The 2023 Florida Statutes (including Special Session C)

Title VI
CIVIL PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE

Chapter 49
CONSTRUCTIVE SERVICE OF PROCESS

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 49.11

49.11 Notice of action, posting, proof.—If there is no newspaper published in the county, three copies of the notice shall be posted at least 28 days before the return day thereof in three different and conspicuous places in such county, one of which shall be at the front door of the courthouse in said county. Proof of posting shall be by affidavit of the person posting the notices, which affidavit shall include a copy of the notice posted and the date and places of its posting.

History.—s. 11, ch. 20452, 1941; s. 2, ch. 29737, 1955; s. 5, ch. 67-254.

Note.—Former s. 48.11.

F.S. 49.11 on Google Scholar

F.S. 49.11 on Casetext

Amendments to 49.11

Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 49.11

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

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 49.11.

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases from cite.case.law:

WILSON, v. MARINEMAX EAST, INC. a, 303 F. Supp. 3d 1343 (N.D. Ga. 2018)

. . . Marine, to address the issues. ( [46] Wilson Dep. at 72:6-24; [54.3] at ¶ 21; [55.1] at ¶ 21; [49.10]; [49.11 . . . Lakeland Power to review issues with the Kohler generator. ( [46] Wilson Dep. at 72:10-13, 73:3-7; [49.11 . . .

J. GREDE, v. UBS SECURITIES, LLC,, 303 F. Supp. 3d 638 (N.D. Ill. 2018)

. . . Sentinel's rate adjustment, Seg 3 customers were paid just $112,657.32 and the house account received $49.11 . . .

WOLFINGTON, v. RECONSTRUCTIVE ORTHOPAEDIC ASSOCIATES II, P. C. a k a, 275 F. Supp. 3d 584 (E.D. Pa. 2017)

. . . Plaintiff had a balance of 89 cents in his account and on Februaiy 22, 2016, his balance was negative $49.11 . . .

YAZZIE, v. U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, To v. U. S. v. U. S., 851 F.3d 960 (9th Cir. 2017)

. . . . § 49.11(a). . . . Pursuant to this statutory authority, the EPA issued the TAR, 40 C.F.R. § 49.11(a). . . . . § 49.11(a). . . . Petitioners argue that § 49.11(a) only applies when a tribe “eligible” for treatment as a State fails . . . In sum, the EPA reasonably interpreted the TAR (40 C.F.R. §§ 49.4(e), 49.11(a)) and the Regional Haze . . .

UNITED STATES v. A. BLOOM,, 846 F.3d 243 (7th Cir. 2017)

. . . Sentinel’s rate adjustment, Seg 3 customers were paid just $112,657.32 and the house account received $49.11 . . .

UNITED STATES v. A. BLOOM,, 846 F.3d 243 (7th Cir. 2017)

. . . Sentinel’s rate adjustment, Seg 3 customers were paid just $112,657.32 and the house account received $49.11 . . .

WILDEARTH GUARDIANS, v. UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY U. S., 759 F.3d 1196 (10th Cir. 2014)

. . . . § 49.11. . . . See id. at 64222-28; 40 C.F.R. § 49.11(a) (2013). . . . to actions that it determines to be “necessary or appropriate to protect air quality,” 40 C.F.R. § 49.11 . . . regulation of such pollutants in a FIP was "necessary or appropriate to protect air quality,” 40 C.F.R. § 49.11 . . .

TRAINOR, v. HEI HOSPITALITY, LLC, 699 F.3d 19 (1st Cir. 2012)

. . . Moore, Moore’s Federal Practice § 49.11 [6] (2012) (collecting cases). . . .

J. KOSEGARTEN, v. DEPARTMENT OF THE PROSECUTING ATTORNEY,, 907 F. Supp. 2d 1143 (D. Haw. 2012)

. . . Larson, Employment Discrimination § 49.11(c)(2)).... . . . Larson at § 49.11(c)(2)).... . . .

NATIONAL PARKS CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION, v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR, 794 F. Supp. 2d 39 (D.D.C. 2011)

. . . . § 49.11. . . .

