered high vacancy rates, such as 9.5% and 14.28% . . .

A. DiGIALLONARDO, v. SAINT- GOBAIN RETIREMENT INCOME GROUP, 697 F. Supp. 2d 173 (D. Mass. 2010)

. . . provided for in the pension article of the union shop contract, you have vested pension rights for 14.28 . . .

G. BALDWIN, v. W. BADER P. L. F. H. A., 585 F.3d 18 (1st Cir. 2009)

. . . amount of approximately $14,285 each, and, in exchange, received the company’s shares in equal amounts (14.28 . . . provided unlimited guaranties while the remaining shareholders provided limited guaranties capped at 14.28 . . . As a result of the share issuance, Baldwin’s stake in WMI was diluted from 14.28 percent to 5.04 percent . . .

GREATER NEW ORLEANS FAIR HOUSING ACTION CENTER, v. ST. BERNARD PARISH,, 641 F. Supp. 2d 563 (E.D. La. 2009)

. . . AMI), approximately 21 % of African-American households fall within that income category, compared to 14.28% . . .

In CHEN,, 351 B.R. 355 (Bankr. E.D. Va. 2006)

. . . memorandum of lien claimed a condominium fee due on February 1, 1997, in the amount of $333.00, interest of $14.28 . . .

In WORLDCOM, INC. SECURITIES LITIGATION, 388 F. Supp. 2d 319 (S.D.N.Y. 2005)

. . . court on October 21, 2003, WorldCom bondholders were given the choice of exchanging their notes for 14.28 . . .

In HOFFINGER INDUSTRIES, INC. v., 308 B.R. 362 (Bankr. E.D. Ark. 2004)

. . . . = 14.28 FF). (Pl.’s Ex. 34.) . . . .

HARIK v. CALIFORNIA TEACHERS ASSOCIATION Dr. Dr. v. Dr. Dr. v. Dr. Dr., 326 F.3d 1042 (9th Cir. 2003)

. . . Id. at 1107 (citing Bailey at 14.25-14.28). . . .

KING, v. STATE, 840 So. 2d 1047 (Fla. 2003)

. . . request for records from the Office of the Governor by ruling that such records were exempt under section 14.28 . . .

HARIK v. CALIFORNIA TEACHERS ASSOCIATION Dr. Dr. v. Of As As Dr. As Dr. v. As Dr. Dr., 298 F.3d 863 (9th Cir. 2002)

. . . Id. at 1107 (citing Bailey at 14.25-14.28). . . .

CAMPUS COMMUNICATIONS, INC. v. EARNHARDT,, 821 So. 2d 388 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

. . . See, e.g., §§ 14.28, 39.202(5), 119.07(3), 240.2996(6), 288.075(2), 397.50 l(7)(a)5:, 828.30(5), 985.04 . . .

PIVEN, v. SYKES ENTERPRISES, INC. L. J., 137 F. Supp. 2d 1295 (M.D. Fla. 2000)

. . . 66,237.10 06/04/1999 4,600.00 $ 32.94 02/01/2000 $18.35 67,109.40 06/04/1999 1,100.00 $ 32.94 02/07/2000 $14.28 . . . 20,519.62 06/09/1999 10,500.00 $ 30.34 02/07/2000 $14.28 168,632.10 06/29/1999 1,500.00 $ 31.55 02/07 . . . /2000 $14.28 25.900.80 07/01/1999 3,200.00 $ 32.38 02/07/2000 $14.28 57,895.04 08/12/1999 5,000.00 $ . . . 26.00 02/07/2000 $14.28 58,586.00 10/26/1999 200.00 $ 26.98 02/07/2000 $14.28 2,540.04 10/26/1999 6,500.00 . . .

PRESCOTT F. L. M. v. COUNTY OF EL DORADO El, 177 F.3d 1102 (9th Cir. 1999)

. . . Id. at 14.25; see generally, id. at 14.25-14.28. . . .

SCOTT, v. A. BUTTERWORTH,, 734 So. 2d 391 (Fla. 1999)

. . . These documents were exempt from disclosure under § 14.28, Florida Statutes (1995), and Rule 16 of the . . .

