alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Eric WEIR, Petitioner-Appellee, v. Lloyd FLETCHER, Superintendent, Bell County Forestry Camp, Respondent-Appellant.

No. 80-3093.

United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

May 25, 1982.

Stephen L. Beshear, Atty. Gen., James L. Dickinson, Asst. Atty. Gen., Frankfort, Ky., for respondent-appellant.

Donna Boyce Proctor, Asst. Public Advocate, Frankfort, Ky., for petitioner-appellee.

Before ENGEL and KEITH, Circuit Judges, and LAMBROS *, District Judge.

*

 Hon. Thomas D. Lambros, United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio, sitting by designation.

ORDER

In *Weir v. Fletcher,*658 F.2d 1126 (6th Cir. 1981) (J. Engel dissenting), a panel of this Court affirmed a decision of the United States District Court for the Western District of Kentucky, granting habeas corpus relief under authority of *Doyle v. Ohio,*426 U.S. 610, 96 S.Ct. 2240, 49 L.Ed.2d 91 (1976). In *Weir,*we held whether a defendant had received his *Miranda*warning was not relevant to a finding of a *Doyle*violation. In view of our holding, we found it unnecessary to determine whether Weir had, in fact, received *Miranda*type assurances concerning his right to silence.

On March 22, 1982, the United States Supreme Court granted respondent-appellant’s petition for a writ of certiorari and summarily reversed our decision in *Weir. See Fletcher v. Weir,*- U.S. -, 102 S.Ct. 1309, 71 L.Ed.2d 490 (1982).

Subsequently, Eric Weir filed a motion urging that this case be remanded with directions that the district court conduct an evidentiary hearing concerning the *Miranda*issue. The State of Kentucky filed a response in opposition to petitioner’s motion.

*438Petitioner’s motion does not, however, allege that any comment was made before the jury regarding petitioner’s silence which occurred after the *Miranda*warnings were given. Moreover, the record is inconclusive on this issue. The Supreme Court has made it undisputedly clear that prosecutorial comments must pertain to *post-Miranda*warning silence. *Fletcher, supra.*

Therefore, upon consideration of the record and the motions of the parties, we conclude that petitioner has failed to allege facts sufficient to warrant an evidentiary hearing. Accordingly, we remand with directions that the district court dismiss the writ without prejudice.
§ 20.3 Location, organization, and officer qualifications. ( a ) *Mailing address.* The Office of Hearings and Appeals is located at the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street, SW., Room B-133, Washington, DC 20410.
( b ) *Location.* For deliveries, the Office of Hearings and Appeals is physically located at 409 Third Street, SW., Suite 201, Washington, DC 20024. The telephone number of the Office of Hearings and Appeals is 202-254-0000. Hearing- or speech-impaired individuals may access this number via TTY by calling the toll-free Federal Information Relay Service at 800-877-8339. The facsimile number is 202-619-7304.
( c ) *Organization.* The Office of Hearings and Appeals is supervised by the Chief Administrative Law Judge and a Deputy Chief Administrative Law Judge.
( d ) *Officer qualifications.* ( 1 ) The Administrative Judges of the Office of Hearings and Appeals shall be attorneys at law actively licensed by any state, commonwealth, territory, or the District of Columbia.
( 2 ) The Administrative Law Judges of the Office of Hearings and Appeals shall be qualified in accordance with the Office of Personnel Management regulations at 5 CFR part 930.
[72 FR 53878, Sept. 20, 2007, as amended at 74 FR 4635, Jan. 26, 2009; 87 FR 8196, Feb. 14, 2022]
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

