7 U.S. Code § 2016
L. 110–246, § 4115(a)(2), inserted heading, substituted “Benefits” for “Coupons”, and struck out before period at end “: Provided further, That eligible households using coupons to purchase food may receive cash in change therefor so long as the cash received does not equal or exceed the value of the lowest coupon denomination
Actived: 6 days ago
26 U.S. Code § 165
a bond, debenture, note, or certificate, or other evidence of indebtedness, issued by a corporation or by a government or political subdivision thereof, with interest coupons or in registered form. (3) Securities in affiliated corporation For purposes of paragraph (1), any security in a corporation affiliated with a taxpayer which is a domestic
7 CFR § 249.10
(1) If the State agency elects to replace lost, stolen or damaged SFMNP coupons, it must describe its system for doing so in the State Plan. (2) The State agency must use uniform SFMNP coupons within its jurisdiction. (3) SFMNP coupons must include, at a minimum, the following information: (i) The last date by which the participant may use the
48 CFR § 552.203-71
Any advertisement by the Contractor, including price-off coupons, that refers to a military resale activity shall contain the following statement: “This advertisement is neither paid for nor sponsored, in whole or in part, by any element of the United States Government.”. (End of clause)
26 U.S. Code § 274
cash, cash equivalents, gift cards, gift coupons, or gift certificates (other than arrangements conferring only the right to select and receive tangible personal property from a limited array of such items pre-selected or pre-approved by the employer), or
26 CFR § 1.451-2
Amounts payable with respect to interest coupons which have matured and are payable but which have not been cashed are constructively received in the taxable year during which the coupons mature, unless it can be shown that there are no funds available for payment of the interest during such year.
26 U.S. Code § 461
Except as provided in regulations prescribed by the Secretary, amounts paid to, or credited to the accounts of, depositors or holders of accounts as dividends or interest on their deposits or withdrawable accounts (if such amounts paid or credited are withdrawable on demand subject only to customary notice to withdraw) by a mutual savings bank not having capital stock represented by …
21 U.S. Code § 333
21 U.S. Code § 333 - Penalties. U.S. Code. Notes. prev | next. (a) Violation of section 331 of this title; second violation; intent to defraud or mislead. (1) Any person who violates a provision of section 331 of this title shall be imprisoned for not more than one year or fined not more than $1,000, or both. (2)
21 CFR § 1140.16
(a) Restriction on product names. A manufacturer shall not use a trade or brand name of a nontobacco product as the trade or brand name for a cigarette or smokeless tobacco product, except for a tobacco product whose trade or brand name was on both a tobacco product and a nontobacco product that were sold in the United States on January 1, 1995. (b) Minimum cigarette package size.
12 CFR § 1026.41
(A) Has charged off the loan in accordance with loan-loss provisions and will not charge any additional fees or interest on the account; and (B) Provides, within 30 days of charge-off or the most recent periodic statement, a periodic statement, clearly and conspicuously labeled “Suspension of Statements & Notice of Charge Off - Retain This
1 CCR 201-4
Off-road, agricultural, electricity generation, and railroad uses must still qualify for the exemption as described in 39-26-102(21)(a) C.R.S. and as further described in (1)(a) of this rule. Thus, departmental guidance issued pursuant to this statute and rule apply for the period 3/1/2010-6/30/2012, including FYI 71 and the use of the DR 1666
18 U.S. Code § 1956
Pub. L. 102–550, § 1534(3), which directed insertion of “, any felony violation of section 9(c) of the Food Stamp Act of 1977 (relating to food stamp fraud) involving a quantity of coupons having a value of not less than $5,000, or any felony violation of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act” before semicolon, was executed by making
CLARK v. IOWA CITY. Supreme Court US Law LII / Legal
For this interest ten coupons, or interest warrants in negotiable form, for $50 each, were annexed to the bonds. From ten of these bonds the coupons were subsequently cut off, and long before the commencement of this suit—which was on the 31st of January, 1874—were negotiated and by purchase and delivery became the property of a certain Clark.