WHITFIELD, v. CHARTIERS VALLEY SCHOOL DISTRICT, 707 F. Supp. 2d 561 (W.D. Pa. 2010)

. . . Students to have a Pennsylvania Public School Certificate or emergency permit. 22 Pa.Code Chapt. 49, § 49.11 . . .

MICHIGAN, v. UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,, 581 F.3d 524 (7th Cir. 2009)

. . . . § 49.11. . . .

ARIZONA PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY, v. UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, C- C- v., 562 F.3d 1116 (10th Cir. 2009)

. . . . § 49.11(a). . . . Appendix V, or does not receive EPA approval of a submitted tribal implementation plan. 40 C.F.R. § 49.11 . . . Nothing in section 49.11(a) requires the EPA' — -as opposed to a tribe — to submit a plan meeting the . . . The Environmentalists’ construction is contrary to the plain language of section 49.11(a). . . . Section 49.11(a) mistakenly refers to section 304(a), instead of 301(a). . . . .

INTERNATIONAL UNION, UNITED MINE WORKERS OF AMERICA, v. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH ADMINISTRATION,, 554 F.3d 150 (D.C. Cir. 2009)

. . . . § 49.11 (table). . . .

GRAPEVINE IMPORTS, LTD, T- v. UNITED STATES,, 71 Fed. Cl. 324 (Fed. Cl. 2006)

. . . Singer, Sutherland: Statutes and Statutory Construction (hereinafter Sutherland) § 49.11 (6th ed. 2000 . . .

NOWICK, v. GAMMELL a a LLC, 351 F. Supp. 2d 1025 (D. Haw. 2004)

. . . Larson, Employment Discrimination § 49.11(c)(2)). . . . Larson at § 49.11(c)(2)). However, KHVO did not participate in the EEOC proceedings. . . .

KERMAN, v. THE CITY OF NEW YORK, s, 374 F.3d 93 (2d Cir. 2004)

. . . supply an omitted finding that would complete a jury’s verdict, see, e.g., 9 Moore’s Federal Practice § 49.11 . . .

v. L., 28 Ct. Int'l Trade 616 (Ct. Int'l Trade 2004)

. . . states, in part: “[t]his heading does not cover . . . printed plans and drawings (heading 49.05 or 49.11 . . .

NUSS, v. CENTRAL IOWA BINDING CORPORATION d b a, 284 F. Supp. 2d 1187 (S.D. Iowa 2003)

. . . Antonio, Tex., 40 F.3d 698, 711-12 (5th Cir.1994)) (also citing 2 Larson, Employment Discrimination § 49.11 . . .

COUNTY OF SUFFOLK, NEW YORK, v. FIRST AMERICAN REAL ESTATE SOLUTIONS, TRW, 261 F.3d 179 (2d Cir. 2001)

. . . Singer, Sutherland Statutes and Statutory Construction § 49.11 (6th ed.2000) (indicating that a subsequent . . .

UNITED STATES v. ELECTRONIC GAMBLING DEVICES,, 223 F.3d 1091 (9th Cir. 2000)

. . . Singer, Sutherland Statutory Construction § 49.11, at 83 (5th ed.1992). . . .

v., 24 Ct. Int'l Trade 504 (Ct. Int'l Trade 2000)

. . . change, existing law is doubt or ambiguity surrounding a statute.” 2B Sutherland Statutory Construction §49.11 . . .

STARKEY LABORATORIES, INC. v. UNITED STATES,, 110 F. Supp. 2d 945 (Ct. Int'l Trade 2000)

. . . , existing law is doubt or ambiguity surrounding a statute.” 2B Sutherland Statutory Construction § 49.11 . . .

SAMAN v. ROBBINS v. v. v., 173 F.3d 1150 (9th Cir. 1999)

. . . Sys., Inc., 793 F.2d 875, 882 (7th Cir.1986); 9 Moore’s Federal Practice § 49.11[5][b] (3d ed.1997). . . .

K. TALKINGTON, a v. ATRIA RECLAMELUCIFERS FABRIEKEN BV CRICKET BV SA BV,, 152 F.3d 254 (4th Cir. 1998)

. . . Bethlehem Steel Corp., 41 F.3d 182, 190 (4th Cir.1994); see also 9 Moore's Federal Practice § 49.11[2 . . .

