The 2023 Florida Statutes (including Special Session C)

Title XIV
TAXATION AND FINANCE

Chapter 201
EXCISE TAX ON DOCUMENTS

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 201.21

201.21 Notes and other written obligations exempt under certain conditions.—There shall be exempt from all excise taxes imposed by this chapter all promissory notes, nonnegotiable notes, and other written obligations to pay money bearing date subsequent to July 1, 1955, hereinafter referred to as “principal obligations,” when the maker thereof shall pledge or deposit with the payee or holder thereof pursuant to any agreement commonly known as a wholesale warehouse mortgage agreement, as collateral security for the payment thereof, any collateral obligation or obligations, as hereinafter defined, provided all excise taxes imposed by this chapter upon or in respect to such collateral obligation or obligations shall have been paid. If the indebtedness evidenced by any such principal obligation shall be in excess of the indebtedness evidenced by such collateral obligation or obligations, the exemption provided by this section shall not apply to the amount of such excess indebtedness; and, in such event, the excise taxes imposed by this chapter shall apply and be paid only in respect to such excess of indebtedness of such principal obligation. The term “collateral obligation” as used in this section means any note, bond, or other written obligation to pay money secured by mortgage, deed of trust, or other lien upon real or personal property. The pledging of a specific collateral obligation to secure a specific principal obligation, if required under the terms of the agreement, shall not invalidate the exemption provided by this section. The temporary removal of the document or documents representing one or more collateral obligations for a reasonable commercial purpose, for a period not exceeding 60 days, shall not invalidate the exemption provided by this section.

History.—s. 1, ch. 29981, 1955; s. 8, ch. 79-350; s. 86, ch. 81-259.

F.S. 201.21 on Google Scholar

F.S. 201.21 on Casetext

Amendments to 201.21

Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 201.21

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

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 201.21.

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases from cite.case.law:

J. BARNES, v. A. BERRYHILL,, 895 F.3d 702 (9th Cir. 2018)

. . . At Step Five, the ALJ stated that Grid rules 201.21 and 201.28 would direct a finding of "not disabled . . . Part 404, Subpart P, App'x 2, rules 201.21-.22 ("younger individual age 45-49") and 201.28-.29 ("younger . . . Grid rule 201.21 states that a "younger individual age 45-49" with a high school education, skilled or . . .

BANCOLITA, v. A. BERRYHILL,, 312 F. Supp. 3d 737 (N.D. Ill. 2018)

. . . Part 404, Subpart P, App. 2, Table No. 1, Rule 201.21. . . .

C. BRITT, v. A. BERRYHILL,, 889 F.3d 422 (7th Cir. 2018)

. . . could specify the evidence supporting the assessed limitations and consider Medical Vocational Rule 201.21 . . .

D. ARRINGTON, v. W. COLVIN,, 216 F. Supp. 3d 217 (D. Mass. 2016)

. . . P, App. 2 § 201.21. . . .

JOHNSON, v. W. COLVIN,, 640 F. App'x 770 (10th Cir. 2016)

. . . Part 404, Subpart P, App. 2, Rule 201.21; and a vocational expert’s (VE’s) identification of séveral . . .

BROWN, v. W. COLVIN,, 146 F. Supp. 3d 489 (W.D.N.Y. 2015)

. . . P., App. 2, § 201.21. . . .

DeLORME PUBLISHING COMPANY, INC. LLC, v. INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION,, 805 F.3d 1328 (Fed. Cir. 2015)

. . . Order and to all waivers and other provisions as required by Commission Rule of Practice and Procedure 201.21 . . .

J. GARCIA, v. W. COLVIN,, 83 F. Supp. 3d 1177 (D. Colo. 2015)

. . . considered presumptively disabled under Grid Rule 201.14, a 49-year old would not, under Grid Rule 201.21 . . .