RYANS v. GRESHAM,, 6 F. Supp. 2d 595 (E.D. Tex. 1998)

. . . No. 1-L, 135 F.3d 694, 699-700, 702 (10th Cir.1998); see also Nowak & Rotuna, supra § 14.28; cf. . . .

ASSOCIATED BUILDERS AND CONTRACTORS, SAGINAW VALLEY AREA CHAPTER, v. W. PERRY, AFL- CIO J., 115 F.3d 386 (6th Cir. 1997)

. . . . § 14.28 (West 1994). . . .

ROBERTS, v. BUTTERWORTH,, 668 So. 2d 580 (Fla. 1996)

. . . The judge ruled that materials relating to Roberts’ clemency proceedings were exempt under section 14.28 . . . Lockett, 620 So.2d 153 (Fla.1993); § 14.28, Fla.Stat. (1993). . . . Section 14.28, Florida Statutes (1993), provides in pertinent part that "[a]ll records developed or received . . .

M. EMMEL, v. COCA- COLA BOTTLING COMPANY OF CHICAGO, INC., 904 F. Supp. 723 (N.D. Ill. 1995)

. . . Dulin, Linke and Merenda, the three men promoted to Key Account Executive, received salary increases of 14.28% . . .

STATE OF MICHIGAN J. KELLEY, v. C. R. EQUIPMENT SALES, INC., 898 F. Supp. 509 (W.D. Mich. 1995)

. . . . § 14.28 (West 1994). . . .

REICHENPFADER v. PACCAR, INC. d b a, 872 F. Supp. 328 (E.D. La. 1994)

. . . La.1993), the employer’s share of fault (30%) was reapportioned, bringing Peterbilt Motors share to 14.28% . . . Of this amount, Peterbilt Motors is liable for 14.28%, or $6264.87. . . .

HUMPHREY, v. KLEINHARDT,, 157 F.R.D. 404 (W.D. Mich. 1994)

. . . This authority is vested in the Attorney General by both statute, see, e.g., MCL §§ 14.28, 14.29 and . . . Kelley, 79 Mich.App. 789, 262 N.W.2d 676 (1977); MCL § 14.28. . . .

SIMMONS, SIMMONS, v. HOOKS, In No. No. A In No., 843 F. Supp. 1296 (E.D. Ark. 1994)

. . . minority population and the special education minority population in the district increased in 1989-90 to 14.28 . . .

In VALLEY STEEL PRODUCTS COMPANY, INC. OFFICIAL PLAN COMMITTEE, ESTATE OF VALLEY STEEL PRODUCTS COMPANY, INC. v. G M FABRICATING, INC., 166 B.R. 1017 (Bankr. E.D. Mo. 1993)

. . . less 53.33% (8) 0.00% (0) 0.00% (0) 31-45 days 26.67% (4) 57.14 (4) 18.18% (4) 46-60 days 6.67% (1) 14.28% . . .

CITIZENS OF STATE OF FLORIDA, v. McK. WILSON,, 568 So. 2d 1267 (Fla. 1990)

. . . Likewise, it is undisputed that United’s rate of return in 1988 was 14.28%, which was within the permissible . . . The Public Counsel asserts because United’s 14.28% rate of return exceeded the 13.5% midpoint, the PSC . . . Even though the PSC and United concede that United’s rate of return was 14.28%, they argue that there . . .

CARTER v. UNIT RIG EQUIPMENT COMPANY, a, 908 F.2d 1483 (10th Cir. 1990)

. . . MILLER, COLORADO PERSONAL INJURY PRACTICE, §§ 14.28-14.29 (1989) (in cases “commenced on or after July . . .

In ANDERSON,, 88 B.R. 877 (Bankr. N.D. Ind. 1988)

. . . He showed 370 acres tillable and fair to good for farming and 14.28 acres non-tillable due to fences, . . .

NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, v. RYDER P. I. E. NATIONWIDE, INC., 810 F.2d 502 (5th Cir. 1987)

. . . claim Pate submitted for April 2, and the amount which the company calculated he was actually owed was $14.28 . . .