MATTSON, v. O. SCHULTZ,, 145 F.3d 937 (7th Cir. 1998)

. . . Moore et al., Moore’s Federal Practice § 49.11[2][b] (3d ed.1997). . . .

In CALDOR, INC. NY, CT, CALDOR CORPORATION, v. S PLAZA ASSOCIATES, L. P., 217 B.R. 121 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 1998)

. . . Tax is assessed, Caldor will pay Additional Rent for the Demised Premises equal to (i) its Fraction (49.11% . . .

G. SYKES, v. COLUMBUS GREENVILLE RAILWAY,, 117 F.3d 287 (5th Cir. 1997)

. . . Singer, Sutherland Statutory Construction § 49.11, p. 84 (Rev. ed.1992) (same). . . .

GERAC- OGASHI, v. IBERIA GENERAL HOSPITAL,, 952 F. Supp. 360 (W.D. La. 1996)

. . . Rubbermaid, Inc., 436 F.Supp. 1184, 1190-91, 1193-94 (D.C.Md.1977); 2 Larson, Employment Discrimination § 49.11 . . .

UNITED STATES v. BCCI HOLDINGS LUXEMBOURG S. A. S. A., 941 F. Supp. 180 (D.D.C. 1996)

. . . Construction § 49.11, at 83-84 (5th ed. 1992) (citing cases). . . .

UNITED STATES v. PHOMMACHANH, LO,, 91 F.3d 1383 (10th Cir. 1996)

. . . Singer, Sutherland Statutory Construction § 49.11, at 83 (5th ed. 1992). . . .

In T. SLOVER, A. SLOVER, v. T. SLOVER,, 191 B.R. 886 (E.D. Okla. 1996)

. . . expenses $ 106.91 Utilities $ 197.58 Cable (one-half) $ 13.16 Car payment $ 318.99 Car insurance $ 49.11 . . .

UNITED STATES v. BARBERIS,, 887 F. Supp. 110 (D. Md. 1995)

. . . Ed., § 49.11(c)(2) (1995). . . .

S. CLEMMER, v. ENRON CORP., 882 F. Supp. 606 (S.D. Tex. 1995)

. . . National Ass’n of Gov’t Employees, 40 F.3d at 712 (citing 2 Larson, Employment Discrimination § 49.11 . . .

NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, v. CITY PUBLIC SERVICE BOARD OF SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS,, 40 F.3d 698 (5th Cir. 1994)

. . . Rubbermaid, Inc., 436 F.Supp. 1184, 1190-91, 1193-94 (D.C.Md.1977); 2 Larson, Employment Discrimination § 49.11 . . .

In HARRY LEVIN, INC. t a s N. SCHWARTZ, v. J. KURSMAN, N. SCHWARTZ, v. JETRONIC INDUSTRIES, INC., 175 B.R. 560 (Bankr. E.D. Pa. 1994)

. . . Const., § 49.11 (5th ed. 1992). Accord, e.g., Red Lion Broadcasting Co. v. . . . Const., § 49.11 (5th ed. 1992). . . . Sands, Sutherland Statutory Construction § 49.11, at 265-66 (4th ed. 1973)); cf. Anderson Bros. . . . that the previous statute meant the exact contrary.’ 2A Sutherland Statutory Construction, supra, § 49.11 . . .

FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION, FSLIC FSLIC v. J. OLDENBURG, W. L. H. MGIC, 34 F.3d 1529 (10th Cir. 1994)

. . . Alley et al., Banking Law § 49.11[1] (1992) (emphasis added). . . .

FAIR EMPLOYMENT COUNCIL OF GREATER WASHINGTON, INC. Jr. A. III, v. BMC MARKETING CORP., 829 F. Supp. 402 (D.D.C. 1993)

. . . Larson, Employment Discrimination § 49.11(c)(2) (1992) (quoting Bostic v. . . .

NAULT S AUTOMOBILE SALES, INC. d b a s M. v. AMERICAN HONDA MOTOR COMPANY, INC. ACURA AUTOMOBILE DIVISION, 148 F.R.D. 25 (D.N.H. 1993)

. . . Sutherland, Statutes and Statutory Construction § 49.11 (C. Sands 4th ed. 1973)). . . .

