alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
## IN THE COU RT O F CR IM IN AL AP PE ALS OF TE XAS
N O . A P - 75, 904

EX PA R TE C H A R LE S A N I SO N R O G ER S, JR. , A ppl i c ant

ON AP P LI CAT I ON F OR A W RI T OF HABE AS CORP US CAUS E N O. F 7 8 8 7 - A I N T HE 8 DI S TR I CT COURT TH FROM FRANK LI N CO UNTY

P er cur i am . O P I N I O N Pur s u a n t to th e p r o v is io n s o f A rti c le 1 1
. 0 7 o f th e T e xa s Co d e o f Cr im in a l Pr o c edure , the cler k of the trial c ourt transmitted to this C ourt this application for a writ of habea s corpus. Ex pa rte Y oung , 418 S.W .2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967) . Applicant wa s convicted of possession of a
co n tr o ll e d s u

b s ta n c e w it h in te n t to d e li v e r a n d s e n te n c e d to s ixt y ( 6 0 ) y e a r s ’ im

p r is o n me n t. The Six th Court of Appe als dismissed Applicant’s appe al. Ro ge rs v . S tat e , N o . 0 6
- 0 6
- 0 0 1 4 5
- CR ( T e x. App. – Texarkana , 2006, no pet.) (not de signated for publication.) Ap pli c a nt c on te nd s th a t his c ou ns e l r e nd e re d in e ff e c tiv e a ssi sta

nc e be c a us e he fai led to timely file a notice o f ap p ea l . The re cord shows tha t the Six th Court of Appea ls dismi ssedRoge rs -- 2

Applicant’s dire ct appe al bec ause the notice of a ppeal wa s untimely

filed and that Applicant had not
wa ive d h is a

pp e llate ri g hts
. On Au g us t 22 , 200 7, thi s Cour t re mand e d this a

pp lic a tio n to ge t an a ff

ida vit fr om c ou ns e l. On Aug ust 27, 2007, the trial judge order ed appe llate counse l to file an affidavit, but counsel failed to respond. On Ma

rch 19, 2008, the trial judg e ente red f indings of f

act a nd conclu s i o n s of law
rec ommending that relief be g rante d. We find that Applicant is entitled to the opportu n i t y to file an out-of

-time appe al of the judgme nt of conviction in Caus e No
. F7887- A from the 8th J udicial District Court of Fr anklin County . Applicant is order ed re turned to that time at which he may g ive a written notice of a ppeal
s o that he may

then, with the aid of c ounsel, obtain a mea ningf ul appea l. All tim e limits shall be
c a lc ulate d a s if the se nte nc e ha d b e e n im po se d o n th e da te on

wh ic h th e mand a te of

thi s Co ur t is su e s. We h old that, s ho uld Ap pli c a nt de sir e to pr os e c ute a n ap pe a l, he mus t tak e a ff ir ma tiv e ste ps to f

ile
a wr itt e n n oti c e of

a pp e a l in the tr ia l c ourt

wi thi n 3 0 d a y s a ft e r t

he mand a te of

thi s Co ur t is su e s.

Deliver ed: April 30, 2008 Do No t Pu

bli sh
EX-10.1



 Exhibit 10.1 
 January 5, 2016 
 [Executive Name 
 Executive Home Address 
 Executive Home Address] 

Dear [Executive]: 
 Reference is made to the
Employment Agreement dated as of November 1, 2004, as amended in a letter amendment dated as of December 23, 2008, between you and AEP Industries Inc. (the “Employment Agreement”), and which is hereby further
amended as provided below. Capitalized terms used but not defined in this letter shall have the meaning specified in the Employment Agreement. 
  

	 	1.	The pre-amble (first paragraph) of the Employment Agreement shall be deleted and replaced with the following paragraph: 


 

	 	  	This Employment Agreement, dated May 9, 2005, (and amended in letter amendments dated December 23, 2008 and January 5, 2016), by and between AEP
Industries Inc., a Delaware corporation having its offices at 95 Chestnut Ridge Road, Montvale, New Jersey 07645 (the “Company”), and Executive Name (the “Executive”), presently residing at Executive
Home Address, is entered into and shall be effective as of November 1, 2004 (the “Effective Date”.) 