JIMISON, o b o D. SIMS, v. W. COLVIN,, 513 F. App'x 789 (10th Cir. 2013)

. . . education, and work experience, a finding of ‘not disabled’ is directed by Medical-Vocational Rule 201.21 . . . challenged, nor has either party even mentioned, the ALJ’s alternate step-five determination that Rule 201.21 . . .

BRESLIN, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, 509 F. App'x 149 (3d Cir. 2013)

. . . education, and work experience, Breslin was not disabled under Rule 202.21 (for light work) and Rule 201.21 . . .

PETERSEN, v. J. ASTRUE, r, 2 F. Supp. 3d 223 (N.D.N.Y. 2012)

. . . 2010, a finding of “not disabled” was directed under the framework provided by Medical-Vocational Rule 201.21 . . . As such, the ALJ applied the “framework” of Medical-Vocational Rule 201.21 and concluded that Plaintiff . . .

L. HOUSE, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,, 32 F. Supp. 3d 138 (N.D.N.Y. 2012)

. . . jobs exist in the national economy that Plaintiff can perform, the ALJ used Medical-Vocational Rules 201.21 . . .

FIGUEROA, v. J. ASTRUE,, 848 F. Supp. 2d 894 (N.D. Ill. 2012)

. . . The ALJ pointed to Rule 201.21, which suggested a finding of “not disabled.” (R. 55). . . .

D. DENNIS, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,, 779 F. Supp. 2d 727 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 2011)

. . . P, App. 2 § 201.21 as a framework, the ALJ concluded that the plaintiff was not disabled within the meaning . . .

W. O DELL M. O v. J. ASTRUE,, 736 F. Supp. 2d 378 (D.N.H. 2010)

. . . (Tr. at 21, citing Rules 201.27-29, 201.21 and 201.22). . . .

J. SOLSBEE, v. J. ASTRUE,, 737 F. Supp. 2d 102 (W.D.N.Y. 2010)

. . . The ALJ determined that Rule 201.21 and 201.28 would direct a finding of “not disabled” if Plaintiff . . . I find that the ALJ’s reliance upon SSR 85-15 and Grid Rule 201.21 and 201.28 was inappropriate and constituted . . .

VAN DER BOSCH, v. J. ASTRUE,, 728 F. Supp. 2d 1034 (D. Minn. 2010)

. . . Specifically, the Appeals Council concluded the ALJ erred by relying on Rule 201.21 of the Medical-Vocational . . .

HILSDORF, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,, 724 F. Supp. 2d 330 (E.D.N.Y. 2010)

. . . At step five, the ALJ determined that Medical-Vocational Rules 202.28, 201.21, and 202.2 (in 20 C.F.R . . .

E. SPAULDING, v. J. ASTRUE,, 379 F. App'x 776 (10th Cir. 2010)

. . . Applying rule 201.21 of the Medical-Vocational Guidelines, 20 C.F.R. pt. 404, subpt. . . .

E. ROSADO, v. J. ASTRUE,, 713 F. Supp. 2d 347 (S.D.N.Y. 2010)

. . . P, App. 2, §§ 201.21-22, 202.21-22. . . .

PRETTY, v. PRUDENTIAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, 696 F. Supp. 2d 170 (D. Conn. 2010)

. . . range of sedentary work, a finding of ‘not disabled’ would be directed by Medical-Vocational Rules 201.21 . . .

GONZALEZ, GUZMAN, v. SECRETARY OF UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH HUMAN SERVICES, 360 F. App'x 240 (2d Cir. 2010)

. . . that “[biased on a residual functional capacity for a full range of sedentary work, Rules 201.18 and 201.21 . . .

TUCKER, v. J. ASTRUE,, 337 F. App'x 392 (5th Cir. 2009)

. . . performance of her past relevant work, but at step five, the ALJ concluded that Medical-Vocational rule 201.21 . . .

L. SHIRD, v. J. ASTRUE,, 635 F. Supp. 2d 1319 (M.D. Fla. 2009)

. . . Utilizing Grid Rule 201.21, a younger person, under the age of fifty (50), with the Plaintiffs RFC, for . . .

