Cases from cite.case.law:

WILSON, Sr. v. STATE, 202 So. 3d 135 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . following manner: (a) Under oath or affirmation taken or administered before an officer authorized under s. 92.50 . . .

INTEGO SOFTWARE, LLC d b a v. CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT, INC., 198 So. 3d 887 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . See §§ 92.50 and 92.525, Fla. Stat. . . .

INTERNATIONAL INFORMATION SYSTEMS SECURITY CERTIFICATION CONSORTIUM, INC. v. SECURITY UNIVERSITY, LLC,, 823 F.3d 153 (2d Cir. 2016)

. . . McCarthy § 19:92.50 (footnotes omitted); see, e.g., Am. . . . McCarthy § 19:92.50 (citing Institut Nat’l Des Appellations d’Origine v. . . .

STATE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, M. v. M. HARTSELL,, 189 So. 3d 363 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . motion were each signed, sworn, and notarized, thereby fulfilling the affidavit requirements of section 92.50 . . .

LUJAN, v. CITY OF SANTA FE,, 122 F. Supp. 3d 1215 (D.N.M. 2015)

. . . of his and his brother’s personal expenses: Ncaa ticket — $450 Room % 703 — $350 Car rental 185 — $92.50 . . .

LUJAN, v. CITY OF SANTA FE,, 89 F. Supp. 3d 1109 (D.N.M. 2015)

. . . replied: Here is the break down in case you forgot: Ncaa ticket- $450 Room[é703- $350 Car rental 185- $92.50 . . . number of his and his brother’s personal expenses: Ncaa ticket- $450 RoomJ/¿703- $350 Car rental 185- $92.50 . . .

PLACIDE, v. STATE, 189 So. 3d 810 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . Section 92.50(1), Florida Statutes (2014), recognizes that an affidavit must be sworn to before a person . . .

In CITY OF DETROIT,, 524 B.R. 147 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 2014)

. . . . • Class 9- — COPs Claims accepted by 92.50% in number and 96.61% in amount. • Class 10 — PFRS Pension . . .

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

. . . 10.850.00 Thomas Murtagh 33.50 $120 4,020.00 Allen Engerman: 69.70 $538 37,498.60 Jeffrey Engerman: 92.50 . . .

SECURITIES EXCHANGE COMMISSION, v. ONE OR MORE UNKNOWN TRADERS IN SECURITIES OF ONYX PHARMACEUTICALS, INC., 296 F.R.D. 241 (S.D.N.Y. 2013)

. . . That same day, a trader used the Citigroup account to purchase 50 July $90 call options and 270 July $92.50 . . . call options in this purchase, too, was significantly higher than the average number of July $90 and $92.50 . . . The trades at issue were bets that Onyx’s stock would hit values ranging from $80 to $92.50 a share in . . . Exhibit 3 to Ganguly’s declaration includes the volume of July $80, $85, $90, and $92.50 call options . . . options purchased June 27,16% of the July $90 call options purchased June 28, and 57% of the July $92.50 . . .

In AMENDMENTS TO FLORIDA PROBATE RULES, 123 So. 3d 31 (Fla. 2013)

. . . Statutory References § 92.50, Fla. Stat. . . .

DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY, v. PREVRATIL, 120 So. 3d 573 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2013)

. . . following manner: (a)Under oath or affirmation taken or administered before an officer authorized under s. 92.50 . . .

In BANK OF NEW ENGLAND CORPORATION,, 484 B.R. 252 (Bankr. D. Mass. 2012)

. . . With the exception of a cab fare costing $92.50 that Attorney Russell incurred traveling from the airport . . .

HYDEN, v. STATE, 117 So. 3d 1 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2011)

. . . Subsection (1)(a) allows for verification under oath or affirmation as set forth in section 92.50(1). . . . Section 92.50(1) provides that "[o]aths, affidavits, and acknowledgments required or authorized under . . .

MORENO- GONZALEZ, v. STATE, 67 So. 3d 1020 (Fla. 2011)

. . . following manner: (a) Under oath or affirmation taken or administered before an officer authorized under s. 92.50 . . . See id. at 1185 (quoting § 92.50(1), Fla. Stat. (2007)). . . . following manner: (a) Under oath or affirmation taken or administered before an officer authorized under s. 92.50 . . . satisfied if the drafter swears under oath before a judge, or other officer authorized pursuant to section 92.50 . . . See § 92.50(1), Fla. . . .