1. A pari-mutuel cashier in exchange for cash, gaming chips, slot tokens or coupons; 2. A credit voucher machine in exchange for cash; or. 3. A self-service pari-mutuel machine as a simulcast payout or as the balance returnable after a simulcast wager has been placed. "Credit voucher machine" means a mechanical, electrical or other device
45 CFR § 156.122
(a) A health plan does not provide essential health benefits unless it: (1) Subject to the exception in paragraph (b) of this section, covers at least the greater of: (i) One drug in every United States Pharmacopeia (USP) category and class; or (ii) The same number of prescription drugs in each category and class as the EHB-benchmark plan; (2) Submits its formulary drug list to the Exchange
NATIONAL BANK v. GRAHAM. Supreme Court US Law LII
The cashier cut off and collected the coupons, and placed the proceeds to her credit. The bonds, therefore, entered into the legitimate and proper business of the institution. But it is unnecessary to pursue this view of the subject further, because we think there is another ground free from doubt upon which our judgment may be rested.
AMY v. DUBUQUE. Supreme Court US Law LII / Legal
The coupons in suit matured more than ten years prior to its commencement. Upon the non-payment, at maturity, of each coupon, the holder had a complete cause of action. In other words, he might have instituted his action to recover the amount thereof at their respective maturities.
28 CFR § 2.20
(a) Grade as Category Four, except as provided below. (b) If the relationship is clearly consensual and the victim is at least fourteen years old, and the age difference between the victim and offender is less than four years, grade as Category One. (c) If the victim is less than twelve years old, grade as Category Seven. (d) If the offender is an adult who has abused a position of trust (e.g
CALIFORNIA, Petitioner v. Billy GREENWOOD and Dyanne Van
For example, a nationally syndicated consumer columnist has suggested that apartment dwellers obtain cents-off coupons by "mak[ing] friends with the fellow who handles the trash" in their buildings, and has recounted the tale of "the 'Rich lady' from Westmont who once a week puts on rubber gloves and hip boots and wades into the town garbage
25 CFR § 547.2
Non-volatile memory that retains its data when the power is turned off and that can be electronically erased and reprogrammed without being removed from the circuit board. Game software. The operational program or programs that govern the play, display of results, and/or awarding of prizes or credits for Class II games. Gaming equipment.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA v. CORNELL. Supreme Court US Law
From other certificates, on which some ink-marks still appeared, he cut off the coupons, and pasted them over the partially effaced marks. In this condition no signs or marks of cancellation or redemption were visible on the certificates, but some of them still had a soiled or stained appearance. The stolen certificates were sold by Farnham to
LITTLE and others v. GILES and others. Supreme Court
Pillsbury, 114 U. S. 138, S. C. 5 Sup. Ct. Rep. 807, where certain bonds of a municipal corporation were declared void by a state court as issued under an unconstitutional act, and thereupon the holders of some of the coupons cut them off, and transferred them to a citizen of another state at much less than their face value, and took his note
MARYE, Auditor, etc., and others v. PARSONS. Supreme
The coupons are tendered in payment, not as money, for they have no quality of money, but as a set-off which, as is insisted, the state has agreed to allow. The tax-payer stands on this agreement. That is the situation; and that is the whole of it.
ANTHONY v. COUNTY OF JASPER. Supreme Court US Law
Merwin delivered them during the same month, with the first two coupons cut off, to the Union Savings Bank of St. Louis, for the use of Edward Burgess, a contractor for building the road. In November, Burgess sold them to one Wilson at fifty-five cents on the dollar, and the bank gave them up to the purchaser on his order.
HOLLISTER, Collector of Internal Revenue, v. BENEDICT
Thus, to indicate 126 gallons, 120 being the whole number of the stamp, the coupon slip is cut off between the numbers 6 and 7, and the piece so cut off is moistened on the back and permanently attached to the face of the stamp, the 6 being the significant figure of the coupon.
WOOD et al. v. GUARANTEE TRUST & SAFE DEPOSIT CO
He cut off the coupons that were due and unpaid, so long as the bonds remained in his possession, and put up some money to redeem coupons which fell due on bonds that had been sold, so long as he was still engaged in selling other bonds. It looks very much as if Mr. Starr had dug a pit, and was anxiously keeping the pathway to it in good order.