UNITED STATES v. HILL,, 971 F.2d 1461 (10th Cir. 1992)

. . . (emphasis added). . 2B Sutherland § 49.11 (5th ed. 1992) states: Where a former statute is amended, or . . .

WEINBERGER, v. GREAT NORTHERN NEKOOSA CORP. BTZ, INC. v. GREAT NORTHERN NEKOOSA CORP. RYAN, v. GREAT NORTHERN NEKOOSA CORP., 801 F. Supp. 804 (D. Me. 1992)

. . . .: 49.11 Law Offices of Curtis V. . . .

In WORCESTER QUALITY FOODS, INC. M. NICKLESS, v. EQUIPMENTLEASE CORPORATION,, 140 B.R. 21 (Bankr. D. Mass. 1992)

. . . . § 49.11 (1991). Marine made no such filing. . . .

GREENWOOD TRUST COMPANY, v. COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS, 776 F. Supp. 21 (D. Mass. 1991)

. . . Dickerson, Interpretation and Application of Statutes, 179-80 (1975); Sutherland, Statutory Construction, § 49.11 . . .

GOMEZ, v. AMOCO OIL COMPANY,, 767 F. Supp. 191 (N.D. Ind. 1991)

. . . Larson, Employment Discrimination § 49.11(c)(1), at 9B-9). . . .

T. CONROY, v. BOSTON EDISON CO., 758 F. Supp. 54 (D. Mass. 1991)

. . . Larsen at § 49.11(c)(1) (noting by way of example that a reasonable investigation of sex discrimination . . .

SOSA, v. HIRAOKA,, 920 F.2d 1451 (9th Cir. 1990)

. . . Larson, Employment Discrimination, § 49.11(c)(2) (1990). . . . Larson at § 49.11(c)(2). . . .

SANTIAGO HODGE, v. PARKE DAVIS COMPANY,, 909 F.2d 628 (1st Cir. 1990)

. . . See, in general, 1C Larson, supra, §§ 49.00 and 49.11. . . .

DOLE, v. SHENANDOAH BAPTIST CHURCH C. D. B. M. S. F. P. T. I. T. T. R. L. C. T. M. DOLE, v. SHENANDOAH BAPTIST CHURCH C. D. B. M. S. F. P. T. I. T. T. R. L. C. T. M., 899 F.2d 1389 (4th Cir. 1990)

. . . , 666, 100 S.Ct. 1932, 1938, 64 L.Ed.2d 593 (1980); see also 2A Sutherland Statutory Construction § 49.11 . . .

UNITED STATES v. WILSON,, 884 F.2d 174 (5th Cir. 1989)

. . . Singer, 2A Sutherland Statutory Construction §§ 49.11, 412-14 (rev. 4th ed. 1984) (“[ajlthough comments . . .

BALTZER, M. v. CITY OF SUN PRAIRIE POLICE DEPARTMENT, O, 725 F. Supp. 1008 (W.D. Wis. 1989)

. . . Larson, Employment Discrimination § 49.11(c)(1) (1988). . . .

YARBER, v. INDIANA STATE PRISON,, 713 F. Supp. 271 (N.D. Ind. 1988)

. . . Larson, Employment Discrimination § 49.11(c)(1), at 9B-9; see Oubichon v. . . .

A. GRIFFITH, v. FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY, 842 F.2d 487 (D.C. Cir. 1988)

. . . intent of Congress expressed before the Act’s passage”); Sands, Sutherland Statutory Construction § 49.11 . . .

UNITED STATES v. YANCEY,, 827 F.2d 83 (7th Cir. 1987)

. . . . § 49.11 (4th Ed.). . . .

L. LAMB, v. W- ENERGY, INC., 663 F. Supp. 395 (D. Utah 1987)

. . . Larson, Workmen's Compensation Law, § 49.11 at 9-12 (1982)), and citing Lee v. . . . Larson, Workmen’s Compensation Law, § 49.11 at 9-21 (1982). . . . .

LEWIS, v. GRINKER,, 660 F. Supp. 169 (E.D.N.Y. 1987)

. . . Sands, Sutherland Statutory Construction ¶ 49.11, at 265-66. . . .