NORTHEASTERN LUMBER MANUFACTURERS ASSOC. v. NORTHERN STATES PALLET COMPANY, INC. H., 710 F. Supp. 2d 179 (D.N.H. 2010)

. . . materials, so certification of the lumber could designate certification of the WPM, see 3 McCarthy § 19:92.50 . . . See id. §§ 19:91 & 19:92.50. 5. N.H. . . .

L. M. A. L. v. In ADOPTION OF J. A. M. L., 23 So. 3d 837 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2009)

. . . The trial court acknowledged that section 92.50(3), Florida Statutes (2009), does not require that an . . . made under penalties of perjury, while “affidavits” are governed by a separate Florida law, section 92.50 . . . This Court’s decision in Defense Control complies with section 92.50(3), which provides as follows: ( . . .

STATE v. MORENO- GONZALEZ,, 18 So. 3d 1180 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2009)

. . . following manner: (a) Under oath or affirmation taken or administered before an officer authorized under s. 92.50 . . . of a court of record, the seal of such court may be affixed as the seal of such officer or person. § 92.50 . . . which expressly includes an affidavit, requiring verification may be so verified by oath, and section 92.50 . . .

D. S. In a v. J. L., 18 So. 3d 1103 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2009)

. . . following manner: (a) Under oath or affirmation taken or administered before an officer authorized under s. 92.50 . . .

In M. WASSON, In, 402 B.R. 561 (Bankr. W.D.N.Y. 2009)

. . . the amount of $875, foreclosure costs in the amount of $930.41, property inspection fees totaling $92.50 . . .

DEFENSE CONTROL USA, INC. v. ATLANTIS CONSULTANTS LIMITED CORP., 4 So. 3d 694 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2009)

. . . made under penalties of perjury, while “affidavits” are governed by a separate Florida law, section 92.50 . . .

JENKINS, v. STATE, 6 So. 3d 71 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2008)

. . . Section 92.50(1), Florida Statutes (1992), provides that the oath may be administered by a deputy clerk . . .

In B. WILLIAMS,, 378 B.R. 811 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 2007)

. . . This amount is comprised of $92.50 for the fifth entry on January 3, 2007 for clerical services; and . . .

In KUHN,, 337 B.R. 668 (N.D. Ind. 2006)

. . . one-half hour charge for this service is disallowed, and thus the requested compensation is reduced by $92.50 . . . deems the travel time to be one hour, and thus compensation for services on November 18 is reduced by $92.50 . . .

CRAIN, v. STATE, 914 So. 2d 1015 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005)

. . . Section 92.50, Florida Statutes, entitled: “Oaths, affidavits and acknowledgements, who may take or administer . . . following manner: (a) Under oatb or affirmation taken or administered before an officer authorized under s. 92.50 . . . definition of a verification and because a notarized oath must satisfy the requirements of section 92.50 . . . Section 92.50, Florida Statutes, also indicates that an affidavit must be sworn to before a person authorized . . . § 92.50(1), Fla. Stat. (2003). . . . following manner: (a) Under oath or affirmation taken or administered before ah officer authorized under s. 92.50 . . .

RUIZ, v. STATE, 908 So. 2d 508 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005)

. . . following manner: (a) Under oath or affirmation taken or administered before an officer authorized under s. 92.50 . . .

FIRESTINE v. PARKVIEW HEALTH SYSTEM, INC., 374 F. Supp. 2d 658 (N.D. Ind. 2005)

. . . 225.00 1,800.00 11/20/04 10 12.0 225.00 2,700.00 11/22/04 10 .7 225.00 157.50 11/22/04 17 .5 185.00 92.50 . . .

A. SMARTMAYS, v. STATE, 901 So. 2d 278 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005)

. . . defective because it was not sworn to before a person authorized to administer oaths under section 92.50 . . .

MARTINEZ, v. ABRAHAM CHEVROLET- TAMPA, INC., 891 So. 2d 579 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004)

. . . following manner: (a) Under oath or affirmation taken or administered before an officer authorized under s. 92.50 . . .