ISLA PETROLEUM CORPORATION De v. DEPARTMENT OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS PHILLIPS PUERTO RICO CORE, INC. v. ORTIZ ALVAREZ, TEXACO PUERTO RICO, INC. v. ORTIZ ALVAREZ, H Mr. CIA. PETROLERA CARIBE, INC. v. ORTIZ ALVAREZ, SHELL COMPANY PUERTO RICO LIMITED v. ORTIZ ALVAREZ, ESSO STANDARD OIL CO. P. R. v. ORTIZ ALVAREZ, CARIBBEAN GULF REFINING CORPORATION, v. ORTIZ ALVAREZ, TENOCO OIL CO. INC. De El v. DEPARTMENT OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS, 640 F. Supp. 474 (D.P.R. 1986)

. . . during the first ten days of April 1986; 11.90 cents per gallon from April 11 to May 10, 1986, and 14.28 . . .

FIRST FEDERAL SAVINGS LOAN ASSOCIATION OF PITTSBURGH, v. OPPENHEIM, APPEL, DIXON CO. a OPPENHEIM, APPEL, DIXON CO. a v. E. OWENS S. J. a, 634 F. Supp. 1341 (S.D.N.Y. 1986)

. . . Moore, Federal Practice ¶ 14.28[2] at 14-124 to 125 (2d ed. 1984). . . .

L. LUCE, Jr. C. E. B. P. S. v. UNITED STATES, 4 Cl. Ct. 212 (Cl. Ct. 1983)

. . . 12.89% 1972 12.86% Average 1972-1976 8.47% Standard & Poor’s Automobiles-Trucks & Parts Index_ 1976 14.28% . . .

UNITED STATES v. EXXON CORPORATION,, 561 F. Supp. 816 (D.D.C. 1983)

. . . 1975 to September 30,1979 9.00 percent October through December 1979 11.70 January through March 1980 14.28 . . .

FLAGSHIP NATIONAL BANK OF MIAMI, v. COMMERCIAL BANK TRUST COMPANY,, 428 So. 2d 361 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1983)

. . . Moore Federal Practice § 14.28(2) (1982); H. . . .

MOSLEY, v. CLARKSVILLE MEMORIAL HOSPITAL, 574 F. Supp. 224 (M.D. Tenn. 1983)

. . . Two of the new employees in 1976 were non-white while 14.28% of those hired in 1976 were non-white. . . .

In JOHNSON JOHNSON v. RUTHERFORD HOSPITAL, 13 B.R. 185 (Bankr. M.D. Tenn. 1981)

. . . plaintiffs executed a promissory note in the principal amount of $1,557.00 plus interest at the rate of 14.28 . . .

M. JACOBS, v. FLIGHT EXTENDERS, INC. v. LAKEWOOD AIRCRAFT SERVICE, INC., 90 F.R.D. 676 (E.D. Pa. 1981)

. . . Globemaster Baltimore, Inc., 49 F.R.D. 63 (D.Md.1969); 3 Moore’s Federal Practice ¶ 14.28[1], at 14-611 . . .

ADAMS v. GAUDET, 515 F. Supp. 1086 (W.D. La. 1981)

. . . Superintendents and Supervisors 7 6 1 85.72 14.28 Principals Jr. . . .

TEXAS TRADING MILLING CORP. v. FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA DECOR BY NIKKEI INTERNATIONAL, INC. d b a v. FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA CHENAX MAJESTY, INC. v. FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA EAST EUROPE IMPORT- EXPORT, INC. v. FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA, 647 F.2d 300 (2d Cir. 1981)

. . . East Europe contract was $59.50 per ton; accordingly, the East Europe letter of credit was to be for $14.28 . . .

R. E. LINDER STEEL ERECTION CO. INC. v. ALUMISTEEL SYSTEMS, INC. SHERMAN R. SMOOT COMPANY, INC. v. ALUMISTEEL SYSTEMS, INC., 88 F.R.D. 629 (D. Md. 1980)

. . . . ¶ 14.28[2]; 6 C. Wright & A. . . .