  

	 	2.	The following language in Section 4(a)(i) shall be deleted: “[Q: change re: termination by the Company without Cause, e.g. downsize]”.


  

	 	3.	The following language in Section 4(b) shall be deleted: “[Company Policy must be written]”. 


 

	 	4.	The following language in Section 10(e) shall be deleted: “[Q-add: except that Executive shall be entitled to be reimbursed for his reasonable legal fees if
he is successful in enforcing the provisions requiring payment by the Company.]” 








 [Executive Name] 
 January 5, 2016 
 Page Two 

 

	 	5.	The second paragraph of Section 10(g) shall be deleted and replaced with the following paragraph: 


If to the Company, to: 
 AEP Industries Inc. 
 95 Chestnut Ridge Road, 

Montvale, NJ 07645 
 Facsimile: (201) 807-6801 
 Attention: Paul M. Feeney

 Executive Vice President, Finance and Chief Financial Officer 

With a copy (which shall not constitute notice) to: 

Honigman Miller Schwartz and Cohn LLP 

660 Woodward Avenue, 
 2290 First National Building, 
 Detroit, MI 48226-3506 

Facsimile: (313) 465-7317 
 Attention: Michael S. Ben, Esq. 
 If to the Executive, to
Executive’s address set forth on the revised ‘Exhibit A’ signature page hereto. 
  

	 	6.	‘EXHIBIT A, Executive Data Sheet for Signature Page’ shall be deleted and replaced with the attached ‘EXHIBIT A, Executive Data Sheet for Signature Page,
Revised January 5, 2016 

 The Employment Agreement, as hereby amended, shall remain in full force and effect. 

 

			
	Very truly yours,
	
	AEP Industries Inc.
		
	By:	 	 
	
	Its:


  

	
	The Above is Agreed to
	And Accepted:
	
	 
	[Executive Name]
### §7102. Duties of the Interagency Committee

#### (a) In general

The Interagency Committee shall—

(1) monitor, coordinate, and promote the plans, programs, and operations of the departments and agencies of the Federal Government that may contribute to the establishment and growth of women's business enterprise;

(2) develop and promote new public sector initiatives, policies, programs, and plans designed to foster women's business enterprise;

(3) review, monitor, and coordinate plans and programs, developed in the public sector, which affect the ability of women-owned businesses to obtain capital and credit;

(4) promote and assist, as appropriate, in the development of surveys of women-owned business; and

(5) design a comprehensive plan for a joint public-private sector effort to facilitate growth and development of women's business enterprise, which plan shall, not later than 1 year after October 22, 1994, be submitted to the President for review.

#### (b) Meetings

The Interagency Committee shall meet not less than biannually at such times as the Interagency Committee determines to be necessary to perform the duties under subsection (a). A majority of the members of the Committee shall constitute a quorum for the approval of recommendations or reports issued pursuant to this section.

#### (c) Interaction with Council

In performing its duties under subsection (a), the Interagency Committee shall consult with the Council. The Interagency Committee may meet jointly with the Council at the discretion of the chairperson of the Interagency Committee and the chairperson of the Council, but not less frequently than twice annually. The chairperson of the Interagency Committee shall serve as chairperson of any joint meetings of the Interagency Committee and the Council.