S. JACKSON, v. STATE, 881 So. 2d 666 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004)

. . . This fact is implicitly recognized in section 92.50, Florida Statute (2002), which sets forth the persons . . .

AMENDMENTS TO THE FLORIDA PROBATE RULES, 848 So. 2d 1069 (Fla. 2003)

. . . Statutory References § 92.50, Fla. Stat. . . .

JENKINS, v. MERCANTILE MORTGAGE COMPANY PCFS s, 231 F. Supp. 2d 737 (N.D. Ill. 2002)

. . . the HUD-1, CST collected $37.50 for recording a mortgage and $55 for recording releases, which total $92.50 . . . loan documents were provided to her for the 1999 mortgage, she cannot determine whether CST collected $92.50 . . .

THE FLORIDA BAR, v. A. CENTURION,, 801 So. 2d 858 (Fla. 2000)

. . . based on Ortiz’s testimony since she was not properly sworn as a witness in accordance with section 92.50 . . . an attorney challenged the admissibility of testimony that was not taken in accordance with section 92.50 . . . specifically agreed to continue with her testimony in the absence of the formalities required by section 92.50 . . .

CADLE COMPANY, v. G G ASSOCIATES,, 737 So. 2d 1136 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)

. . . Section 92.50(1), Florida Statutes (1997), provides the general authority for a notary public to administer . . . Section 92.50(1), Florida Statutes (1997), provides: IN THIS STATE. — Oaths, affidavits, and acknowledgments . . .

LIMA, v. STATE, 732 So. 2d 1173 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)

. . . Circuit Court in Miami-Dade County was not valid because it did not satisfy the requirements of section 92.50 . . . THE OATH Defendant argues that pursuant to the terms of section 92.50(2), the oath administered to Ms . . . .2d 1364 (Fla.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 119 S.Ct. 236, 142 L.Ed.2d 194 (1998), as concerns section 92.50 . . .

E- Z SERVE CONVENIENCE STORES, INC. AIG v. C. PAUL,, 720 So. 2d 301 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998)

. . . P. 4.075(f)(3); see also § 92.50(a), Fla. . . .

SCHNEIDER, v. ELKO COUNTY SHERIFF S DEPARTMENT I- XX,, 17 F. Supp. 2d 1162 (D. Nev. 1998)

. . . not challenge defense counsels’ hourly rates, which we conclude are reasonable in any event — either $92.50 . . .

BEN- AZIZ, v. POLANI,, 710 So. 2d 125 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998)

. . . We first note that the affidavit is deficient, for failure to comply with section 92.50(3), Florida Statutes . . . The affidavit was not properly authenticated under section 92.50(3), because it does not contain the . . .

In Re GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION, 110 F.3d 1003 (4th Cir. 1997)

. . . and file brief. 2.5 512.20 212 Assc. 0.5 185 Review final draft of reply to motion to dismiss. 0.5 92.50 . . .

In POTASH ANTITRUST LITIGATION, 954 F. Supp. 1334 (D. Minn. 1997)

. . . pricing decisions, the Plaintiffs have directed our attention to NMP’s announced January price of $92.50 . . .

A. MILLS, v. E. BARKER,, 664 So. 2d 1054 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)

. . . This statute together with section 92.50(2), Florida Statutes (1993), furnish the authority for the admission . . . Section 92.50(2) provides that acknowledgments required or authorized under the laws of this state may . . . Barker does not contend that section 92.50(2) does not authorize the taking of an acknowledgment by an . . .

THE FLORIDA BAR, v. CLEMENT,, 662 So. 2d 690 (Fla. 1995)

. . . Costa Rica, should have been excluded because the oath was not administered in accordance with section 92.50 . . . An affidavit that is not executed in accordance with the requirements of section 92.50(3) is not competent . . . Vannier, 498 So.2d 896 (Fla.1986), it would be a better practice to comply with section 92.50(3). . . . Section 92.50(3), Florida Statutes (1993), provides: Oaths, affidavits, and acknowledgments, required . . .