C. PELINSKI v. GOODYEAR TIRE AND RUBBER COMPANY GOODYEAR TIRE AND RUBBER COMPANY v. SPACEMARK, INC., 499 F. Supp. 1092 (N.D. Ill. 1980)

. . . therefore do not require independent satisfaction of the venue statutes. 3 Moore’s Federal Practice, ¶ 14.28 . . .

D. POUNCY, v. PRUDENTIAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA,, 499 F. Supp. 427 (S.D. Tex. 1980)

. . . Predicted Actual Predicted Actual Predicted Actual Predicted Actual Predicted Actual Predicted Level 10 14.28% . . . 13.33% 7.23% 22.72% 8.23% 25% 9.24% 12.50% 10.57% 18.18 8.03 Level 11 0.00 3.53 8.70 7.23 13.95 8.23 14.28 . . .

PETRIZZO, v. UNITED STATES v. FIRST PENNSYLVANIA BANKING AND TRUST CO. a k a N. A., 492 F. Supp. 752 (D.N.J. 1980)

. . . advocated: the third-party defendant has no objection based upon venue. 3 Moore’s Federal Practice, ¶ 14.28 . . .

DAVIS, v. A. CALIFANO, 613 F.2d 957 (D.C. Cir. 1979)

. . . The men had an average grade of 14.28 while the women’s average grade was 13.29. . . . year, the average grade level for male NHLBI chemists within the division of Intramural Research was 14.28 . . .

NELSON v. A. GAMMON, 478 F. Supp. 630 (W.D. Ky. 1979)

. . . As a result of such purchase, Fuqua presently holds 14.28% of the outstanding voting stock of National . . .

M. COCHRAN, v. PACO, INC. M. JONES, v. PACO, INC., 606 F.2d 460 (5th Cir. 1979)

. . . was disclosed: Cash down payment_$ 53.00 Unpaid balance (amount financed)_$ 98.00 Finance charge_$ 14.28 . . .

CAMEL MANUFACTURING COMPANY v. THE UNITED STATES, 215 Ct. Cl. 460 (Ct. Cl. 1978)

. . . 15,307.88 7,409.84 Net Operating Profit 1,129,077.08 939,733.48 189,343.60 % Profit (of total sales) 14.28% . . .

CAMEL MANUFACTURING COMPANY v. UNITED STATES, 572 F.2d 280 (Ct. Cl. 1978)

. . . 15,307.88 7,409.84 Net Operating Profit 1,129,077.08 939,733.48 189,343.60 % Profit (of total sales) 14.28% . . .

METROPOLITAN DADE COUNTY, v. KELLY, 348 So. 2d 49 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1977)

. . . Wright on Federal Courts, § 76; 3 Moore, Federal Practice, § 14.28(2), Odette v. . . .

SEAFOOD IMPORTS, INC. v. A. J. CUNNINGHAM PACKING CORP. A. J. CUNNINGHAM PACKING CORP. v. MARITIME REEFER SERVICE A PANAMANIAN CORPORATION, 405 F. Supp. 5 (S.D.N.Y. 1975)

. . . Moore’s Federal Practice, Vol. 3, f[ 14.28 [2], at 14-614 (and cases cited therein, at n. 4.) . . .

KEELY, v. WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC CORP., 404 F. Supp. 573 (E.D. Mo. 1975)

. . . employees; c) the highest labor grade attained by 2 black employees is labor grade 3, representing 14.28% . . .

O. JONES v. D. KREMINSKI, v. FEDERAL FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC. ALTIERI v. D. KREMINSKI D. KREMINSKI, v. FEDERAL FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC., 404 F. Supp. 667 (D. Conn. 1975)

. . . Moore, Federal Practice ¶ 14.28 [2] (1974), and cases cited therein at n. 4. . . .

E. A. v., 64 T.C. 1130 (T.C. 1975)

. . . 57.14% 5/12- 41.67% September_ 3/7— 42.85% 4/12- 33.33% October_ 2/7— 28.57% 3/12- 25.00% November_ 1/7— 14.28% . . .

V. WASSEL, v. M. EGLOWSKY H. M. EGLOWSKY H. v. GOLDMAN, 399 F. Supp. 1330 (D. Md. 1975)

. . . Moore, Federal Practice fl 14.28 [2] at 14-614 (1974) (footnotes omitted). See 6 C. Wright & A. . . .

