alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court 

Lansing, Michigan 

April 28, 2006 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 129627(32) Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman, MONIQUE RIVERS, Justices 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 129627 

 COA: 261547 
 Wayne CC: 02-251317-DS

BEVERLY MOORE,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the motion for reconsideration of this Court’s order of 

February 27, 2006 is considered, and it is DENIED, because it does not appear that the 

order was entered erroneously. 

d0424 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

April 28, 2006 

Clerk
Cullen D. Speckhart (VSB No. 79096)

WOLCOTT RIVERS GATES 

919 E. Main Street, Ste. 1040, Richmond, Virginia 23219 

200 Bendix Road, Ste. 300, Virginia Beach, Virginia 23452 

Telephone: (757) 497-6633 

Direct: (757) 470-5566 

Email: cspeckhart@wolriv.com

Counsel to Plaintiff Richard Arrowsmith,

Liquidating Trustee of the HDL Liquidating Trust

IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA

Richmond Division

In re: Chapter 11

HEALTH DIAGNOSTIC LABORATORY, INC., 

et al.,

Case No.: 15-32919-KRH

Debtors.1

Jointly Administered

RICHARD ARROWSMITH AS LIQUIDATING 

TRUSTEE OF THE HDL LIQUIDATING 

TRUST,

Plaintiff,

v.

Adv. Proc. No. 17-03187-KRH

CAROLINA INTERNAL MEDICINE, P.A.,

Defendant.

AMENDED CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, Diana Lyn Curtis McGraw, certify that I am, and at all times during the service of process was, not less 

than 18 years of age and not a party to the matter concerning which service of process was made. I further 

certify that service of the copies of the Complaint [Docket Item No. 1] together with the Order Establishing 

Procedures for Avoidance Action Adversary Proceedings and Alias Summons and Notice in an Adversary 

Proceeding [Docket Item No. 6], were served on August 18, 2017, as follows:

Mail Service: Regular, first class United States mail, postage fully pre-paid and addressed to:

MARK R. CERVI

REGISTERED AGENT, CAROLINA INTERNAL MEDICINE, P.A.

1039 DAVENPORT PLACE

WINTERVILLE, NC 28590

 1 The debtors in these cases, along with the last four digits of each debtor’s federal tax identification number, are: 

Health Diagnostic Laboratory, Inc. (0119), Central Medical Laboratory, LLC (2728), and Integrated Health Leaders, 

LLC (2434)(the “Debtors”).

Case 17-03187-KRH Doc 8 Filed 08/18/17 Entered 08/18/17 12:18:54 Desc Main

 Document Page 1 of 2
MARK R. CERVI

OFFICER OF CAROLINA INTERNAL MEDICINE, P.A.

2317 EXECUTIVE PARK CIRCLE

GREENVILLE, NC 27834-3749

MARK R. CERVI

OFFICER OF CAROLINA INTERNAL MEDICINE, P.A.

1900 BLOOMSBURY ROAD

GREENVILLE, NC 27858-9603

MARK R. CERVI

OFFICER OF CAROLINA INTERNAL MEDICINE, P.A.

EMERALD PLACE PROFESSIONAL CENTER

2460-A EMERALD PLACE

GREENVILLE, NC 27834-3749

Under penalty of perjury, I declare that the foregoing is true and correct.

 August 18, 2017 /s/ Diana Lyn Curtis McGraw

 Date Signature

Print Name:

Diana Lyn Curtis McGraw

Business Address:

200 Bendix Road, Suite 300, Virginia Beach, VA 23452

Case 17-03187-KRH Doc 8 Filed 08/18/17 Entered 08/18/17 12:18:54 Desc Main

 Document Page 2 of 2
DISMISSED; Opinion Filed June 28, 2016.

In The

Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05-16-00092-CV

BEAUTY ELITE PROPERTIES, INC., Appellant

V.

DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 116th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. DC-15-08310

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

Before Justices Myers, Stoddart, and Whitehill 

Opinion by Justice Myers

In a letter dated June 9, 2016, the Court questioned its jurisdiction over the appeal. 

Specifically, it appeared the notice of appeal was untimely. We instructed appellant to file a 

letter brief by June 20, 2016 addressing the jurisdictional issue and cautioned appellant that 

failure to file a letter brief by the specified deadline may result in dismissal of the appeal without 

further notice. As of today’s date, appellant has not filed a response.