ORBE, v. ORBE,, 651 So. 2d 1295 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)

. . . Section 92.50(2), Florida Statutes (1993), provides that oaths, affidavits and acknowledgements taken . . .

STATE v. E. SHEARER,, 628 So. 2d 1102 (Fla. 1993)

. . . following manner: (a) Under oath or affirmation taken or administered before an officer authorized under s. 92.50 . . .

STATE DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAY SAFETY MOTOR VEHICLES, v. PADILLA,, 629 So. 2d 180 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)

. . . following manner: (a) Under oath or affirmation taken or administered before an officer authorized under s. 92.50 . . .

L. KIMBALL, v. E. SHALALA,, 826 F. Supp. 573 (D. Me. 1993)

. . . this case under the EAJA is 24.65 hours at $100 per hour ($2,465), plus 1.85 hours at $50 per hour ($92.50 . . .

In AMENDMENTS TO FLORIDA PROBATE RULES, 607 So. 2d 1306 (Fla. 1992)

. . . Statutory References § 92.50, Fla.Stat. . . .

STATE v. MANDELL,, 599 So. 2d 1383 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)

. . . Section 92.50(1), Florida Statutes (1991), provides in pertinent part: 92.50 Oaths, affidavits, and acknowledgments . . .

In W. MURRAY,, 132 B.R. 808 (Bankr. D. Mass. 1991)

. . . Turning to the expense schedule, we find a charge of $92.50 for secretarial overtime. . . .

HAMILTON, v. ALEXANDER PROUDFOOT COMPANY WORLD HEADQUARTERS, a a, 576 So. 2d 1339 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)

. . . This affidavit was not executed in accordance with the requirements of section 92.50(3), Florida Statutes . . .

In WASHINGTON PUBLIC POWER SUPPLY SYSTEM SECURITIES LITIGATION, 779 F. Supp. 1063 (D. Ariz. 1990)

. . . 22,000.00 Grossmann 298.00 80.00 77,480.00 20,800.00 Litowitz 130.25 36.00 35,818.75 9,900.00 Browne 92.50 . . . 92.50 16,187.50 16,187.50 Kainen 101.00 98.25 11,615.00 11,298.75 Mellieker 39.25 39.25 5,298.75 5,298.75 . . .

In SAMARRIPPAS, Sr. d b a, 107 B.R. 366 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1989)

. . . Utilities 217.00 Food 200.00 Clothing 100.00 Laundry & Cleaning 25.00 Medical & Drug 100.00 Insurance 92.50 . . . 364.00 Utilities 125.00 Food 200.00 Clothing 0.00 Laundry & Cleaning 0.00 Medical & Drug 0.00 Insurance 92.50 . . .

SALSBURY LABORATORIES, INC. v. MERIEUX LABORATORIES, INC., 735 F. Supp. 1555 (M.D. Ga. 1989)

. . . From 1982 until July of 1987, Salsbury sold MG-BAC at $92.50 per bottle. . . . If these bottles of MG vaccine had been sold by Salsbury at its original price of $92.50 per bottle, . . . Erosion When Merieux entered the MG vaccine market in April of 1987, Salsbury was selling MG-BAC at $92.50 . . . figure by 5, which represents the five-month period during which Salsbury would have sold MG-BAC at $92.50 . . .

In CHURCHFIELD MANAGEMENT INVESTMENT CORPORATION,, 98 B.R. 838 (Bankr. N.D. Ill. 1989)

. . . Umana and Ferguson 511.45 Special Postage 87.34 Photocopying 564.28 Filing Fee and Service of Summons 92.50 . . .

STATE v. L. HARTUNG, 543 So. 2d 236 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1989)

. . . See § 92.50(1), Fla.Stat. .See generally State v. Miller, 313 So.2d 656 (Fla.1975); Gerstein v. . . .

THE FLORIDA BAR. In Re RULES OF PROBATE AND GUARDIANSHIP PROCEDURE, 537 So. 2d 500 (Fla. 1988)

. . . F.S. 92.50 Oaths, affidavits, and acknowledgments; who may take or administer; requirements. 22 U.S.C . . .

THE FLORIDA BAR. In Re RULES OF PROBATE AND GUARDIANSHIP PROCEDURE, 531 So. 2d 1261 (Fla. 1988)

. . . F.S. 92.50 Oaths, affidavits, and ac-knowledgements; who may take or administer; requirements. 22 U.S.C . . .