J. KELLEY, v. BUTZ, U. S. D. C., 404 F. Supp. 925 (W.D. Mich. 1975)

. . . Section 14.28, M.S.A. . . .

E. ODETTE, v. SHEARSON, HAMMILL CO. INCORPORATED, v. NATIONAL BANK OF NORTH AMERICA, SLADE, v. SHEARSON, HAMMILL CO. INCORPORATED, v. NATIONAL BANK OF NORTH AMERICA, COMPASS BANK AND TRUST COMPANY, LIMITED v. SHEARSON, HAMMILL CO. INCORPORATED, v. NATIONAL BANK OF NORTH AMERICA, E. FELDMAN, v. SHEARSON, HAMMILL CO. INCORPORATED, v. NATIONAL BANK OF NORTH AMERICA,, 394 F. Supp. 946 (S.D.N.Y. 1975)

. . . advocated : the third-party defendant has no objection based on venue.” 3 Moore’s Federal Practice |f 14.28 . . . be considered ancillary for purposes of statutory venue requirements. 3 Moore’s Federal Practice ¶ 14.28 . . .

CONCERNED RESIDENTS OF BUCK HILL FALLS, By v. GRANT, U. S., 388 F. Supp. 394 (M.D. Pa. 1975)

. . . benefits to costs analysis on a three dam basis and an impact analysis on the basis of this dam alone. 14.28 . . .

MOSBY RUSSELL ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. v. HUDSON COMPANY OF FLORIDA, 299 So. 2d 53 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1974)

. . . and Miller, Federal Practice and Procedure, Section 1445 (1971); 3 Moore, Federal Practice, Section 14.28 . . .

SOUTHLAND MALL, INC. v. C. GARNER, 455 F.2d 887 (6th Cir. 1972)

. . . Southland Mall, Inc., originally acquired a 50 acre tract; two parcels — one of 14.28 acres and one of . . .

BLACK COMPANY, v. NOVA- TECH, INC. a J. NEILS, v. BLACK COMPANY, v. NOVA- TECH, INC. a NORTHERN PACIFIC CAPITAL CORPORATION, v. BLACK COMPANY, S. a v. J. BARTON G. L. COMPTON v. S. DUTTON,, 333 F. Supp. 468 (D. Or. 1971)

. . . See 3 Moore’s Federal Practice jf 14.28 [2], However, Black & Company’s Rule 10b-5 claim is an original . . .

SOUTHLAND MALL, INC. a v. C. GARNER,, 324 F. Supp. 674 (W.D. Tenn. 1971)

. . . Sears has 14.28 acres of the original tract and Federated owns 12.58 acres. . . .

SWISS ISRAEL TRADE BANK, v. E. L. MOBLEY, v. J. P. JONES CORP. d b a, 319 F. Supp. 374 (S.D. Ga. 1970)

. . . jurisdictional purposes and no independent jurisdictional ground is necessary (3 Moore's Federal Practice § 14.28 . . .

A. DUNDEE, v. ORLEANS PARISH BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ELECTIONS, 434 F.2d 135 (5th Cir. 1970)

. . . Percent- Percentage of age of Total Total Popula- Represention tation on Board of Assessors 56,949 9.1 14.28 . . . 78,275 12.5 14.28 260,510 41.5 14.28 56,839 9.0 14.28 91,809 14.6 14.28 34,415 5.5 14.28 48,731 7.8 . . . 14.28 The City, while acknowledging the disparity between the population of the various Municipal Districts . . .

T. McGONIGLE v. PENN- CENTRAL TRANSPORTATION COMPANY, a PENN- CENTRAL TRANSPORTATION COMPANY v. D. SALUTI T., 49 F.R.D. 58 (D. Md. 1969)

. . . Service Trucking Co., supra; 2 Moore, supra, ¶ 14.28 [2]. . . .

SOUTHERN NATURAL GAS COMPANY v. THE UNITED STATES, 188 Ct. Cl. 302 (Ct. Cl. 1969)

. . . The fair market value is 71-14.28-% points on $5,781,576.75 makes the $1,647,749.37. * * * The value . . .