When a party files a timely post-judgment motion extending the appellate timetable, the 

notice of appeal is due ninety days after the date the judgment is signed. See TEX. R. APP. P.

26.1(a). Without a timely notice of appeal, this Court lacks jurisdiction. See TEX. R. APP. P.

25.1(b).
–2–

The trial court signed the judgment on September 24, 2015 and appellant filed a timely 

motion for new trial on Monday, October 26, 2015. Accordingly, the notice of appeal was due 

by December 23, 2015, ninety days after the date the judgment was signed. See TEX. R. APP. P.

26.1(a). Appellant filed a notice of appeal on January 28, 2016, thirty-six days past the 

deadline.1

Because appellant did not timely file a notice of appeal this Court lacks jurisdiction. 

Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a).

160092F.P05

 

1 We note appellant states in the notice of appeal that it is appealing the trial court’s “judgment or order” that was signed on December 31, 

2015. The trial court’s December 31, 2015 order denied appellant’s motion for new trial. The deadline for filing a notice of appeal runs from the 

date the judgment is signed, not an order denying a motion for new trial. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.1.

/Lana Myers/

LANA MYERS

JUSTICE
–3–

Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT

BEAUTY ELITE PROPERTIES, INC., 

Appellant

No. 05-16-00092-CV V.

DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 116th Judicial District 

Court, Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. DC-15-08310.

Opinion delivered by Justice Myers. 

Justices Stoddart and Whitehill participating.

In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, the appeal is DISMISSED.

It is ORDERED that appellee DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS recover its costs of this 

appeal from appellant BEAUTY ELITE PROPERTIES, INC.

Judgment entered this 28th day of June, 2016.
### §759. Omitted

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section, act Aug. 18, 1949, ch. 478, §2, 63 Stat. 616, authorized Secretary of the Interior through the Fish and Wildlife Service to undertake an Atlantic Coast shad study, prescribed a $75,000 per annum cost limitation for a six year period, and authorized transfer to such Service from Federal agencies or corporations surplus boats or equipment for conduct of the studies.

Section 4 of act Aug. 18, 1949 authorized appropriations for carrying out the purposes of act Aug. 18, 1949.
§ 44.302 Investigation. ( a ) The Special Counsel may seek information, request documents and answers to written interrogatories, inspect premises, and solicit testimony as the Special Counsel believes is necessary to ascertain compliance with this part.
( b ) The Special Counsel may require any person or other entity to present Employment Eligibility Verification Forms (“Forms I-9”) for inspection.
( c ) The Special Counsel shall have reasonable access to examine the evidence of any person or other entity being investigated. The respondent shall permit access by the Special Counsel during normal business hours to such books, records, accounts, papers, electronic and digital documents, databases, systems of records, witnesses, premises, and other sources of information the Special Counsel may deem pertinent to ascertain compliance with this part.
( d ) A respondent, upon receiving notice by the Special Counsel that it is under investigation, shall preserve all evidence, information, and documents potentially relevant to any alleged unfair immigration-related employment practices, and shall suspend routine or automatic deletion of all such evidence, information, and documents.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     9
<LEGEND>
RESTATED FINANCIAL DATA SCHEDULE
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                  1000
<CURRENCY>                    U.S. Dollars
       
<S>                                       <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                    YEAR    
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                         DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                              DEC-31-1996
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                     1
<CASH>                                        572,182
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                          3,955
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                              190,455
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                    0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                 2,250,952
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                              0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                0
<LOANS>                                     6,165,903
<ALLOWANCE>                                  (129,039)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              9,560,320
<DEPOSITS>                                  8,052,746
<SHORT-TERM>                                  331,796
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                           166,645
<LONG-TERM>                                    57,192
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0
<PREFERRED>                                   100,000
<COMMON>                                      253,825
<OTHER-SE>                                    598,116
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>              9,560,320
<INTEREST-LOAN>                               487,918
<INTEREST-INVEST>                             142,457
<INTEREST-OTHER>                               11,065
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                              641,440
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                            248,593
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            265,807
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                         375,633
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                 (12,417)
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                             (5,306)
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                               326,920
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               173,674
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                    112,818
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     0
<CHANGES>                                           0
<NET-INCOME>                                  112,818
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    0.85
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    0.84
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                   4.89
<LOANS-NON>                                    16,080
<LOANS-PAST>                                    5,538
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                    0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                29,800
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                              151,367
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                  35,147
<RECOVERIES>                                   19,380
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                             129,039
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                          129,039
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                 0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                        31,955
        