UNITED STATES v. STATE OF LOUISIANA. Supreme Court US
This being so, it follows that the limitation of section 1069 of the Revised Statutes is a bar against the recovery of the item of $13,602.71 of the 5 per cent. fund, credited May 8, 1879, and that the amount of the set-off of $31,080, for coupons falling due up to November 1, 1887, on the Indian trust bonds, is a valid set-off against the
26 CFR § 1.165-5
See section 165 (g) (1). The amount so allowed as a deduction shall be subject to the limitations upon capital losses described in paragraph (c) (3) of § 1.165-1 . (d) Loss on worthless securities of an affiliated corporation -. (1) Deductible as an ordinary loss. If a taxpayer which is a domestic corporation owns any security of a domestic or
CROMWELL v. COUNTY OF SAC. COUNTY OF SAC v. CROMWELL
2. As to the other two bonds in suit,—those payable in 1868 and 1869,—and coupons annexed, it appears that when Clark purchased them, on the 20th of May, 1863, there were attached to each the coupon due on the first of that month and all subsequent unmatured coupons.
PARSONS v. JACKSON. Supreme Court US Law LII / Legal
PARSONS v. JACKSON. 99 U.S. 434. 25 L.Ed. 457. v. JACKSON. APPEAL from the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Louisiana. This is an appeal by Edwin Parsons, George Parsons, E. G. Pearl, Charles Parsons, and Scott, Zerega, & Co., from the decree of the court below, confirming the report of the master disallowing as a charge
BOARD OF SUP'RS OF GRENADA CO. and others v. BROWN and
In 1872 and 1873 the county assessed and collected taxes to pay the coupons maturing at these respective periods on all the bonds in suit. The coupons for those years have been fully paid. The county, by its duly-accredited agent, was represented at all the stockholders' meetings of the company, and voted a stock subscription of $100,000.
LYTLE v. TOWN OF LANSING. Supreme Court US Law LII
LYTLE. v. TOWN OF LANSING. No. 79. January 3, 1893. Suit by the town of Lansing against John T. Lytle, brought in the supreme court of the state of New York, for cancellation of certain bonds. The defendant removed the cause to the circuit court of the United States, and filed a cross bill. Decree for complainant. 38 Fed. Rep. 204.
45 CFR § 156.270
(a) General requirement. A QHP issuer may only terminate enrollment in a QHP through the Exchange as permitted by the Exchange in accordance with § 155.430(b) of this subchapter. (See also § 147.106 of this subchapter for termination of coverage.) (b) Termination of coverage or enrollment notice requirement. If a QHP issuer terminates an enrollee's coverage or enrollment in a QHP through the
POINDEXTER v. GREENHOW, Treasurer, etc. Supreme Court
2. The hustings court was of the opinion that the police justice erred in deciding that he had no jurisdiction, and that the issue in the action might have been tried by him, and that it should be tried by that court on the appeal; but it was also of the opinion that in tendering to the defendant, as part of the tender in payment of the plaintiff's taxes, the coupons mentioned and described
THOMSON v. LEE COUNTY. Supreme Court US Law LII
The coupons attached were in a like negotiable shape; 'promises to pay to the bearer at the Continental Bank, in the city of New York, forty dollars interest on bond No. 1.' Soon after the bonds were issued the county laid a tax to meet the interest due on the coupons.
COUNTY OF CARTER v. SINTON. Supreme Court US Law LII
3. Here the title is 'An act authorizing the county of Carter, and those parts of the counties of Boyd and Elliott taken from Carter county, to compromise and settle with the holders of the bonds and coupons of interest exc uted by Carter county in its subscription to the capital stock of the Lexington & Big Sandy Railroad Company, and to levy and collect a tax for that purpose.'