HERRERA v. FIRST NORTHERN SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATION,, 805 F.2d 896 (10th Cir. 1986)

. . . is intended to clarify, rather than change, the existing law. 2A Sutherland Statutory Construction § 49.11 . . .

In FIELDER, STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, v. FIELDER,, 799 F.2d 656 (11th Cir. 1986)

. . . Sand, Sutherland Statutory Construction § 49.11 at 414-15 (N. Singer 4th ed. 1984). . . .

UNITED STATES v. STEWART,, 779 F.2d 538 (9th Cir. 1985)

. . . Singer, 2A Sutherland Statutory Construction § 49.11, at 414-15 (rev. 4th ed. 1984). . . .

M. ENOS, v. O. MARSH,, 769 F.2d 1363 (9th Cir. 1985)

. . . . § 49.11, p. 414 (4th ed. 1984). . . .

In ADAMS, MORAES, v. ADAMS,, 761 F.2d 1422 (9th Cir. 1985)

. . . Sands, Sutherland Statutory Construction § 49.11, at 414-15 (N. Singer 4th ed. 1984). . . .

In ADAMS, MORAES, v. ADAMS,, 761 F.2d 1422 (9th Cir. 1985)

. . . Sands, Sutherland Statutory Construction § 49.11, at 414-15 (N. Singer 4th ed. 1984). . . .

BARNES, v. COHEN, M. BETSON, HARRIS, T. E. v. HARRIS, J. M., 749 F.2d 1009 (3d Cir. 1984)

. . . Sands, Sutherland Statutory Construction § 49.11, at 265-66 (4th ed. 1973); cf. Anderson Bros. . . . that the previous statute meant the exact contrary.” 2A Sutherland Statutory Construction, supra, § 49.11 . . . opinion concerning [the statute’s] proper interpretation.” 2A Sutherland Statutory Construction, supra, § 49.11 . . .

In CURTINA INTERNATIONAL, INC. S. MURDOCK, v. PLYMOUTH ENTERPRISES, INC., 23 B.R. 969 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 1982)

. . . to the debtor’s books and records, its normal selling price for the wafers in question ranged from $49.11 . . .

E. BROWN M. v. MARQUETTE SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATION,, 686 F.2d 608 (7th Cir. 1982)

. . . is intended to clarify, rather than change, the existing law. 2A Sutherland Statutory Construction § 49.11 . . .

B. B. v., 78 T.C. 320 (T.C. 1982)

. . . Sutherland, Statutes and Statutory Construction, sec. 49.11, at 265 (Sands 4th ed. 1973). . . .

L. PRESCOTT, v. UNITED STATES a, 523 F. Supp. 918 (D. Nev. 1981)

. . . See 1C Larson, Workmen’s Compensation § 49.11, pp. 9-12 to 9-13 (1976). . . .

CALIFORNIA v. ARIZONA, 452 U.S. 431 (U.S. 1981)

. . . N 04°26/34" W 49.11 feet; 74. N 08°54/12,/ W 109.59 feet; 75. N 45°00'45/' W 15.45 feet; 76. . . . N 04°26/34" W 49.11 feet; 74. N 08°54'12" W 109.59 feet; 75. N 45°00'45" W 15.45 feet; 76. . . .

OLVEDA v. UNITED STATES, 508 F. Supp. 255 (E.D. Tex. 1981)

. . . Larson’s Law of Workmen’s Compensation, Vol. 1C, § 49.11 at p. 9-5. . . . .

MONONGAHELA POWER COMPANY v. L. ALEXANDER, Jr., 507 F. Supp. 385 (D.D.C. 1980)

. . . United States, 411 F.2d 231, 237 n.18 (5th Cir. 1969); 2A Sands, Statutes and Statutory Construction, § 49.11 . . .

RUSSELL, a v. LAW ENFORCEMENT ASSISTANCE ADMINISTRATION,, 637 F.2d 1255 (9th Cir. 1980)

. . . Sutherland, Statutes and Statutory Construction § 49.11, at 266 (4th ed. C. Sands 1973). . . .

UNITED STATES v. SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICE OF NEW ENGLAND, 496 F. Supp. 1127 (D. Conn. 1980)

. . . Sutherland, Statutes and Statutory Construction § 49.11 at 266 (4th ed., Sands ed., 1973). . . . .

