Cases from cite.case.law:

MIAMI- DADE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, v. AN ACCOUNTABLE MIAMI- DADE,, 208 So. 3d 724 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . . §§ 15.21, 16.061(1), Fla. Stat. (2016). . . .

REGAN, v. CITY OF CHARLESTON,, 142 F. Supp. 3d 442 (D.S.C. 2015)

. . . That means he has a straight time rate of $15.21 this work period. . . .

REGAN, v. CITY OF CHARLESTON, SOUTH CAROLINA,, 131 F. Supp. 3d 541 (D.S.C. 2015)

. . . That means he has a straight time rate of $15.21 this work period. . . .

J. SCHUMACHER, v. AK STEEL CORP. RET. ACC. PENSION PLAN,, 995 F. Supp. 2d 835 (S.D. Ohio 2014)

. . . Telephone and fax charges ($15.21) are modest, reasonable, and will be taxed. . . . $31.35); Sixth Circuit filing fee ($455); postage ($214.13); private investigator ($1,080); telephone ($15.21 . . .

DEFENDERS OF WILDLIFE CPR v. SALAZAR, U. S. M. U. S., 877 F. Supp. 2d 1271 (M.D. Fla. 2012)

. . . to a natural condition; (2) converting 1.58 miles of primary trail to secondary trail; (3) reopening 15.21 . . . Simply stated, NPS’s decision to convert 1.58 miles of primary trail to secondary trail, to re-open 15.21 . . . designation, to the extent it re-designated 1.58 miles of primary trails to secondary trails and reopened 15.21 . . .

FUQUA, v. UNITED STATES, 869 F. Supp. 2d 814 (W.D. Ky. 2012)

. . . his wife, and the Fidelity Trust and Safety Vault Company granted rights to Tennessee Central for a 15.21 . . . hundred feet wide fifty feet on the left of the center line of the survey of said railroad ... containing 15.21 . . .

S. BROWNING, v. FLORIDA HOMETOWN DEMOCRACY, INC. PAC,, 29 So. 3d 1053 (Fla. 2010)

. . . .; §§ 15.21(3), 16.061(1), Fla. Stat. (2007). . . . Const.; §§ 15.21(3), 16.061(1), Fla. Stat. (2007); Fla. Admin. . . .

ADVISORY OPINION TO ATTORNEY GENERAL RE PROPERTY TAX CAP, UNLESS VOTER APPROVED, 2 So. 3d 968 (Fla. 2009)

. . . the initiative petition met the registration, submission, and signature criteria set forth in section 15.21 . . .

GRILLETTA, Jr. v. LEXINGTON INSURANCE COMPANY,, 558 F.3d 359 (5th Cir. 2009)

. . . elevation of the lowest floor of the house was 16.22 feet NAVD, with the lowest “horizontal member” at 15.21 . . .

UNITED STATES v. CULLEN, J. V., 499 F.3d 157 (2d Cir. 2007)

. . . . §§ 15.21-.26. Once obtained a permit is neither transferable nor assignable. 50 C.F.R. § 13.25. . . .

ADVISORY OPINION TO ATTORNEY GENERAL RE REFERENDA REQUIRED FOR ADOPTION, 963 So. 2d 210 (Fla. 2007)

. . . . §§ 101.161(2), 15.21(2), 100.371(2), Fla. Stat. (2006); Fla. Admin. . . . Consistent with article XI, section 3, general law, in particular section 15.21(2), Florida Statutes . . .

In NANOVATION TECHNOLOGIES, INC. v., 364 B.R. 308 (Bankr. N.D. Ill. 2007)

. . . If the analyst assumes the preferred stock has a value of $15.21, then the output from the Monte Carlo . . . Sherwin concluded that if Nanovation’s Series A convertible preferred stock had a fair market value of $15.21 . . .

LASSITER, v. LASSITER,, 456 F. Supp. 2d 876 (E.D. Ky. 2006)

. . . Leibson, Kentucky Practice (Tort Law) § 15.21 (1995); 1 Robert D. . . .