HUNTER S RUN, LTD. v HOELSCHER EHRHART, 34 Fla. Supp. 2d 148 (Orange Cty. Ct. 1987)

. . . The cost of the towels was $92.50. . . . TENANT’S CLAIM FOR DAMAGES TO PERSONAL PROPERTY The court rules the tenant is entitled to $92.50 for . . . Total damages to personal property for the tenant $92.50 5. . . . Towels (cleaning and replacement) $ 92.50 Total damages for tenant subject to set off $342.50 Security . . .

L. TURNER, v. E. BROCK, III, E. MONK G. T. L. R. B. J. R. M. E. J. v. E. BROCK, III,, 813 F.2d 1494 (9th Cir. 1987)

. . . . § 92.50(l) II. Each claimant was employed by an affected employer. . . . claimants reversed without considering whether they were covered employees on the basis that section 92.50 . . . apply to determinations of entitlement under the California Unemployment Insurance Code. 29 C.F.R. § 92.50 . . .

In ARMSTRONG,, 812 F.2d 1024 (7th Cir. 1987)

. . . Elevator Patronage Dividend 72.00 Farming Rent 17,181.50 Gasoline Tax Credit 61.00 Gasoline Tax Refund 92.50 . . .

In ARMSTRONG,, 812 F.2d 1024 (7th Cir. 1987)

. . . Elevator Patronage Dividend 72.00 Farming Rent 17,181.50 Gasoline Tax Credit 61.00 Gasoline Tax Refund 92.50 . . .

In K. BARRIDO B. s, 69 B.R. 316 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1987)

. . . Florida Statute § 92.50, which governs oaths, affidavits, and acknowledgments, requires that an acknowledgment . . . Thus, Fla.Stat. §§ 695.03, 92.50, and 117.07, when read in para materia, provide that if an instrument . . . Gi-bralter urges that the document substantially complies with the requirements of Fla.Stat. §§ 695.03, 92.50 . . .

W. HOLT, v. J. DONOVAN,, 790 F.2d 1417 (9th Cir. 1986)

. . . . § 92.50(c) (reconsideration of a Redwood benefit application is subject to time limits applicable to . . .

ARMSTRONG, v. CORN BELT BANK,, 55 B.R. 755 (C.D. Ill. 1985)

. . . Elevator Patronage Dividend 72.00 Farming Rent 17,181.50 Gasoline Tax Credit 61.00 Gasoline Tax Refund 92.50 . . .

W. HOLT, v. J. DONOVAN,, 757 F.2d 1045 (9th Cir. 1985)

. . . . § 92.50(c) (1984); Cal.Unemp.Ins.Code § 1382 (West 1972 & Supp.1985). . . . receive benefits in November 1979, and was not advised of his ineligibility until April 1980. 29 C.F.R. § 92.50 . . .

KYLES, v. SECRETARY OF AGRICULTURE,, 604 F. Supp. 426 (D.D.C. 1985)

. . . The third exception, where the rate was $92.50, was a case that had been taken over from another firm . . .

THE FLORIDA BAR RE AMENDMENT TO RULES- PROBATE AND GUARDIANSHIP, 458 So. 2d 1079 (Fla. 1984)

. . . F.S. 92.50 Oaths, affidavits, and acknowledgments; who may take or administer; requirements. 22 U.S.C . . .

A. HANLEY, v. J. DONOVAN, J. HADDORFF, v. J. DONOVAN,, 734 F.2d 473 (9th Cir. 1984)

. . . . § 92.50(c) (reconsideration of Redwood Act determinations to be made according to California unemployment . . .

E. DEMARINIS, v. J. DONOVAN,, 728 F.2d 1266 (9th Cir. 1984)

. . . that Demarinis was not “laid off” and therefore not eligible for REPP benefits, and that 29 C.F.R. 92.50 . . . Twenty-nine C.F.R. 92.50(c) and Cal.Un-emp.Ins.Code § 1332 provide that the EDD may, for good cause, . . . . § 92.50(c) provides that the EDD may reconsider determinations of eligibility on the same terms and . . .