</TABLE>
NOT FOR PUB LIC ATION UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C U IT GAR Y D. SC HW IR SE, Pe titione r, v. DIR EC TOR , OFFIC E OF W ORKER S’ C OM PENSATION PR OGR AM ; e t a l., R

e sponde n t s. No. 11-73172 B R B No. 11-0119

ORDER

B e fore : SILVER

M AN, C L IFTON, a

nd N.R . SM ITH, C irc uit Judge s. The m a nda te issue d De c e m be r 18, 2012 is vac a te d. The M e m ora n dum Disposition file d on Oc tobe r 23, 2012, a nd a ppe a ring a

t 496 F. App’ x 734 (9th C ir. 2012), is va c a te d c onc urre ntly with the filing of theOpinion. W ith the filing of the Opinion, the

re que s ts for public a tion a re GR ANTED. 

# FIL E D JUL 26 2013 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U. S. CO URT O F APPEALS
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4829 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 4829

   To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide that the 50 
percent limitation on the deduction for meal expenses does not apply to 
 meals provided on certain fishing boats or at certain fish processing 
                              facilities.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            October 23, 2019

Ms. DelBene (for herself and Mr. Young) introduced the following bill; 
         which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide that the 50 
percent limitation on the deduction for meal expenses does not apply to 
 meals provided on certain fishing boats or at certain fish processing 
                              facilities.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Remote Seafood Employee Meals Tax 
Parity Act''.

SEC. 2. MEALS PROVIDED ON CERTAIN FISHING BOATS AND AT CERTAIN FISH 
              PROCESSING FACILITIES NOT SUBJECT TO 50 PERCENT 
              LIMITATION.