ADVISORY OPINION TO ATTORNEY GENERAL RE INDEPENDENT NONPARTISAN COMMISSION TO APPORTION LEGISLATIVE AND CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICTS WHICH REPLACES APPORTIONMENT BY LEGISLATURE, 926 So. 2d 1218 (Fla. 2006)

. . . Pursuant to section 15.21, Florida Statutes (2005), the Secretary of State submitted the amendment to . . . Thus, that petition was never submitted to the Attorney General as specified in section 15.21, Florida . . .

UNITED STATES v. MARTIN,, 431 F.3d 846 (5th Cir. 2005)

. . . Article 15.21 reads as follows: “If the proper office of the county where the offense is alleged to have . . . PROC. art. 15.21. . . . As such, the Henderson County authorities may not have even violated Article 15.21. . . . The violation of Article 15.21 did not temporally relate to Martin’s custody in June 2003, when he made . . . If the Henderson County officials had complied with Article 15.21 and released Martin from custody on . . .

ADVISORY OPINION TO THE ATTORNEY GENERAL RE REFERENDA REQUIRED FOR ADOPTION AND AMENDMENT OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLANS, 902 So. 2d 763 (Fla. 2005)

. . . Pursuant to section 15.21, Florida Statutes (2004), the Florida Secretary of State submitted the amendment . . .

ADVISORY OPINION TO ATTORNEY GENERAL REPEAL OF HIGH SPEED RAIL AMENDMENT, 880 So. 2d 624 (Fla. 2004)

. . . Pursuant to section 15.21, Florida Statutes (2003), on June 2, 2004, the Florida Secretary of State submitted . . .

ADVISORY OPINION TO THE ATTORNEY GENERAL RE FAIRNESS INITIATIVE REQUIRING LEGISLATIVE DETERMINATION THAT SALES TAX EXEMPTIONS AND EXCLUSIONS SERVE A PUBLIC PURPOSE, 880 So. 2d 630 (Fla. 2004)

. . . Florida Secretary of State submitted the amendment to the Florida Attorney General, pursuant to section 15.21 . . .

ADVISORY OPINION TO THE ATTORNEY GENERAL RE FLORIDA MINIMUM WAGE AMENDMENT, 880 So. 2d 636 (Fla. 2004)

. . . The Secretary of State submitted the amendment to the Attorney General, pursuant to section 15.21(2), . . .

ADVISORY OPINION TO ATTORNEY GENERAL RE ADDITIONAL HOMESTEAD TAX EXEMPTION, 880 So. 2d 646 (Fla. 2004)

. . . The Secretary of State submitted the amendment to the Attorney General, pursuant to section 15.21(2), . . .

PROCHROMA TECHS. INC. l v. UNITED STATES,, 60 Fed. Cl. 614 (Fed. Cl. 2004)

. . . See DX 15 H 158, at 15.21; Tr. at 2025-27. . See note 9, supra. . . . .

PROTECT OUR WATER v. Lt. B. FLOWERS, U. S. J. Jr. U. S., 377 F. Supp. 2d 844 (E.D. Cal. 2004)

. . . total loss of 9.08 acres of waters of the United States within the Phase 1 area by the creation of 15.21 . . . These two additional areas are in addition to the construction of 15.21 acres of waters to mitigate for . . .

FLORIDA SENATE, s v. FLORIDA ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS, INC. s, 829 So. 2d 854 (Fla. 2002)

. . . See § 15.21, Fla. . . .

ADVISORY OPINION TO ATTORNEY GENERAL Re LOCAL TRUSTEES s OPINION TO ATTORNEY GENERAL Re LOCAL TRUSTEES s, 819 So. 2d 725 (Fla. 2002)

. . . Pursuant to section 15.21, Florida Statutes (2001), the Secretary of State submitted to the Attorney . . .