(Pub. L. 100–533, title IV, §402, as added Pub. L. 103–403, title IV, §413, Oct. 22, 1994, 108 Stat. 4193.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 402 of Pub. L. 100–533, title IV, Oct. 25, 1988, 102 Stat. 2694, related to duties of the National Women's Business Council, prior to the general amendment of title IV of Pub. L. 100–533 by Pub. L. 103–403. See section 7106 of this title.
§ 11.9 Administrative offset. ( a ) *Collection.* The organization head may collect a claim pursuant to 31 U.S.C. 3716 from a person, organization, or entity other than an agency of the United States Government by administrative offset of monies other than salaries payable by the government. Collection by administrative offset shall be undertaken where the claim is certain in amount, where offset is feasible and desirable and not otherwise prohibited, where the applicable statute of limitations has not expired, and where the offset is in the best interest of the United States.
( b ) *Withholding of payment.* Prior to the completion of the procedures described in paragraph (c) of this section, the Department may withhold a payment to be made to a debtor, if: ( 1 ) Failure to withhold payment would substantially prejudice the Department's ability to collect the debt; and
( 2 ) The time before the payment is to be made does not reasonably permit completion of the procedures described in paragraph (c) of this section. Such prior withholding shall be followed promptly by the completion of the procedures described in paragraph (c) of this section.
( c ) *Debtor's rights.* Unless the procedures described in paragraph (b) of this section are used, prior to collecting any claim by administrative offset, the organization head shall provide the debtor with the following: ( 1 ) Written notification of the nature and amount of the claim, the intention of the organization head to collect the claim through administrative offset, and a statement of the rights of the debtor under this paragraph;
( 2 ) An opportunity to inspect and copy the records of the Department with respect to the claim;
( 3 ) An opportunity to have the Department's determination of indebtedness reviewed by the organization head. Any request for review by the debtor shall be in writing and be submitted to the Department within 30 days of the date of the notice of the offset. The organization head may waive the time limit for requesting review for good cause shown by the debtor; and
( 4 ) An opportunity to enter into a written agreement for the repayment of the amount of the claim at the discretion of the Department. If the procedures described in paragraph (b) of this section are employed, the procedures described in this paragraph shall be effected after offset.
( d ) *Interest.* The Department is authorized to assess interest and related charges on debts that are not subject to 31 U.S.C. 3717 to the extent authorized under the common law or other applicable statutory authority.
#### Athens Manufacturing Company *v.*Malcolm *et al.*

June 16, 1910.

Complaint. Before Judge Brand. Clarke superior court.

June 4, 1909.

*Cobb & Erwin,*for plaintiff in error.

*W. M. Smith*and *H. C. Tuck,*contra.

Beck, J.

1. Where on the trial of a case it was material for the jury to determine whether the period of time within which the privilege of exercising a certain option was extended to the date as testified to by one party or to a later date as given in the testimony of the other party, and the latter having testified that at the time. of making the agreement for the extension of the time he made a written entiy in a memorandum book of the agreement in the presence of the other party, such memorandum was competent evidence to corroborate the testimony of the party offering it, and it was error for the court to exclude it. *Reviere*v. *Powell & Murphy,*61 *Ga.*30 (34 Am. R. 94).

2. The memorandum book should have been admitted in evidence although at the time it was tendered counsel failed to state in explicit terms what he proposed to prove by it, it appearing from d colloquy betvreen counsel for both parties and the court, in reference to the admissibility of the memorandum, and from the testimony of the witness who had made the memorandum, that court and counsel must have known what entry in the book was offered in evidence and what were the contents of that entry. *Judgment reversed.*

*All the Justices concur.*
II 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 862 

To repeal the sunset for collateral requirements for Small Business 

Administration disaster loans. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 25, 2019 

Mr. KENNEDY (for himself, Mr. BOOKER, and Mr. RUBIO) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Small 

Business and Entrepreneurship 

A BILL 

To repeal the sunset for collateral requirements for Small 

Business Administration disaster loans. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Rebuilding Small Busi5 nesses After Disasters Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. REPEAL OF SUNSET FOR COLLATERAL REQUIRE7 MENTS FOR SBA DISASTER LOANS. 