KRISTIN M PERRY, SANDRA B STIER,

PAUL T KATAMI and JEFFREY J

ZARRILLO,

Plaintiffs,

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO,

Plaintiff-Intervenor,

v

ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, in his

official capacity as governor of

California; EDMUND G BROWN JR, in

his official capacity as attorney

general of California; MARK B

HORTON, in his official capacity

as director of the California

Department of Public Health and

state registrar of vital

statistics; LINETTE SCOTT, in her

official capacity as deputy

director of health information &

strategic planning for the

California Department of Public

Health; PATRICK O’CONNELL, in his

official capacity as clerkrecorder of the County of

Alameda; and DEAN C LOGAN, in his

official capacity as registrarrecorder/county clerk for the

County of Los Angeles, 

Defendants,

DENNIS HOLLINGSWORTH, GAIL J

KNIGHT, MARTIN F GUTIERREZ,

HAKSHING WILLIAM TAM, MARK A

JANSSON and PROTECTMARRIAGE.COM –

YES ON 8, A PROJECT OF

CALIOFORNIA RENEWAL, as official

proponents of Proposition 8,

Defendant-Intervenors. /

No C 09-2292 VRW

ORDER

Case 3:09-cv-02292-JW Document 672 Filed 05/31/10 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

In the event any party wishes to use portions of the

trial recording during closing arguments, a copy of the video can

be made available to the party. Parties will of course be

obligated to maintain as strictly confidential any copy of the

video pursuant to paragraph 7.3 of the protective order, Doc #425. 

Any party wishing to make use of the video during closing arguments

is DIRECTED to inform the court clerk not later than June 2, 2010

at 5 PM PDT.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

 

VAUGHN R WALKER

United States District Chief Judge

Case 3:09-cv-02292-JW Document 672 Filed 05/31/10 Page 2 of 2
NNumber Model # Category

240P A-26 LIMITED

626SH A-26 LIMITED

9682C A-26 LIMITED

7227C B-17 LIMITED

9323Z B-17 LIMITED

24927 B-24 EXPER

125AZ B-25 LIMITED

25YR B-25 LIMITED

27493 B-25 LIMITED

345TH B-25 LIMITED

5865V B-25 LIMITED

9643C B-25 LIMITED

529B B-29 EXPER

53594 C-46 EXPER

10601 P-51 LIMITED

44727 P-51 LIMITED

5428V P-51 LIMITED

61429 P-51 LIMITED

92879 SB2C EXPER

9124Z T-33 EXPER

40402 TBM-3 LIMITED

5264V TBM-3 LIMITED

53503 TBM-3 LIMITED
§ 886.105 Content of application; Disclosure. Applications shall be in the form and in accordance with the instructions prescribed by HUD, and shall include: ( a ) Information on Gross Income, family size, and amount of rent paid to the project by Families currently in residence;
( b ) Information on vacancies and turnover;
( c ) Estimate of effect of the availability of Section 8 assistance on marketability of units in the project;
( d ) For projects having a history of financial default, financial difficulties or deferred maintenance, a plan and a schedule for remedying such defaulted or deferred obligations;
( e ) Total number of units by unit size (by bedroom count) for which Section 8 assistance is requested; and
( f ) Affirmative Fair Housing Marketing Plan on a HUD-prescribed form.
To be eligible to become an owner of housing assisted under this subpart, the owner must meet the disclosure and verification requirements for Social Security and Employer Identification Numbers, as provided by part 5, subpart B, of this title. (Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control number 2502-0204) [42 FR 5603, Jan. 28, 1977, as amended at 54 FR 39708, Sept. 27, 1989; 61 FR 11118, Mar. 18, 1996]
#### Southern Cotton Mills *et al. v.*Parsons *et al.*

Atkinson, J.

This case was before the Supreme Court on a former occasion, on exception to a judgment rendered at an interlocutory hearing. Co*oper*v. *Parsons,*136 *Ga.*789 (72 S. E. 158). It was then decided: “3. A corporation issued bonds and executed a mortgage to secure them. Under an equitable petition filed by the trustee named in the mortgage, the property of the mortgagor was placed in the hands of receivers, and a decree of foreclosure was entered. The receivers sold at private sale the property covered by the mortgage, and, upon confirmation by the court, made a deed and delivered the property, the grantee paying an amount in cash, giving a certain note to the receivers for another amount, and assuming the payment of the bonds and buying-subject to the mortgage. *Eeld,*that the directors of the mortgagor had no such title or interest as authorized them to file, in their own names, as directors, a petition to enforce the contract of purchase from the original receivers or to seek to foreclose the mortgage, and to have new receivers appointed to take charge of the property sold.” Before this decision was rendered by the Supreme Court the demurrer was heard *510and overruled by the trial court, and the defendants excepted. *Held,*that the decision above mentioned extended to the right of the plaintiffs to maintain the action; and the petition showing upon its face substantially the facts upon which' the ruling was predicated, the ruling announced is applicable also to the case on demurrer. Accordingly, the judgment overruling the demurrer will be reversed.