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

. . . 10.8 10.40 13.65 15.39 16.66 Marvin-Ludlow 13.8 14.7 15.45 17.23 18.09 17.15 Naramake 9.0 10.6 10.85 14.28 . . .

T. M. BRITT E. v. UNITED STATES M. BRITT, v. UNITED STATES, 292 F. Supp. 6 (M.D. Fla. 1968)

. . . 15,911.83 15,911.83 23,867.74 Long-term capital gain 367.97 367.97 551.96 Section 1231 gain 9.52 9.52 14.28 . . .

E. THOMPSON, v. UNITED ARTISTS THEATRE CIRCUIT, INC. v. NATIONWIDE THEATRE INVESTMENT CO., 43 F.R.D. 197 (S.D.N.Y. 1967)

. . . applicable to any objections by the third-party defendant based on venue, 3 Moore, Federal Practice ¶ 14.28 . . .

In STEIKER, a k a a k a G., 380 F.2d 765 (3d Cir. 1967)

. . . discharged, and therefore, the bankrupt has little to gain by failing to list it. 1 Collier, Bankruptcy ¶ 14.28 . . .

In COX,, 244 F. Supp. 430 (W.D. Mo. 1965)

. . . Paragraph 14.28 1 Collier on Bankruptcy, 14th Edition, 1346 states the following: The bankrupt’s schedule . . .

AGRASHELL, INC. v. BERNARD SIROTTA COMPANY, M. A. v. HAMMONS PRODUCTS COMPANY,, 344 F.2d 583 (2d Cir. 1965)

. . . court, so long as Agrashell’s claim against Sirotta was properly laid there. 3 Moore, Federal Practice ¶14.28 . . . See 3 Moore, Federal Practice ¶14.28 [1]; Moreno v. . . .

J. BONATH, Jr. a J. Jr. v. AETNA FREIGHT LINES, INC. a v. DALESANDRO, P., 33 F.R.D. 260 (W.D. Pa. 1963)

. . . Moore's Federal Practice, Vol. 3, Sec. 14.28(3); Barron & Holtzoff, Sec. 424, p. 659-660, interpreting . . .

CLAYTON a A. v. JAMES B. CLOW SONS, a, 212 F. Supp. 482 (N.D. Ill. 1962)

. . . Foundry Company, and Warren Foundry Company for 1938 and applying it to the 1938 Clow earnings of $14.28 . . .

LaCHANCE, R. v. SERVICE TRUCKING CO. a E. v. R. LaCHANCE, LaCHANCE v. SERVICE TRUCKING CO. a E. v. R. LaCHANCE, M. WEBBER v. SERVICE TRUCKING CO. a E. v. R. LaCHANCE, LaCHANCE v. SERVICE TRUCKING CO. a E. v. R. LaCHANCE W. Jr., 208 F. Supp. 656 (D. Md. 1962)

. . . Moore, op. cit., para. 14.28; Lesnik v. Public Industrials Corp., 2 Cir., 144 F.2d 968; Malkin v. . . .

HEINTZ CO. v. PROVIDENT TRADESMENS BANK AND TRUST COMPANY, v. M. KERR, M., 30 F.R.D. 171 (E.D. Pa. 1962)

. . . This was the statement from Moore (3 Moore, “Federal Practice”, § 14.28, p. 503): “ * * * Since, as we . . .

In SIMON,, 182 F. Supp. 377 (E.D.N.Y. 1960)

. . . As is pointed out in Collier on Bankruptcy, 14th Edition, Volume I, Section 14.28, at page 1331, “The . . .

BRANDT, v. OLSON J., 179 F. Supp. 363 (N.D. Iowa 1959)

. . . In 3 Moore's Federal Practice, 2d ed. 1948, par. 14.28 [2], it is stated: “ * * * by the great weight . . .

ABRAMOVITCH, v. UNITED STATES LINES,, 174 F. Supp. 587 (S.D.N.Y. 1959)

. . . See 3 Moore, Federal Practice, par. 14.28 [3] (2d ed. 1948) Whether the venue statute applies depends . . . position that the venue statutes do not apply to third-party actions, 3 Moore, Federal Practice, par. 14.28 . . .