8 Section 2102 of the RISE After Disaster Act of 2015 

9 (Public Law 114–88; 129 Stat. 690) is amended— 

10 (1) by striking ‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—’’; and 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
2 

•S 862 IS

1 (2) by striking subsections (b) and (c). 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-7809

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

JAMES PRESTON SMITH,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern 

District of West Virginia, at Beckley. Irene C. Berger, 

District Judge. (5:99-cr-00161-1; 5:09-cv-01257)

Submitted: February 26, 2013 Decided: February 28, 2013

Before MOTZ, WYNN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

James Preston Smith, Appellant Pro Se. John J. Frail, Assistant 

United States Attorney, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

James Preston Smith seeks to appeal the district 

court’s order adopting the magistrate judge’s recommendation and 

denying as successive his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2012) 

motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or 

judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2253(c)(1)(B) (2006). A certificate of appealability will not 

issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a 

constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006). When the 

district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies 

this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would 

find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional 

claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 

484 (2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 

(2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural 

grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive 

procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a 

debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 

529 U.S. at 484-85. 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude 

that Smith has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we 

deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We 

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal 
3

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before 

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
#### In the Matter of the Arbitration between Gunze Silk Corporation, Respondent-Appellant, and Charles Rudolph Corporation of New York, Appellant-Respondent.

First Department,

July 2, 1943.

*542*Frank C. Fisher*of counsel *(Caesar L. Pitassy*with him on the brief; *Dwight, Harris, Koegel & Caskey,*attorneys), for appellant-respondent.

*Gabriel Kaslow*of counsel *(Frank L. Weil*with him on the brief; *Weil, Gotshal & Manges,*attorneys), for respondent-appellant.

*Per Curiam.*

The contracts involved herein were for delivery of certain quantities of raw silk during August and September, 1941. On July 26, 1941, the Office of Production Management issued General Preference Order M-22 prohibiting all persons from making or accepting delivery of raw silk unless specifically authorized by the Director of Priorities (see 6 Federal Register 3731; also Code of Federal Regulations, tit. 32, ch. 9, § 963.1). This was later interpreted by that governmental agency as not to prohibit transfer of title documents; but on October 16, 1941, the order was amended to prohibit transfer of title documents (6 Federal Register 5290). Performance of the present contract, which called for physical delivery of raw silk, was completely frustrated by the governmental decree, and the arbitration clauses of the contracts were thus rendered unenforcible *(Matter of Kahn & Feldman, Inc. [Rothschild],*265 App. Div. 470, affd. 290 N. Y. 781).

The. order should be modified by granting a permanent stay of the arbitration, and, as so modified affirmed, with twenty dollars costs and disbursements to the petitioner.

Towrley, Dore, Corar and Callahan concur; Mártir, P. J., dissents.

Order modified by granting a permanent stay of the arbitration, and, as so modified affirmed, with twenty dollars costs and disbursements to the petitioner. Settle order on notice.
Exhibit






EXHIBIT 10.25
SUMMARY OF KEY TERMS OF COMPENSATION ARRANGEMENTS WITH PACIFICORP'S NAMED EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND DIRECTORS 


PacifiCorp's named executive officers (other than its Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Gregory E. Abel) each receive an annual salary and participate in health insurance and other benefit plans on the same basis as other employees, as well as certain other compensation and benefit plans described in PacifiCorp's Annual Report on Form 10-K. Mr. Abel is employed by PacifiCorp's parent company, Berkshire Hathaway Energy Company ("BHE") and is not directly compensated by PacifiCorp. PacifiCorp reimburses BHE for the cost of Mr. Abel's time spent on PacifiCorp matters, including compensation paid to him by BHE, pursuant to an intercompany administrative services agreement among BHE and its subsidiaries. 


The named executive officers are also eligible to receive a cash incentive award under PacifiCorp's Annual Incentive Plan ("AIP"). The AIP provides for a discretionary annual cash award that is determined on a subjective basis and paid in December. In addition to the AIP, the named executive officers are eligible to receive discretionary cash performance awards periodically during the year to reward the accomplishment of significant non-recurring tasks or projects. The named executive officers are participants in PacifiCorp's Long-Term Incentive Partnership Plan ("LTIP"). A copy of the LTIP is incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.10 to PacifiCorp's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2014.