August 15, 1912.

Equitable petition. Before Judge Martin. Pulaski superior court. July 29, 1911.

*Robert L. Berner*and *John R. Cooper,*for plaintiffs in error.

*W. L. & Warren Grice*and *Hardeman, Jones, Callaway & Johnston,*contra.

*Judgment reversed.*

*All the Justices concur.*
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION ) 

# RECEIVED .IUN 

## 23 2014 HEARING DOCKET
In the Matter ofJett Pro Line Maintenance ) FAACaseNo.2011WP910076 ) Judge Richard C. Goodwin WITHDRAWAL OF COMPLAINT As this matter has been settled, the Federal Aviation Administration ("FAA'') hereby withdraws the complaint filed in this matter.
Dated this 23rd day ofJune, 2014.
Peter J. Lynch Assistant ChiefCounsel Killingham ore ent Division Office ofthe ChiefCounsel (202) 267-7728CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify thatthe foregoing Withdrawal ofComplaint, In the Matter of JettPro Line Maintenance, FAA Case No. 2011WP910076, (FDMS NO. FAA-2013-1077) has been mailed this date by facsimile and certified mail, to: John Craig Weller, Esq. Aerlex Law Group 2800 28'11 Street Santa Monica, CA. 90405 Honorable Richard C. Goodwin Office ofHearings, M-20 U.S. Department ofTransportation 1200 NewJersey Avenue, S.E. (Ell-310) Washington, DC 20590 The original and a copy was also personally delivered to: Hearing Docket (Original and I copy) Federal Aviation Administration 600 Independence Avenue, S.W. Room 2WIOOO-AGC-430 Washington, DC 20591

June 23, 2014
### §515. Default of contractor; new contracts and purchase in open market

If a contractor fails to comply with his contract, the Director of the Government Publishing Office shall report the default to the Joint Committee on Printing, and under its direction, enter into a new contract with the lowest, best, and most responsible bidder for the interest of the Government among those whose proposals were rejected at the last opening of bids, or he shall advertise for new proposals, under the regulations provided by sections 509–517 of this title. During the interval that may thus occur he may, under the direction of the Joint Committee on Printing, purchase in open market, at the lowest market price, paper necessary for the public printing.

(Pub. L. 90–620, Oct. 22, 1968, 82 Stat. 1245; Pub. L. 113–235, div. H, title I, §1301(c)(1), Dec. 16, 2014, 128 Stat. 2537.)

#### Historical and Revision Notes

Based on 44 U.S. Code, 1964 ed., §11 (Jan. 12, 1895, ch. 23, §9, 28 Stat. 602; Mar. 3, 1917, ch. 163, §6, 39 Stat. 1121).

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2014—Pub. L. 113–235 substituted "Director of the Government Publishing Office" for "Public Printer".
Exhibit  99.2

OFFICER'S CERTIFICATE
REGARDING ANNUAL STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE

New Century Home Equity Loan Trust, Series 2004-2
2004-2 Asset-Backed Notes

I, Kevin Cloyd, hereby certify that I am a duly appointed Executive
Vice President of New Century Mortgage Corporation (the "Company"), and
Further certify as follows:

1. This certification is being made pursuant to the terms of the
Servicing Agreement, dated as of June 29, 2004 (the "Servicing
Agreement"), among New Century Home Equity Loan Trust 2004-2, as
issuer, the Company, as master servicer and Deutsche Bank National
Trust Company, as indenture trustee.