ADVISORY OPINION TO THE ATTORNEY GENERAL RIGHT TO TREATMENT AND REHABILITATION, 818 So. 2d 491 (Fla. 2002)

. . . See § 15.21, Fla. Slat. (2000). . See § 16.061(1), Fla. Stat. (2000). . . . .

FIRST MED REPRESENTATIVES, LLC, v. FUTURA MEDICAL CORP., 195 F. Supp. 2d 917 (E.D. Mich. 2002)

. . . between First Med and Fre-senius, Fresenius had been purchasing its injection caps from Futura for $15.21 . . .

ADVISORY OPINION TO ATTORNEY GENERAL RE LIMITING CRUEL AND INHUMANE CONFINEMENT OF PIGS DURING PREGNANCY, 815 So. 2d 597 (Fla. 2002)

. . . Pursuant to section 15.21, Florida Statutes (2001), the Secretary of State submitted to the Attorney . . .

Dr. ARMSTRONG, v. HARRIS,, 773 So. 2d 7 (Fla. 2000)

. . . signatures of eight percent of electors statewide in order to place the amendment on the ballot); §§ 15.21 . . .

ADVISORY OPINION TO ATTORNEY GENERAL, AMENDMENT TO BAR GOVERNMENT FROM TREATING PEOPLE DIFFERENTLY BASED ON RACE IN PUBLIC EDUCATION., 778 So. 2d 888 (Fla. 2000)

. . . the Secretary of State submitted the initiative petitions to the Attorney General pursuant to section 15.21 . . . Section 15.21, Florida Statutes, requires the Secretary of State to submit the initiative petition to . . . See § 15.21, Fla.Stat. (1999). . . . . See § 15.21, Fla.Stat. (1999). . See § 16.061, Fla.Stat. (1999). . See Askew v. . . .

KLAMATH SISKIYOU WILDLANDS CENTER, v. BABBITT,, 105 F. Supp. 2d 1132 (D. Or. 2000)

. . . Even at the time of her final settlement offer in September 1999, plaintiffs’ counsel had spent only 15.21 . . .

UNITED STATES v. NORTHERN TRUST COMPANY, v., 93 F. Supp. 2d 903 (N.D. Ill. 2000)

. . . For the taxable year 1991, the IRS also remitted interest of $15.21 to Caterpillar Master Trust. . . .

UNITED STATES v. HOCK,, 172 F.3d 676 (9th Cir. 1999)

. . . At that time, the police found 15.21 grams of methamphetamine and narcotics transaction records in Hock . . .

M. SUMMIT, v. S- B POWER TOOL, SKIL CORPORATION A DIVISION OF EMERSON ELECTRIC COMPANY,, 121 F.3d 416 (8th Cir. 1997)

. . . When she left the Company, Summit was receiving $15.21 per hour. . . .

BIDDULPH, v. MORTHAM,, 89 F.3d 1491 (11th Cir. 1996)

. . . . § 15.21 (West 1988), who in turn must petition the Florida Supreme Court for an advisory opinion regarding . . .

WILLIAMS, v. R. GLICKMAN, U. S., 936 F. Supp. 1 (D.D.C. 1996)

. . . . § 15.21 covers programs not subject to the regulation effectuating Title VI. . . .

ASSICURAZIONI GENERALI, SpA, v. PIPE LINE VALVE SPECIALTIES CO. INC., 935 F. Supp. 879 (S.D. Tex. 1996)

. . . Policy stamped in accordance with Art. 1.14r-2 § 7(a) (Vernon 1981 and Vernon Supp. 1994) and Section 15.21 . . . Pursuant to Art. 1.14-2, the State Board of Insurance promulgated § 15.21 of the Texas Administrative . . . of insurance procured and delivered as a surplus lines coverage pursuant to Art. 1.14-2. 28 T.A.C. § 15.21 . . . Defendants argue that Section 15.21 was in effect in 1988 and that, by failing to stamp the Policy with . . .