F. JACKSON, v. J. DONOVAN,, 758 F.2d 1313 (9th Cir. 1984)

. . . . § 92.50(c), bar the Secretary from reconsidering Jackson’s eligibility for Redwood Act benefits. . . .

L. PAGE, v. J. DONOVAN, R. PAPAGEORGE, v. J. DONOVAN,, 727 F.2d 866 (9th Cir. 1984)

. . . . §§ 92.50(g), 92.-50(m), and direct the Assistant Secretary, when hearing an appeal, to “ascertain whether . . . party has occurred, regardless of whether such error is alleged by an appealing party.” 29 C.F.R. § 92.50 . . .

MOON, Jr. v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR,, 727 F.2d 1315 (D.C. Cir. 1984)

. . . . §§ 92.1-92.50 (1983). . . . .

N. CROOK, v. SHEARSON LOEB RHOADES, INC., 591 F. Supp. 40 (N.D. Ind. 1983)

. . . The close resulted in a profit of $92.50. . . . The third trade again of November 1980 lumber resulted in a profit of $92.50. . . .

E. EGBERT, v. J. DONOVAN,, 720 F.2d 1122 (9th Cir. 1983)

. . . See 29 C.F.R. 92.50(r). . . .

LOCAL INTERNATIONAL WOODWORKERS OF AMERICA, AFL- CIO, v. J. DONOVAN,, 713 F.2d 436 (9th Cir. 1983)

. . . Notwithstanding § 92.50 of this part, after the effective date of this section, an affected employee . . .

HOOPA VALLEY TRIBE, a v. G. WATT, L. E. Jr., 569 F. Supp. 943 (N.D. Cal. 1983)

. . . Plaintiff asks to be compensated at the rates of $97.90 for work by its senior attorneys, $92.50 for . . .

STATE v. TOLMIE,, 421 So. 2d 1087 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1982)

. . . However, in McManus, the statute on oaths, affidavits and acknowledgments Section 92.50, Florida Statutes . . .

C. NEFF, v. ADLER L., 416 So. 2d 1240 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1982)

. . . See sections 92.50, 92.51 and 695.25, Florida Statutes (1979). . . . See again sections 92.50 and 92.51 as well as 5 Bigham, Tennessee Practice § 1115. . . .

RUSSELL S CUSTOM HOME REPAIR, INC. v. O DONNELLS AUTO SERVICE,, 411 So. 2d 356 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1982)

. . . Therefore, it benefited to the extent of $92.50 and suffered no actual damages. . . . Summary Procedure 7.100(a) bars his recovery of any differential remaining in the respondent’s hands ($92.50 . . .

STATE v. Ed McMANUS E. O Sr., 404 So. 2d 757 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1981)

. . . a circuit judge, in the usual course of his duties, would administer a lawful oath pursuant to F.S. 92.50 . . .

WRIGHT v. HEIZER CORPORATION, 503 F. Supp. 802 (N.D. Ill. 1980)

. . . In fact, two invoices from our court reporter, dated June 10, 1976 and June 21, 1976, totalling $92.50 . . . This $92.50 charge was based on an expedited delivery rate. . . .

W. Jr. v., 74 T.C. 1249 (T.C. 1980)

. . . Clothing. 150.00 Incidentals.42.00 Medical and dental.10.00 Transportation. 135.00 Recreation and club.92.50 . . .

W. KEITH v. A. VOLPE,, 501 F. Supp. 403 (C.D. Cal. 1980)

. . . 591.00 36.642.00 1974 75.00 335.50 25,162.50 1975 81.25 261.50 21,246.87 1976 88.75 77.50 6,878.12 1977 92.50 . . .

W. KEITH v. A. VOLPE,, 86 F.R.D. 565 (C.D. Cal. 1980)

. . . 591.00 36.642.00 1974 75.00 335.50 25,162.50 1975 81.25 261.50 21,246.87 1976 88.75 77.50 6,878.12 1977 92.50 . . .