M. CORSON, v. J. ASTRUE,, 601 F. Supp. 2d 515 (W.D.N.Y. 2009)

. . . P, App. 2, Rule 201.21 and 201.27. . . .

HARRIS, v. J. ASTRUE,, 646 F. Supp. 2d 979 (N.D. Ill. 2009)

. . . in significant numbers and, thus, was not disabled under the framework of Medical-Vocational Rules 201.21 . . .

SCHETTINO, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, 295 F. App'x 543 (3d Cir. 2008)

. . . and Schettino's education and previous work experience should be deemed "disabled”), with id. at Rule 201.21 . . .

JUSTICE, v. ASTRUE,, 576 F. Supp. 2d 195 (D. Mass. 2008)

. . . limitations at the sedentary exertional level, Justice would be considered not disabled according to rule 201.21 . . .

HOADLEY v. J. ASTRUE, 503 F. Supp. 2d 466 (D. Conn. 2007)

. . . In this case, Rule 201.21 of Appendix 2, Sub-part P, Regulations No. 4 applies and indicated that the . . . other work that exists in significant numbers in the national economy under the provisions of Rule 201.21 . . . other work that exists in significant numbers in the national economy under the provisions of Rule 201.21 . . .

GOODWATER, v. Jo B. BARNHART,, 579 F. Supp. 2d 746 (D.S.C. 2007)

. . . limitations do not allow her to perform the full range of sedentary work, using Medical-Vocational Rule 201.21 . . .

C. MARTIN, v. Jo B. BARNHART,, 501 F. Supp. 2d 1179 (N.D. Ind. 2007)

. . . restrictions and limitations do not allow her to perform the full range of light work, using Rules 201.14, 201.21 . . .

MULET- RIVERA, v. Jo B. BARNHART,, 437 F. Supp. 2d 616 (S.D. Tex. 2006)

. . . The claimant’s medical-vocational profile corresponds with Rule 201.21, Appendix 2, Subpart P, Regulations . . .

R. MULLENS, v. Jo B. BARNHART,, 165 F. App'x 611 (10th Cir. 2006)

. . . P, App. 2, rule 201.21 (the grids), would direct a finding of not disabled, direct application was not . . .

C. MAHARAJH, v. Jo B. BARNHART,, 424 F. Supp. 2d 915 (S.D. Tex. 2006)

. . . Based on the testimony of the vocational expert, and using Rule 201.21, Appendix 2, Subpart P, Regulations . . .

E. JOHNSON, v. Jo B. BARNHART,, 397 F. Supp. 2d 1122 (S.D. Iowa 2005)

. . . In making the fifth step finding, the ALJ relied on Medical-Vocational Rules 201.21 and 201.22. . . .

J. RICKERTSEN, v. Jo B. BARNHART,, 381 F. Supp. 2d 1064 (S.D. Iowa 2005)

. . . Based on Rule 201.21, of the medical vocational guidelines, the ALJ found that Plaintiff is not disabled . . .

ORR, v. Jo B. BARNHART,, 375 F. Supp. 2d 193 (W.D.N.Y. 2005)

. . . At step five of the sequential evaluation, the ALJ used the Grid Rules 201.21, 201.27 and 201.28 to direct . . .

LONG, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,, 375 F. Supp. 2d 674 (W.D. Tenn. 2005)

. . . capacity for sedentary work and Plaintiffs age, education, and work experience, Medical-Vocational Rule 201.21 . . .

L. LACROIX, v. B. BARNHART,, 352 F. Supp. 2d 100 (D. Mass. 2005)

. . . (citing Medical-Vocation Rules 201.21 & 201.28). C. . . .

E. WIRTH, v. Jo BARNHART,, 325 F. Supp. 2d 911 (E.D. Wis. 2004)

. . . Thus, Grid Rule 201.21 directed a finding of “not disabled.” . . .