K. WATTS, v. BUTTE SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. S. E., 939 F. Supp. 1418 (D. Neb. 1996)

. . . Droge, 226 Neb. 314, 322-23, 411 N.W.2d 324 (1987); see Nebraska Jury Instructions, Civil § 15.21 (referring . . .

ADVISORY OPINION TO THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, 656 So. 2d 466 (Fla. 1995)

. . . County Choice Gaming, Inc., to an advisory opinion from this Court under the authority of sections 15.21 . . .

ADVISORY OPINION TO THE ATTORNEY GENERAL RE FLORIDA LOCALLY APPROVED GAMING, 656 So. 2d 1259 (Fla. 1995)

. . . sufficient number of signatures to entitle it to an advisory opinion from this Court under sections 15.21 . . . Section 15.21, Florida Statutes (1993), provides: The Secretary of State shall immediately submit an . . .

ADVISORY OPINION TO ATTORNEY GENERAL Re, 642 So. 2d 724 (Fla. 1994)

. . . See §§ 15.21, 16.061, Florida Statutes (1993). . . .

WESCH, v. HUNT,, 785 F. Supp. 1491 (S.D. Ala. 1992)

. . . 1,966 100.00% 591 30.06% 1,367 69.53% 3 0.15% 5 0.25% 0 0.00% NATIONAL GUARD ARMORY 2,722 100.00% 414 15.21% . . .

NATIONAL LEASED HOUSING ASSOCIATION, v. UNITED STATES,, 24 Cl. Ct. 647 (Cl. Ct. 1991)

. . . Section 15.11 states, in pertinent part: Subject to the exemptions in § 15.21, the Department shall separately . . .

G. HOPKINS, v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, 929 F.2d 81 (2d Cir. 1991)

. . . . § 15.21(a)(5), HUD’s regulatory counterpart to the FOIA’s exemption for predecisional, deliberative . . .

M. BALOG L. v. CENTER ART GALLERY- HAWAII, INC. D. L., 745 F. Supp. 1556 (D. Haw. 1990)

. . . Arts & Cult.Afl.Law §§ 11.01-15.21 (McKinney 1984 & Supp.1988). . . .

SPIRIT LEVELING CONTRACTORS, v. UNITED STATES,, 19 Cl. Ct. 84 (Cl. Ct. 1989)

. . . Claim Item #2 Bid Item # 2, Sediment Removal, was bid at $15.21 per linear foot for an estimated quantity . . .

DELGADO, R. v. SMITH, a a U. S. U. S., 861 F.2d 1489 (11th Cir. 1988)

. . . . §§ 15.21, 16.061. . . . . . §§ 100.371(4) & 15.21 (1987). . . .

UNITED STATES v. ACRES OF LAND, MORE OR LESS, SITUATE IN HARDIN AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES, TEXAS,, 687 F. Supp. 1079 (E.D. Tex. 1988)

. . . The court has not considered Hall’s Sale 3 (Gay to Hughes, 15.21 acres), Sale 6 (Clubb to Wright, 15 . . .

In FREDEMAN LITIGATION. DIXIE CARRIERS, INC. v. CHANNEL FUELING SERVICE, INC., 843 F.2d 821 (5th Cir. 1988)

. . . . & Com.Code § 15.21(b), a provision of the Texas antitrust laws cited by the plaintiffs, gives “[a]ny . . . Section 15.21(b) provides, in addition, that “[i]n any such suit, the court shall apply the same principles . . .

C. KILE, v. FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION,, 641 F. Supp. 723 (E.D. Tenn. 1986)

. . . His interest rate was 15.21%; and there was no sworn statement indicating his qualification as a business . . .

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)

. . . For fiscal year 1984-1985, ESSO’s gross margin as per DACO’s own calculations was 15.21 cents per gallon . . .

In BELLANCA AIRCRAFT CORPORATION, W. BERGQUIST, v. ANDERSON- GREENWOOD AVIATION CORP. a Co. a, 56 B.R. 339 (Bankr. D. Minn. 1985)

. . . $97,503.00 $5,530.60 $40,668.89 Rent Payments $5,040.00 $1,250.00 Utilities Payments $32.61 $7.05 $1,123.87 $15.21 . . .

FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION v. EAGLE PROPERTIES, LTD. C. M. W. J. L. R., 664 F. Supp. 1027 (W.D. Tex. 1985)

. . . The defendant argued that the interest rate of 15.21 percent and the lack of a statement in the bank’ . . .

P. v., 84 T.C. 1244 (T.C. 1985)

. . . 465.31 12,874.88 609.56 16.47 4/ 1/82-4/15/82 558.05 364.79 9,849.33 477.87 12.92 4/16/82-4/30/82 22.05 15.21 . . .

FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION, v. M. WOOD,, 758 F.2d 156 (6th Cir. 1985)

. . . with interest at 15% per annum computed on a 360-day-per-annum basis, an annual percentage rate of 15.21% . . . He argues that the interest rate of 15.21% and the lack of a statement in the bank’s files should have . . .

CRAIK, v. MINNESOTA STATE UNIVERSITY BOARD St. J. R. A. G. C. B. P. W. G. J. v. V. L. J. A. A. C. A. H. G. E. C. J. L. R. J. B. D., 731 F.2d 465 (8th Cir. 1984)

. . . V.15.21-23; Px. 208; D.R. 87. . . .

FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION, v. R. STONE, K. M., 578 F. Supp. 144 (E.D. Mich. 1983)

. . . defendants Stone and Barnett and guaranteed by defendant Wood and carried an annual interest rate of 15.21% . . .

WIGGINS BROTHERS, INC. v. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, B., 667 F.2d 77 (Temp. Emer. Ct. App. 1981)

. . . Breeding and Burton, Income Taxation of Natural Resources ¶¶ 14.13, 15.21 (1971). . . .

In D. ALLEN, a, 3 B.R. 360 (Bankr. W.D. Wash. 1980)

. . . Sec. 15.21; 2 Collier on Bankruptcy (15th Ed.) Par. 362.02; House Rep. . . .

COUNTY OF PATRICK, VIRGINIA, C. I. a v. UNITED STATES IBLM,, 596 F.2d 1186 (4th Cir. 1979)

. . . conveyed to the Commonwealth of Virginia, for Parkway right-of-way, a strip or parcel of land containing 15.21 . . .

UNITED STATES v. CONSOLIDATED FOODS CORPORATION, 455 F. Supp. 108 (E.D. Pa. 1978)

. . . 3.90 37.77 41.67 (GX 8) 12 weeks 3.12 46.47 49.59 Denver 52 weeks 10.20 12.01 22.21 (GX 9) 4 weeks 15.21 . . .

COUNTY OF PATRICK, VIRGINIA, v. UNITED STATES, 444 F. Supp. 132 (W.D. Va. 1978)

. . . conveyed to the Commonwealth of Virginia, for Parkway right-of-way, a strip or parcel of land containing 15.21 . . .

CHRYSLER CORPORATION, No. v. A. SCHLESINGER, Lt. J. No., 565 F.2d 1172 (3d Cir. 1977)

. . . . § 15.21 (1976) (HUD); 49 C.F.R. § 7.51 (1976) (Transportation Dept.); 32 C.F.R. § 286.4(b) (Defense . . .

v. v., 67 T.C. 938 (T.C. 1977)

. . . 1957. 18.52 1964. 13.11 1958. 15.65 1965. 12.96 1959. 16.24 1966. 12.14 1960. 16.70 1967. 11.82 1961. 15.21 . . .

TITLE GUARANTEE CO. v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD,, 534 F.2d 484 (2d Cir. 1976)

. . . . § 15.21; DOT — 19 C.F.R. § 7.51.) . . .

PHILADELPHIA NEWSPAPERS, INC. v. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT OF UNITED STATES, 343 F. Supp. 1176 (E.D. Pa. 1972)

. . . . § 15.21. This, we find, it has failed to do. . . .