HARMON, v. SAN DIEGO COUNTY a K. D. G. J. O. M., 477 F. Supp. 1084 (S.D. Cal. 1979)

. . . Karnowski 93.50 Caucasian Male Franeoise Euliss 92.50 Caucasian Female George Ramirez 92.50 Mexican-American . . . Karnowski 93.50 Caucasian Male Francoise Euliss 92.50 Caucasian Female George Ramirez 92.50 Mexican- . . .

SANTA FE INDUSTRIES, INC. v. GREEN, 430 U.S. 462 (U.S. 1977)

. . . control of Kirby’s stock to 95%; the purchase prices during the period 1968-1973 ranged from $65 to $92.50 . . .

FOSTER, v. BOISE- CASCADE, INC., 420 F. Supp. 674 (S.D. Tex. 1976)

. . . Attorneys' Fees Question Total 1.50 (1) Trial Work — Hearing 0 1.50 (2) Pre-Trial Work on the Merits 92.50 . . . Hourly Rate Hours Logged Total (1) Trial Work-Hearing $65.00 0 (2) Pre-Trial Work on the Merits 50.00 92.50 . . .

M. HARRIMAN v. E. I. DU PONT NEMOURS AND COMPANY, a, 411 F. Supp. 133 (D. Del. 1975)

. . . .$ 108.75 $ 92.50 2nd Quarter............................... 121.50 97.13 3rd Quarter................ . . .

S. GREEN, v. SANTA FE INDUSTRIES, INC., 391 F. Supp. 849 (S.D.N.Y. 1975)

. . . period from 1968 through 1973, Santa Fe affiliates purchased shares at prices ranging from $65.00 to $92.50 . . .

SECURITIES INVESTOR PROTECTION CORPORATION, v. CHARISMA SECURITIES CORPORATION,, 352 F. Supp. 302 (S.D.N.Y. 1972)

. . . Also located was some old office furniture, subsequently appraised at $92.50, being held by Charisma’ . . .

R. Sr. v., 56 T.C. 388 (T.C. 1971)

. . . months at 261.06= 3,132.72 12 months at 183.34= 2,200.08 12 months at 129.85= 1,538.20 . 5 month at 92.50 . . .

P. SHULTZ, W. v. UNION TRUST BANK OF ST. PETERSBURG,, 297 F. Supp. 1274 (M.D. Fla. 1969)

. . . Roush 145.21 Edythe Fulkerson 82.00 Virginia Johnston 92.50 Ida Paine 365.97 Helen Perry 232.97 Gladys . . .

UNITED STATES v. BULLOCK,, 402 F.2d 476 (4th Cir. 1968)

. . . Virginia 18.1-96, that is, attempting to employ as true an American Express Money Order in the amount of $92.50 . . .

GRUENWALD, v. W. GARDNER,, 390 F.2d 591 (2d Cir. 1968)

. . . have had a primary insurance amount of $115.60 and would have been entitled to monthly payments of $92.50 . . .

BOURAZAK, v. NORTH RIVER INSURANCE COMPANY, a, 280 F. Supp. 87 (S.D. Ill. 1968)

. . . In addition to the items mentioned, a claim for the sum of $92.50, for exemplification of copies of documents . . .

J. OBLAND, v. UNITED STATES, 278 F. Supp. 989 (E.D. Mo. 1967)

. . . June 8th of that year he received his final paycheck in the amount of $74.39, based on gross wages of $92.50 . . . a “corrected” withholding tax statement in place of the one prepared by his employer, omitting the $92.50 . . . Having realized on the check in 1962, he reported the $92.50 on his return for that year, which, as he . . . He was then advised by the District Director’s office that the $92.50 in wages should have been reported . . .

J. H. v., 39 T.C. 608 (T.C. 1962)

. . . aggregating $745.61, an amount of $2,350, which was retained by the Realty Co., and plus an amount of $92.50 . . .

v., 49 Cust. Ct. 406 (Cust. Ct. 1962)

. . . ready for shipment to tbe United States was the invoice unit values plus export shipping charge of $92.50 . . . involved, and I hold that such statutory value is the invoice unit values, plus export shipping charge of $92.50 . . .

J. NORTON, v. ACONE, d b a Co. Co., 192 F. Supp. 46 (D. Mass. 1961)

. . . case is close, I do not believe that plaintiff would have been paid in any one week such sums as $90, $92.50 . . .