WIRTH, v. Jo BARNHART,, 318 F. Supp. 2d 726 (E.D. Wis. 2004)

. . . 49), and educational level (GED), the ALJ concluded that plaintiff was not disabled under Grid Rule 201.21 . . . Thus, Grid Rule 201.21 directed a finding of “not disabled.” See 20 C.F.R. Pt. 404, App. 2, Subpt. . . . Finally, after applying Medical-Vocational Rule 201.21 (“Grid Rule”), the ALJ determined that the plaintiff . . . determined that the plaintiffs vocational profile and RFC coincided with every factor of Grid Rule 201.21 . . . As such, the ALJ’s application of Grid Rule 201.21, alone was not appropriate. . . .

ANDERSON, v. Jo B. BARNHART,, 312 F. Supp. 2d 1187 (E.D. Mo. 2004)

. . . intact and not compromised by any nonexertional limitation, the ALJ concluded that Rules 201.20 and 201.21 . . .

T. WEISS, v. Jo B. BARNHART,, 92 F. App'x 743 (10th Cir. 2004)

. . . P, App. 2, rules 201.18 & 201.21; (3) the ALJ failed to give controlling weight to her treating physician . . .

MCDANIEL, v. Jo B. BARNHART,, 375 F. Supp. 2d 975 (E.D. Cal. 2004)

. . . Even if the claimant were limited to no more than the full range of sedentary work, Rules 201.21 and . . .

MOORE, v. Jo B. BARNHART,, 303 F. Supp. 2d 1197 (D. Kan. 2004)

. . . education, and work experience, a finding of “not disabled” is directed by Medical-Vocational Rule 201.21 . . .

C. BAKER, v. Jo B. BARNHART,, 84 F. App'x 10 (10th Cir. 2003)

. . . step-four RFC finding, the ALJ found at step five that claimant was not disabled under either Rule 201.21 . . . P, app. 2, Rules 201.21, 201.28. . . .

ERVIN, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,, 75 F. App'x 401 (6th Cir. 2003)

. . . Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 2, Rule 201.21. . . .

IANNOPOLLO, v. B. BARNHART,, 280 F. Supp. 2d 41 (W.D.N.Y. 2003)

. . . to consider plaintiffs nonexertional limitations and as such, application of medical-vocational rule 201.21 . . . The ALJ applied medical-vocational rule 201.21, and determined that plaintiff could perform the full . . . significantly erode the occupational base, application of the medical-vocational rules, such as rule 201.21 . . .

DAILEY, f n a v. Jo B. BARNHART,, 277 F. Supp. 2d 226 (W.D.N.Y. 2003)

. . . Utilizing Medical Vocational Rule 201.21, Table 1, the ALJ considered Dailey’s age, educational background . . .

J. WATES, v. Jo BARNHART,, 274 F. Supp. 2d 1024 (E.D. Wis. 2003)

. . . Therefore, using Grid Rule 201.21 as a framework for her decision, the ALJ concluded that plaintiff was . . . Rule 201.21 of the Medical-Vocational Guidelines, 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Subpt. . . .

WALLACE, v. Jo B. BARNHART,, 256 F. Supp. 2d 1360 (S.D. Fla. 2003)

. . . concluded that a finding of “not disabled” would be reached by application of Medical-Vocational Rule 201.21 . . .

E. ELDRED, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,, 250 F. Supp. 2d 282 (W.D.N.Y. 2003)

. . . of transferra-ble skills, that plaintiff was “not disabled” as a result of Medical-Vocational Rule 201.21 . . . The factual findings of plaintiffs age, education and residual functional capacity correspond to Rule 201.21 . . .

CRINER, v. Jo B. BARNHART,, 208 F. Supp. 2d 937 (N.D. Ill. 2002)

. . . However, using Rule 201.21 or 202.21 as a framework, as supplemented by the VE’s testimony, the ALJ concluded . . .

Y. YEATES, v. Jo B. BARNHART,, 187 F. Supp. 2d 1318 (D. Kan. 2002)

. . . claimant’s age, educational background, and work experience, Sections 404.1569 and 416.969 and Rule 201.21 . . .