Base salary for named executive officers for PacifiCorp's fiscal year ending December 31, 2016 (excluding Mr. Abel) is shown in the following table:


	
					
	Name and Title
	 
	Base Salary

	 
	 
	 

	Nikki L. Kobliha
	 
	$
	203,900
	


	Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
	 
	 

	 
	 
	 

	Stefan A. Bird
	 
	338,000
	


	President and Chief Executive Officer, Pacific Power
	 
	 

	 
	 
	 

	Cindy A. Crane
	 
	338,000
	


	President and Chief Executive Officer, Rocky Mountain Power
	 
	 

	 
	 
	 

	R. Patrick Reiten
	 
	338,000
	


	President and Chief Executive Officer, PacifiCorp Transmission
	 
	 






Messrs. Bird and Reiten and Ms. Crane are also directors of PacifiCorp, but do not receive additional compensation for their service as directors other than what they receive as employees of PacifiCorp. Messrs. Abel, Anderson, Goodman and Mses. Hocken and Kelly are directors of PacifiCorp as well as employees of BHE, but do not receive additional compensation for their service as directors of PacifiCorp other than what they receive as employees of BHE.
§ 35.15 Notices of cancellation or termination. ( a ) *General rule.* When a rate schedule, tariff or service agreement or part thereof required to be on file with the Commission is proposed to be cancelled or is to terminate by its own terms and no new rate schedule, tariff or service agreement or part thereof is to be filed in its place, a filing must be made to cancel such rate schedule, tariff or service agreement or part thereof at least sixty days but not more than one hundred-twenty days prior to the date such cancellation or termination is proposed to take effect. A copy of such notice to the Commission shall be duly posted. With such notice, each filing party shall submit a statement giving the reasons for the proposed cancellation or termination, and a list of the affected purchasers to whom the notice has been provided. For good cause shown, the Commission may by order provide that the notice of cancellation or termination shall be effective as of a date prior to the date of filing or prior to the date the filing would become effective in accordance with these rules.
( b ) *Applicability.* ( 1 ) The provisions of paragraph (a) of this section shall apply to all contracts for unbundled transmission service and all power sale contracts: ( i ) Executed prior to July 9, 1996; or
( ii ) If unexecuted, filed with the Commission prior to July 9, 1996.
( 2 ) Any power sales contract executed on or after July 9, 1996 that is to terminate by its own terms shall not be subject to the provisions of paragraph (a) of this section.
( c ) *Notice.* Any public utility providing jurisdictional services under a power sales contract that is not subject to the provisions of paragraph (a) of this section shall notify the Commission of the date of the termination of such contract within 30 days after such termination takes place.
[Order 888, 61 FR 21692, May 10, 1996, as amended by Order 714, 73 FR 57532, Oct. 3, 2008]
### §4903. Functions of Committee

The Committee shall advise the Secretary of Commerce, as appropriate, on the establishment, structure, contents, and operation of a National Trade Data Bank in accordance with section 4906 of this title in order to assure the timely collection of accurate data and to provide the private sector and government officials efficient access to economic and trade data collected by the Federal Government for purposes of policymaking and export promotion.

(Pub. L. 100–418, title V, §5403, Aug. 23, 1988, 102 Stat. 1464.)
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 50 (Tuesday, March 15, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 13994]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-5905]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary


Termination of Department of Defense Federal Advisory Committees

AGENCY: DoD.

ACTION: Termination of Federal Advisory Committee.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: Under the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act of 
1972, (5 U.S.C. Appendix), 41 CFR 102-3.55(a)(1), the Government in the 
Sunshine Act of 1976 (5 U.S.C. 552b), and the Sunset provisions of 
Section 506 of Public Law 111-84, effective March 5, 2011 the 
Department of Defense gives notice that it is terminating the 
Independent Panel Review of Judge Advocate Requirements of the 
Department of the Navy.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Contact Jim Freeman, Deputy Advisory 
Committee Management Officer for the Department of Defense, 703-601-
6128.

    Dated: March 4, 2011.
Morgan F. Park,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 2011-5905 Filed 3-14-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-08-P