GORE v. UNITED STATES H., 171 F. Supp. 136 (D. Mass. 1959)

. . . . § 14.28, p. 504 and cases there cited. . . .

G. McGRATH, J. G. v. LUND S FISHERIES, INC. a METZGER, C. E. F. T., 170 F. Supp. 173 (D. Del. 1959)

. . . Allen, D.C.W.D.Pa.1955, 137 F.Supp. 691; 3 Moore Fed.Prac., Sec. 14.28, Page 503, et seq.; 1 Barron and . . .

BERKEY, v. ROCKWELL SPRING AXLE COMPANY,, 162 F. Supp. 493 (W.D. Pa. 1958)

. . . Co., D.C.E.D.Pa.1947, 73 F.Supp 815; Vol. 3 Moore’s Federal Practice [14.28 [2], page 504; Federal Practice . . .

UNITED STATES v. ALUMINUM COMPANY OF AMERICA, 153 F. Supp. 132 (S.D.N.Y. 1957)

. . . 1956 (9 mo.) .........Alcoa 4.60 3.06 6.16 13.82 Reynolds 4.56 3.05 ' 6.02 13.63 Kaiser 5.08 1.85 7.35 14.28 . . .

B. B. ROGERS v. DOUGLAS TOBACCO BOARD OF TRADE, B. HOLCOMB, H. E. v. B. B. ROGERS, 244 F.2d 471 (5th Cir. 1957)

. . . The plaintiffs’ allocation of selling time was increased from 14.28 to 14.77 per cent of the available . . . If the 3% per cent (3 %% of 14.28%) limitation had not been applied and the plaintiffs had been allocated . . . Thus plaintiffs- .1954 allocation of 14.28 per cent was increased by less than one-half per cent (3V2% . . . of 14.28%) to 14.77 per cent. . . .

Co. v., 36 Cust. Ct. 555 (Cust. Ct. 1956)

. . . per ream, 20 by 26 inches by 480 sheets. “ 5a_ 10.94 per ream, 20 by 26 inches by 480 sheets. “ 5b_ 14.28 . . .

HARTLEY PEN CO. v. LINDY PEN CO. KIMBERLY CORP. v. HARTLEY PEN CO., 16 F.R.D. 141 (S.D. Cal. 1954)

. . . . §§ 591, 597; 4 Moore, supra, par. 24.17; 3 id. pars. 13.12-13.23, pars. 13.34-13.38, pars. 14.26-14.28 . . .

UNITED STATES v. ACORD, 209 F.2d 709 (10th Cir. 1954)

. . . Moore’s Federal Practice, 2d Ed., Vol. 3, Par. 14.28 [2], p. 504; Lesnick v. . . .

RECONSTRUCTION FINANCE CORP. v. SHERWOOD DISTILLING CO. HOFFENBERG, 200 F.2d 672 (4th Cir. 1952)

. . . In Paragraph Thirteen Lessee agreed to pay R.F.C. a rental of $14.28 for each ton of feed produced by . . .

GARIEPY v. UNITED STATES, 189 F.2d 459 (6th Cir. 1951)

. . . Tear Taxes Paid Income Reported Net Worth Increases Net Worth 1937 (4,858.64) 1938 14.28 3,156.90 4,525.70 . . .

H. H. Co. Co. v., 38 C.C.P.A. 36 (C.C.P.A. 1950)

. . . packed in cases, were invoiced at 13.92 yen per dozen pairs; in sizes 5 and 6, .packed in cases, at 14.28 . . .

Co. H. H. Co. v., 22 Cust. Ct. 446 (Cust. Ct. 1949)

. . . the importer to be the export values are yen 13.92 per dozen pairs, packed, for sizes 4, and 5; yen 14.28 . . .

Co. H. H. Co. v., 17 Cust. Ct. 442 (Cust. Ct. 1946)

. . . sizes of 4, 4)4, and 5 were invoiced at yen 13.92 per dozen pairs, packed; in sizes of 5 and 6 at yen 14.28 . . .