L. CREASY, v. Jo B. BARNHART,, 30 F. App'x 620 (7th Cir. 2002)

. . . Part 404, Subpart P, App. 2, Table No. 1, Rule 201.21. . . .

MCKINNIE, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,, 24 F. App'x 314 (6th Cir. 2001)

. . . P, app. 2, Rule 201.21. . . . The ALJ met this burden by relying on Rule 201.21 of the grids, which indicates that a significant number . . .

D. DIKEMAN, v. A. HALTER,, 245 F.3d 1182 (10th Cir. 2001)

. . . P.App. 2, § 201.21. . . .

HENDERSON, v. S. APFEL,, 142 F. Supp. 2d 943 (W.D. Tenn. 2001)

. . . assess Henderson’s residual functional capacity and apply his findings to the criteria set out in Rule 201.21 . . .

TOLBERT, v. S. APFEL,, 106 F. Supp. 2d 1217 (N.D. Okla. 2000)

. . . The ALJ then applied grid rule 201.21 which directed a finding of “not disabled.” . . . Based on her age, education, work experience and RFC, the ALJ applied grid 201.21 and found Plaintiff . . .

R. RUSHING v. KANSAS CITY SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY,, 185 F.3d 496 (5th Cir. 1999)

. . . . §§ 201.21-.27. . . .

HILL, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,, 49 F. Supp. 2d 865 (S.D.W. Va. 1999)

. . . age, educational background, and work experience, Section 404.1569 of Regulations No. 4 and Rules No. 201.21 . . .

R. SCHAFFER, v. S. APFEL,, 992 F. Supp. 233 (W.D.N.Y. 1997)

. . . Accordingly, considering plaintiffs age, education and work experience, and using Rule 201.21 of Table . . .

SAVIANO, Jr. v. S. CHATER,, 956 F. Supp. 1061 (E.D.N.Y. 1997)

. . . electrician, and a residual functional capacity for sedentary work, Rules 201.28 and/or 201.29 and Rules 201.21 . . .

S. WILLIAMS, v. S. CHATER,, 915 F. Supp. 954 (N.D. Ind. 1996)

. . . Section 404.1569 of Regulations No. 4 and Rule 201.21 of Table No. 1, Appendix 2, Subpart P, Regulations . . .

STUPAKEVICH, v. S. CHATER,, 907 F. Supp. 632 (E.D.N.Y. 1995)

. . . capacity to perform the full range of sedentary work, Section 404.1569 of Regulation No. 4 and Rules 201.21 . . .

LAPLANTE, v. E. SHALALA, Of, 898 F. Supp. 30 (D. Mass. 1995)

. . . Accordingly, under Rule 201.21 of the “Grid,” LaPlante was not disabled for purposes of receiving either . . .

V. JIMENEZ, v. E. SHALALA,, 879 F. Supp. 1069 (D. Colo. 1995)

. . . Therefore, the ALJ cited to appendix rules 201.21 and 201.27 (20 C.F.R. Subpt. . . .

D. LLOYD, v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES,, 876 F. Supp. 996 (N.D. Ill. 1995)

. . . Under Rule 201.21, Table No. 1, the ALJ found Lloyd not disabled when he last met the earning requirements . . .

KOSECK, v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES,, 865 F. Supp. 1000 (W.D.N.Y. 1994)

. . . P, Appendix 2, Rule 201.21, 201.22. . . . The ALJ referred to Rule 201.21 and 201.22 of the regulations which provide that individuals between . . . Pt. 404, Subpart P, App. 2, §§ 201.21, 201.22 (1993). . . .

J. CHECKOSKY, A. v. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, In J. CHECKOSKY A. In J. CHECKOSKY A., 23 F.3d 452 (D.C. Cir. 1994)

. . . . § 201.21(f). . . . .