    (a) In General.--Section 274(n)(2)(C) of the Internal Revenue Code 
of 1986 is amended by striking ``or'' at the end of clause (iii), by 
striking the period at the end of clause (iv) and inserting ``, or'', 
and by adding at the end the following new clause:
                            ``(v) provided--
                                    ``(I) on a fishing vessel, fish 
                                processing vessel, or fish tender 
                                vessel (as such terms are defined in 
                                section 2101 of title 46, United States 
                                Code), or
                                    ``(II) at a fish processing 
                                facility which is located in the United 
                                States north of 50 degrees north 
                                latitude and which is not located in a 
                                metropolitan statistical area (within 
                                the meaning of section 
                                143(k)(2)(B)).''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2017.
                                 <all>
```
(see attached scope of accreditation for field(s) of inspection, including type, range, methods or procedures)

Print Date : 03/16/ 2012 Page 1 of 2 

### This is to signify that



# TIMBERCO, INC. DBA T ECO
1507 MATT PASS, SUIT E 2 COTTAGE GROVE, WI SCONSIN 53527



### Inspection Agency AA

- 654 Type A (Third

- Party) Inspection Body (Revised March 15, 2012)

has met the requirements of the IAS Accreditation Criteria for Inspection Agencies (AC98), has demonstrated compliance with ISO/IEC Standard 17020, General criteria for the operation of various types of bodies performing inspection

, and has been accredited, commencing June 2, 2011 , to provide inspection services in t he approved scope of accreditation.

Patrick V. McCullen C. P. Ramani, P.E. Vice President President

### Timberco, Inc. dba TECO AA

- 654 Type A (Third

- Party) Inspection Body (Revised March 15, 2012)

June 2, 2011 Commencement Date C. P. Ramani, P.E. President Pr int Date: 03/16/2012 Page 2 of 2 

### Timberco, Inc. dba TECO Steven A

. Verhey 1507 Matt Pass, Suite 2 VP Technical & Quality Operations Cottage Grove , WI 535 27 (608) 433

- 0063

FIEL DS OF INSPECTIONS TYPE AND RANGE OF INSPECTIONS INSPECTION METHODS AND PROCEDURES Structural plywood In

- plant Inspection and Certification Procedure

– Structural

- Use Panels Version 1.1 Structural

- use panels In

- plant Inspection and Certification Procedur e

– S tructural

- Use Panels Version 1.1 ; Inspection Procedure for ICC

- ES Report Recognized Products Version 2. 2 Wood I

- joists In

- plant Inspection Procedure for ICC

- ES Report Recognized Products Version 2. 2 Structural wood

- based products In

- plant Inspection Procedure for ICC

- ES Report Recognized Products Version 2. 2 Rim board In

- plant Inspection Procedure for ICC

- ES Report Recognized Products Version 2. 2 Decks and guardrails In

- plant Inspection Procedure for ICC

- ES Report Recognized Products Version 2. 2 Manufacturing in fields specified above Qualification and Follow

- up In

plant ICC

- ES Acceptance Criteria AC304
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     9
<LEGEND>
RESTATED FINANCIAL DATA SCHEDULE
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                  1000
<CURRENCY>                    U.S. Dollars
       
<S>                                       <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                    YEAR    
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                         DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-END>                              DEC-31-1995
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                     1
<CASH>                                        413,903
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                              0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                              113,485
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                    0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                 2,401,260
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                              0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                0
<LOANS>                                     4,819,555
<ALLOWANCE>                                  (151,367)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              7,933,816
<DEPOSITS>                                  6,732,999
<SHORT-TERM>                                  265,126
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                           119,757
<LONG-TERM>                                    36,069
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0
<PREFERRED>                                         0
<COMMON>                                      252,875
<OTHER-SE>                                    526,990
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>              7,933,816
<INTEREST-LOAN>                               398,117
<INTEREST-INVEST>                             169,336
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                7,849
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                              575,302
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                            231,349
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            246,986
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                         328,316
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                   1,218
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                227
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                               289,482
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               143,546
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                    131,412
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     0
<CHANGES>                                           0
<NET-INCOME>                                  131,412
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    1.01
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    1.00
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                   4.69
<LOANS-NON>                                    17,717
<LOANS-PAST>                                    2,926
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                    0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                23,100
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                              156,896
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                  25,416
<RECOVERIES>                                   18,669
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                             151,367
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                          151,367
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                 0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                        45,869
        

</TABLE>
No. 03-14-00716-CV 

In The Third Court of Appeals 

Austin, Texas 

JANOS FARKAS, 

 Appellant,

v. 

WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., AND BRICE VANDER LINDEN & WERNIC, P.C.,

N/KA/ BUCKELY MADOLE, P.C.

 Appellees. 

_____________________________________________________________________ 

Cause No. D-1-GN-11-003692 

On Appeal from the 201st Judicial District Court, Travis County, Texas 

The Honorable Lora J. Livingston, Judge Presiding 

_____________________________________________________________________ 

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE OF ADDITIONAL COUNSEL

TO THE HONORABLE THIRD COURT OF APPEALS: 

Pursuant to Rule 6.2 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, Susan A. 

Kidwell of Locke Lord LLP hereby files this Notice of Appearance as Additional 

Counsel for Appellee Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. 

ACCEPTED

03-14-00716-CV

3919973

THIRD COURT OF APPEALS

AUSTIN, TEXAS

1/27/2015 3:59:09 PM

JEFFREY D. KYLE

CLERK

 FILED IN 3rd COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS 1/27/2015 3:59:09 PM JEFFREY D. KYLE Clerk
2 

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. is also represented by B. David L. Foster. 

Respectfully submitted, 

LOCKE LORD LLP 

By: /s/ Susan A. Kidwell 

B. David L. Foster 

 State Bar No. 24031555 

dfoster@lockelord.com

Susan A. Kidwell 

 State Bar No. 24032626 

 skidwell@lockelord.com 

LOCKE LORD LLP 

600 Congress Avenue, Suite 2200 

Austin, Texas 78701 

Telephone: (512) 305-4700 

Facsimile: (512) 305-4800 

COUNSEL FOR APPELLEE

WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.
3 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that on January 27, 2015 a true and correct copy of the foregoing was 

served by EfileTx.gov upon the following: 

William D. Davis 

bdavis@capital-ip.com

Davis & Associates 

P.O. Box 1093 

Dripping Springs, Texas 78620 

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT

JANOS FARKAS

Luke Madole 

Luke.Madole@BuckleyMadole.com

Buckley Madole, P.C. 

9441 LBJ Freeway, Suite 250 

Dallas, Texas 75243

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE

BRICE VANDER LINDEN & WERNICK,

P.C. N/K/A BUCKLEY MADOLE, P.C.

 /s/ Susan A. Kidwell 

 Susan A. Kidwell