2. I have reviewed the activities of the Company during the preceding
year and the Company's performance under the Servicing Agreement and
to the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Company has
fulfilled all of its obligations under the Pooling and Servicing
Agreement throughout the year.

Capitalized terms not otherwise defined herein have the meanings set
forth in the Servicing Agreement.

Dated: March 15, 2005

<page>

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this Certificate as of
March 15, 2005.

By: /s/: Kevin Cloyd
Name: Kevin Cloyd
Title: Executive Vice President

I, Jennifer Jewett, an Assistant Secretary of the Company, hereby certify
that Kevin Cloyd is a duly elected, qualified, and acting Executive Vice
President of the Company and that the signature appearing above is his
genuine signature.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this Certificate as of March
15, 2005.

By: /s/: Jennifer Jewett
Name: Jennifer Jewett
Title: Assistant Secretary
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000858346
<NAME> WEST COAST REALTY INVESTORS, INC.
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                       6,619,637
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  388,857
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             7,048,649
<PP&E>                                      35,209,031
<DEPRECIATION>                             (1,670,395)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              40,942,139
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,183,927
<BONDS>                                     15,370,342
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        29,328
<OTHER-SE>                                  24,358,542
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                40,942,139
<SALES>                                      2,583,683
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,713,128
<CGS>                                        1,409,008
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,409,008
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             783,082
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                521,038
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   521,038
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .20
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .20
        

</TABLE>
### §42307. Review of regulations and orders

A regulation or final order of the Federal Maritime Commission under this chapter is reviewable exclusively in the same forum and in the same manner as provided in section 2342(3)(B) of title 28.

(Pub. L. 109–304, §7, Oct. 6, 2006, 120 Stat. 1554.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 42307 | 46 App.:1710a(i). | Pub. L. 100–418, title X, §10002(i), Aug. 23, 1988, 102 Stat. 1572. |

Section
#### Ethan Fairman, Respondent, v. Tunis R. Thomas et al., Appellants.

Motion to substitute Ruth M. Fairman, as administratrix of the goods, chattels and credits of Ethan Fairman, deceased, as plaintiff-respondent in this action in the place and stead of Ethan Fairman; and to substitute Harold Armstrong, as executor under the last will and testament of Rhoda Ann Keyser (formerly Rhoda F. Thomas), deceased, individually and as administratrix *a. t. a.,*of the estate of Tunis R. Thomas, deceased, as defendant-appellant in place and stead of Tunis R. Thomas and Rhoda F. Thomas. Motion granted and the title of the action is amended accordingly; and Strong, Golden and Robinson, attorneys, are substituted herein in the place and stead of Arlen T. St. Louis, Esq.
-----------------,------------------------------ 

## SERVED JULY 31,2012

. - ,_-__**~·-_-_** 

### ..,_,.,**,.ll·~ ~.~-N·l·**  

# or· :i' ·:··'.i

..Jih'.**wj~~.. ~** 

### .. 

### U.S. DEPARTMENT OF**TRANSPORTATION,.:/:: :~f:~l)ORl'AJidN**  

### OFFICE-OF HEARINGS :·.v:f:T**Clf-Y:f:IA_j_ n'\i(~**  '. '

..... •h 

### L. ,!'\ lLI ,,.) 

### WASHINGTON, DC

In the Matter of DIAMOND AIR CHARTER, INC. Respondent ) ) ) ) ) J'l ! L 

### .1 I

Docket No. FAA-2010-0620 Case No. CPlO EA 0004

ORDER DISMISSING PROCEEDING On July 30,2012, the Complajnant,.the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), filed an Agency's Withdrawal ofComplaint. There is a Motion Conference and a Hearing currently set in this matter. It

### Is Hereby Ordered: 1) The January 24,2013 Telephone Motion Conference, set for 1:30pm-2:30pm EST, is cancelled. 2) The Hearing set on March 27, 2013 in theIslip, NY area is cancelled. 3) Pursuant to 14 C.F.R. §13.215, the Complainant, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), has Withdrawn its Complaint dated June 

### 17, 2010, and this proceeding is dismissed with prejudice.

Attachment: Service ListFDMS No. FAA.;2010-0620 (Civil Penalty Proceeding) 