S. WILLIAMS, v. SHALALA,, 842 F. Supp. 362 (N.D. Ind. 1993)

. . . for sedentary work, and the claimant’s age, education, and work experience, section 404.1569 and Rule 201.21 . . .

E. GATHRIGHT, v. E. SHALALA,, 872 F. Supp. 893 (D.N.M. 1993)

. . . Section 200.00(a), Appendix 2 of Regulations No. 4 and Social Security Ruling 83-11) Rules 201.21, 201.22 . . . Since the claimant’s medical-vocational profile matches the above factors, Rules 201.21, 201.22, 201.28 . . . Reference to Rule(s) 201.21, 201.22, 201.28 and 201.29, Table No. 1, Appendix 2, Subpart P, Regulations . . .

M. SMALLS, v. E. SHALALA,, 996 F.2d 413 (D.C. Cir. 1993)

. . . At this point, the ALJ applied Rule 201.21 of the grids to Ms. Smalls’ case. . . . Rule 201.21 applies to a “younger individual” (45-49 years) with a high school education or more and . . . Smalls was not disabled because, according to Rule 201.21, there are “sedentary” jobs in sufficient numbers . . .

CREIGHTON, v. W. SULLIVAN, M. D., 798 F. Supp. 1359 (N.D. Ind. 1992)

. . . impairments further diminishing the occupational base administratively noticed in connection with Rule 201.21 . . .

A. GRAHAM, v. W. SULLIVAN,, 794 F. Supp. 1045 (D. Kan. 1992)

. . . for sedentary work, and the claimant’s age, education, and work experience, section 404.1569 and Rule 201.21 . . .

RUSSELL, v. W. SULLIVAN, M. D., 950 F.2d 542 (8th Cir. 1991)

. . . Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 2, Rule 201.21. . . . education, work experience, and capacity for a full range of sedentary work, the ALJ concluded that Rule 201.21 . . . P, App. 2, Rule 201.21. The record supports this application of the grid. . . . semiskilled work experience whose skills are not transferable to sedentary work is “not disabled” under Rule 201.21 . . .

YOUNG, v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH HUMAN SERVICES,, 925 F.2d 146 (6th Cir. 1990)

. . . . § 404.1569 and Grid Rule 201.21, Pt. 404, Subpt. . . .

W. REYNOLDS, v. R. BOWEN, M. D., 844 F.2d 451 (7th Cir. 1988)

. . . The AU then applied Rules 201.21 and 201.28 as set forth in Table 1, Subpart P, Appendix 2. . . . Rule 201.28 is identical to Rule 201.21 except it is for individuals aged 18 to 44. II. A. Mr. . . . However, transferability of skills is not an issue under Rules 201.21 and 201.28. . . . Rules 201.21 and 201.28 take into account the fact that an applicant’s skills are nontransferable. . . . Rules 201.21 and 201.28. . See footnote 2. . . .

C. CRIST, v. R. BOWEN,, 682 F. Supp. 412 (N.D. Ind. 1988)

. . . work experience, Section 404.1569 of Regulations No. 4 and 416.969 of Regulations No. 16, and Rule 201.21 . . .

G. BRASSARD v. HECKLER,, 646 F. Supp. 1152 (D. Vt. 1985)

. . . notwithstanding Plaintiff’s nonexertional visual impairment, applied the grid and concluded that Rule 201.21 . . .

R. HAMMOND, v. M. HECKLER,, 765 F.2d 424 (4th Cir. 1985)

. . . See Rule 201.21, Table No. 1 of Appendix 2, 20 C.F.R. § 404, Subpart P. . . .

BUTTRON, v. M. HECKLER,, 610 F. Supp. 763 (S.D.N.Y. 1985)

. . . Given Buttron’s status as a younger individual with one year of college, the AU applied Rule 201.21 of . . .

A. TAMBORRA, v. M. HECKLER,, 606 F. Supp. 1023 (S.D.N.Y. 1985)

. . . Applying Rule 201.21 of Appendix 2, Subpart P, of the Regulations, he found that Tamborra was not disabled . . .