A. RUSS, v. E. WILKINS, 624 F.2d 914 (9th Cir. 1980)

. . . Sands Sutherland, Statutory Construction, § 49.11, (4th ed. 1973). . . .

NORMAN G. JENSEN, INC. A C s v. UNITED STATES,, 490 F. Supp. 497 (Cust. Ct. 1980)

. . . Particularly relevant is heading 49.11 of the latter schedule providing: 49.11 Other printed matter, . . .

G. A C s v., 84 Cust. Ct. 76 (Cust. Ct. 1980)

. . . Particularly relevant is heading 49.11 of the latter schedule providing: 49.11 Other printed matter, . . .

DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, v. NATIONAL VAN LINES, INC A. III, A. RILEY, III, v. DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR,, 613 F.2d 972 (D.C. Cir. 1979)

. . . . § 49.11 at 9-6 to 9-9. . Id. § 49.12 at 9-33. . Accord, McCaskey v. . . .

AMCHEM PRODUCTS, INC. v. GAF CORPORATION M., 594 F.2d 470 (5th Cir. 1979)

. . . Sutherland, Statutes and Statutory Construction § 49.11 at 266 (4th ed. C. Sands 1973). . . . Sutherland, supra, § 49.11. . . .

CHUGACH NATIVES, INC. v. DOYON, LTD. ALEUT CORP. v. BERING STRAITS NATIVE CORP., 588 F.2d 723 (9th Cir. 1978)

. . . Sands, Sutherland Statutory Construction § 49.11 (4th ed. 1973). . . .

NEWELL v. FEDERAL ENERGY ADMINISTRATION, 445 F. Supp. 80 (D.D.C. 1977)

. . . denied, 425 U.S. 935, 96 S.Ct. 1665, 48 L.Ed.2d 176 (1976); 2A Sutherland Statutory Construction, § 49.11 . . .

C. PARKER v. A. CALIFANO, Jr., 561 F.2d 320 (D.C. Cir. 1977)

. . . Sutherland, Statutes and Statutory Construction § 49.11 at 266 (4th ed., Sands, ed. 1973): Although comments . . .

SHEPPARD, v. SHEPPARD,, 329 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 1976)

. . . . § 49.11 (1973) is fully consistent with due process, in the narrow class of cases in which it is authorized . . . Service of process was perfected under Sections 49.11 and 49.12, Florida Statutes (1973), by posting . . .

FELDMAN, v. PHILADELPHIA NATIONAL BANK, 408 F. Supp. 24 (E.D. Pa. 1976)

. . . . § 49.11, et seq. (1974). . . .

BETESH, v. UNITED STATES, 400 F. Supp. 238 (D.D.C. 1974)

. . . 141, 3 L.Ed.2d 132 (1958); 1A Sutherland Statutory Construction, 4th ed., par. 31.06; 2A, id., par. 49.11 . . .

JAMISON, v. WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC CORPORATION, a, 375 F.2d 465 (3d Cir. 1967)

. . . See generally 1A Larson, Workmen’s Compensation (1966), § 49.11; Qualp v. . . .

PENNSYLVANIA RAILROAD COMPANY v. UNITED STATES, 260 F. Supp. 536 (E.D. Pa. 1965)

. . . .-82 of the $49.11 total station cost differential, can thus be recovered without disturbing the established . . .

NELSON v. BERRY, 59 F.2d 351 (C.C.P.A. 1932)

. . . It seems clear from the language of section 49.11, E. . . .

JOHN K. JOICE v. THE UNITED STATES, 59 Ct. Cl. 1 (Ct. Cl. 1923)

. . . December 27, 1919, as set forth in Finding VII, the market value of said rail, with accessories, was $49.11 . . .

MATTIE W. JACKSON, WIDOW, ET AL. v. THE UNITED STATES, 47 Ct. Cl. 579 (Ct. Cl. 1912)

. . . 1896. 39.2 38.42 33.25 39.0 35.15 38.2 37.4 1897. 51.62 51.75 44.54 52.48 47.85 49.8 50.2 1898. 49.78 49.11 . . .