COUNTY OF DAVIESS v. DICKINSON. Supreme Court US Law
6 S.Ct. 897. 117 U.S. 657. 29 L.Ed. 1026. COUNTY OF DAVIESS v. DICKINSON. Filed April 12, 1886. This was an action brought April 3, 1879, in the circuit court of the United States for the district of Kentucky, by Dickinson against the county of Daviess, on bonds and coupons alleged to have been issued under the statute of Kentucky of February 27, 1867, (chapter 1505,) incorporating the
MCGAHEY v. STATE OF VIRGINIA. BRYAN v. SAME. COOPER v
Edmunds and other cases argued at the same time, decided in February, 1886, and reported in 116 U. S. 550, etc., 6 Sup. Ct. Rep. 501, arise upon certain tax-receivable coupons attached to bonds of the state of Virginia, issued in reduction and liquidation of the state debt under the acts of March 30, 1871, and March 28, 1879. The present
SUPERVISORS v. GALBRAITH. Supreme Court US Law LII
3 'This bond is one of a series of bonds issued and delivered to the Grenada, Houston, and Eastern Railroad Company by Calhoun County, to meet and pay off the amount subscribed by said county to the capital stock of the railroad company aforesaid in pursuance of an act of the legislature of the State of Mississippi, entitled 'An Act to aid in the construction of the Grenada, Houston, and
W. B. WORTHEN CO. ex rel. BOARD OF COM'RS OF STREET
There is no enforceable obligation in the interval to pay installments of the principal or even the accruing coupons. The case is not one in which the chancellor has intervened, either with or without the permission of a statute, to halt the oppressive enforcement of a mortgage by putting off the day of sale or entry for a reasonable time upon
NEW YORK, L. E. & W. R. CO. v. WINTER'S ADM'R. Supreme
4. We think these instructions perfectly correct, and that, upon these points, they embodied substantially the whole law of the case. The gravamen of this action is the wrongful conduct of the conductor who ejected the plaintiff from the train. Whether the plaintiff told nothing but the truth with reference to what occurred on the train between him and the conductor before he was put off and
BARNUM v. TOWN OF OKOLONA. Supreme Court US Law LII
6. Frank D. Barnum, a citizen of Tennessee, brought an action of debt against the town of Okolona at the April term, 1889, of the district court of the United States for the northern district of Mississippi, and averred in his declaration that he was the holder and owner for value, and before the maturity thereof, of 16 bonds of said town, with their coupons attached, which were due and unpaid
COMMISSIONERS OF JOHNSON COUNTY v. JANUARY. Supreme
This court has repeatedly held that paper otherwise negotiable, which on its face shows that which should arouse suspicion and put the taker upon inquiry, cannot be so transferred as to cut off defences which would have been available against the original holder. Fowler v. Brantly, 14 Pet. 318; Goodman v. Simonds, 20 How. 343; Angle v.
PITTSBURGH, C., C. & ST. L. RY. CO. v. LONG ISLAND LOAN
The coupons maturing May 1, 1878, on these 36 bonds, which were attached to them when Lynde purchased, were paid to the latter by the firm of A. Iselin & Co., Wall street, New York, upon presentation by Lynde of the coupons in October, 1878; and the 36 coupons maturing November 1, 1878, were paid to Lynde by the same firm upon the presentation
FARMINGTON VILLAGE CORP. v. PILLSBURY. Supreme Court
This was a suit upon coupons for semi-annual interest on the bonds of the Farmington Village Corporation, and among the defenses set up was one to the effect that the plaintiff was not a bona fide holder of the coupons in suit, but that they were placed in his hands merely for the purpose of bringing a suit in the circuit court of the United States.
RAILWAY COMPANY v. SPRAGUE. Supreme Court US Law LII
At the time of the exchange there were attached to each of the bonds which Mrs. Sprague received all the coupons, beginning from the date of the bonds, sixty in number. Of these coupons two, one payable Oct. 1, 1870, and one payable April 1, 1871, for thirty-five dollars each, were past due and unpaid.
PROVIDENT LIFE & TRUST CO. OF PHILADELPHIA v. MERCER
'Nays, none. Not voting,t wo, as follows: E. I. Massie and A. Johnson.' After this, Pearson, the trustee, decided that the conditions had been performed, and on the _____ day of August, 1888, in the presence of the county judge of the county, delivered the bonds, first cutting off and burning the past-due coupons.
CITY OF LEXINGTON v. BUTLER. Supreme Court US Law
With these statutes in force the city of Lexington, Kentucky, acting under the authority of an act of the legislature of Kentucky, issued in 1853 to the Lexington and Big Sandy Railroad Company, one hundred and fifty bonds, each for $1000, having thirty years to run, and bearing an interest of 6 per cent. per annum, payable semi-annually, for