SECURITY AND LAW ENFORCEMENT EMPLOYEES, DISTRICT COUNCIL AMERICAN FEDERATION OF STATE, COUNTY AND MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES, AFL- CIO, CLAY, F. J. L. E. Jr. L. v. CAREY, A. III,, 737 F.2d 187 (2d Cir. 1984)

. . . the commencement of employment a rule book containing this rule or its quite-similar successor, Rule 201.21 . . . When Hoe arrived with the supervisors, Rule 201.21 was. read to him, he was ordered to prepare for a . . . for examination”; that the district court grant a declaratory judgment that the enforcement of Rule 201.21 . . . plaintiff class; that the district court grant a declaratory judgment that the enforcement of Rule 201.21 . . . of an action to pay damages to a third party as a result of complying with an order to enforce Rule 201.21 . . .

GRAHAM, v. M. HECKLER,, 580 F. Supp. 1238 (S.D.N.Y. 1984)

. . . The AU committed an error of law in finding No. 9 of his decision, in which he found that Rule 201.21 . . . Although it does not affect the result, we note that the ALJ’s findings refer to Rule 201.21 as applicable . . .

S. HAYNES, v. M. HECKLER,, 716 F.2d 483 (8th Cir. 1983)

. . . corresponding table in Appendix 2, and determined that her characteristics fit the criteria of Rule 201.21 . . .

T. RANDOLPHI, v. S. SCHWEIKER,, 532 F. Supp. 579 (N.D. Cal. 1982)

. . . Compare Rule 201.21 with Rule 201.14 of Appendix 2. . . .

P. SMITH v. S. SCHWEIKER,, 520 F. Supp. 27 (D.N.H. 1981)

. . . It appears that rule 201.21 would actually be the rule applicable to plaintiff in this table since in . . . The ALJ found the plaintiff capable of sedentary work, a criteria of both Rule 201.24 and 201.21 of table . . .

STEADMAN v. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, 450 U.S. 91 (U.S. 1981)

. . . . §§ 201.17 (g) (2), 201.21. Section 17 (a) of the Securities Act of 1933, 15 U. S. . . .

ARTHUR LIPPER CORPORATION III, v. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION,, 547 F.2d 171 (2d Cir. 1976)

. . . Rule 21(f) of the Commission's Rules of Practice, 17 C.F.R. 201.21(f), allows a member who was not present . . .

GROSS, v. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION,, 418 F.2d 103 (2d Cir. 1969)

. . . Rule 21(d), Securities and Exchange Commission Rules of Practice, 17 C.F.R. 201.21(d). . . .

GEARHART OTIS, INC. D. Jr. V. v. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, 348 F.2d 798 (D.C. Cir. 1965)

. . . . § 201.21(e) (1964), specifically provides for the filing of a petition for rehearing before the Commission . . .

UNITED STATES v. STANDARD OIL COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA,, 270 F.2d 50 (2d Cir. 1959)

. . . an upper limit to the prices that may be approved by EOA for purchases in bulk of commodities (see § 201.21 . . .

UNITED STATES v. STANDARD OIL COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA,, 155 F. Supp. 121 (S.D.N.Y. 1957)

. . . and published in the Federal Register, 14 F.R. 2166, are as follows: “Subpart D — Price Provisions “§ 201.21 . . . an upper limit to the prices that may be approved by ECA for purchases in bulk of commodities (see § 201.21 . . .

FAMILY SECURITY LIFE INS. CO. v. DANIEL,, 79 F. Supp. 62 (E.D.S.C. 1948)

. . . companies, New York Insurance Law, Consolidated Laws of New York, c. 28, § 244, and Wisconsin Statutes, § 201.21 . . .

OSBORN v. OZLIN, 310 U.S. 53 (U.S. 1940)

. . . companies, New York Insurance Law, Consolidated Laws of New York, c. 28, § 244, and Wisconsin Statutes, § 201.21 . . .