E. BLOCKSTON v. UNITED STATES v. JOHN C. GRIMBERG CO. STATE OF MARYLAND E. BLOCKSTON v. UNITED STATES v. JOHN C. GRIMBERG CO., 278 F. Supp. 576 (D. Md. 1968)

. . . was constructing and altering a high-temperature water system at the Air Station; that by Paragraph 15.21 . . . shows that Hydrotherm prepared the specifications for the construction contract, including Paragraphs 15.21 . . . position that by virtue of the language in the contract, and particularly that language in Paragraph 15.21 . . . Paragraph 15.21 of the Specification for the construction contract read, in pertinent part, as follows . . .

B. Jr. v. v., 45 T.C. 120 (T.C. 1965)

. . . , inclusive of taxes and insurance; (2) the balance of the garage construction loan at the rate of $15.21 . . . at 9216 Donerail, as follows: I960 Mortgage (6 payments of $78 each)_$468.00 Garage (6 payments of $15.21 . . . each)_ 47.22 Total_ 606.48 1961 Mortgage (7 payments of $78 each)- $546. 00 Garage (6 payments of $15.21 . . . , amortization, taxes, and insurance; (2) the balance of a garage construction loan at the rate of $15.21 . . .

JOSE V. BACA, ET AL. v. THE UNITED STATES, 157 Ct. Cl. 646 (Ct. Cl. 1962)

. . . He was paid $40.56 as overtime compensation for the pay period ending April 12, 1952, $15.21 as overtime . . .

BAKER v. CARR, 369 U.S. 186 (U.S. 1962)

. . . 4.87 3.69 Sullivan. 55,712 3.00 4.07 5.57 Hamilton. 131,971 6.00 6.00 15.09 Knox . 140,559 7.25 8.96 15.21 . . .

WRIGHT v. GRAIN DEALERS NAT. MUT. FIRE INS. CO., 186 F.2d 956 (4th Cir. 1950)

. . . unearned premiums exceeded the insurance by $4.20, and this credit was increased by a dividend of $15.21 . . . showed $152.05 as the amount of earned premiums, $109.65 as the amount of the returned premium and $15.21 . . . public liability and property damage policy on January 31, 1949, which, together with a dividend of $15.21 . . .

UNITED STATES v. GELLMAN, 44 F. Supp. 360 (D. Minn. 1942)

. . . 00.835 Thickness (inches) 00.078 00.075 Copper (%) 75.00 64.88 Nickel (%) 25.00 17.56 Zinc (%) 00.00 15.21 . . .

v. Co., 29 C.C.P.A. 258 (C.C.P.A. 1942)

. . . That is to say, the unassembled machines cost the importer $15.21 less than those imported in an assembled . . .

v., 117 Fla. 100 (Fla. 1934)

. . . and recover of and from the defendant, all the costs of these proceedings here taxed in the sum of $15.21 . . .

In EMPIRE CORK CO., 193 F. 225 (E.D.N.Y. 1912)

. . . . & Co. to deliver an additional quantity of corkwood amounting to $1,3-15.21 on credit on an assignment . . .

NEW YORK CENT. H. R. R. CO. v. BANK OF HOLLY SPRINGS, 236 F. 562 (C.C.N.D. Miss. 1911)

. . . drafts upon the security of the 200 bales of cotton marked “A S T U” and “A S O N” was |15,308.20, or 15.21 . . .

JULIA A. NUTT, v. THE UNITED STATES, 23 Ct. Cl. 68 (Ct. Cl. 1888)

. . . $17,000.00 2 lcegs of uails, at $6 . 12.00 2 cans of lard oil, at $15. 30.00 100 barrels of pork, at $15.21 . . .

REILLY v. MARYMAN, 20 F. Cas. 489 (C.C.D.C. 1841)

. . . the sum of $277.50, the arrears of rent, it being the value of the goods and chattels aforesaid, and $15.21 . . .