### SERVICE LIST- BY U.S. MAIL

Federal Aviation Administration 800 Independence Avt?nue, S.W. Washington, DC 205'91 

### ORIGINAL & 

### ONE COPY

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 Wilbur Wright Building

- Suite 2W1 000 1 

### ONE COPY Gregory S. Winton, Respondent's Counsel Aviation Law Experts One Research Court, Suite 450 Rockville, MD 20850 TEL: 301-294-8550 FAX: 301-294-2525 Zachary M. Berman, Complainant's Counsel Attorney, Office ofthe Regional Counsel, EAL-7 Federal Aviation Administration 1 Aviation Plaza Jamaica, NY 11434 TEL: 718-553-3258 FAX: 718-995-5699 The Honorable J. E. Sullivan, Administrative Law Judge U.S. Department ofTransportation Office ofHearings, M-20 (E1l-310) 1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. Washington, DC 20590 TEL: 202-366-2132 FAX: 202-366-7536 .,

1 Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person or by expedited courier, use the following address: Federal Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building- Suite 2Wl000, Washington, DC 20591; Attention:**~Hearing** Docket Clerk, AGC-430.
Petition for Writ of Mandamus Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed

August 15 , 2019.

In The



## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14- 19 -00484- CV

IN RE SPRINT SAND AND CLAY, LLC, Relator

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING WRIT OF MANDAMUS 11th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2018-66557


### MEMORANDUM OPINION On June 18, 2019, relator Sprint Sand and Clay, LLC filed a petition for writ of mandamus in this c ourt. See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 22.221 ( Supp. ); see also Tex. R. App. P. 52

. In the petition, relator asks this c ourt to compel the Honorable Kristen Brauchle Hawkins , presiding judge of the 11th District Court of Harris2

County, to vacate a portion of her order dated June 11, 2019, which grants in part and denies in part plaintiffs’ motions to compel. Plaintiffs are the real parties

- in

interest, John Earl Ellisor , et al. , in the underlying lawsuit. Relator is one of several named defendants in the suit. On July 24, 2019, real parties in interest/ plaintiffs filed a letter with this court, stating that they had filed a notice of non-suit of their suit against relator and, as a result, this mandamus proceeding is now moot. Enclosed with the letter is a copy of the motion for nonsuit of the claims against relator , with a file-stamp showing that the motion was filed in the underlying case on July 24, 2019. Th is motion states that real parties in interest/plaintiffs wish to dismiss all claims against relator. A notice of nonsuit is effective without a court order immediately when the notice is filed. Texas Dep’t of Aging & Disability Servs. v. Cannon , 453 S.W.3d 411, 418 n.13 (Tex. 2015). On July 31, 2019, real parties in interest filed a motion asking this court to di smiss this mandamus proceeding, arguing that relator’s petition for mandamus relief is moot because they have non-suited all their claims against relator.
We GRANT the motion and DISMISS relator’s petition for writ of mandamus
as moot.

PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Chief Justice Frost and Justices Spain and Poissant

.
### §40103. Administrative exemptions

(a) In General.—The Federal Maritime Commission, on application or its own motion, may by order or regulation exempt for the future any class of agreements between persons subject to this part or any specified activity of those persons from any requirement of this part if the Commission finds that the exemption will not result in substantial reduction in competition or be detrimental to commerce. The Commission may attach conditions to an exemption and may, by order, revoke an exemption.

(b) Opportunity for Hearing.—An order or regulation of exemption or revocation of an exemption may be issued only if the Commission has provided an opportunity for a hearing to interested persons and departments and agencies of the United States Government.

(Pub. L. 109–304, §7, Oct. 6, 2006, 120 Stat. 1527.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 40103 | 46 App.:1715. | Pub. L. 98–237, §16, Mar. 20, 1984, 98 Stat. 84; Pub. L. 105–258, title I, §114, Oct. 14, 1998, 112 Stat. 1912. |

Section
§ 891.860 Operating reserves. ( a ) The mixed-finance owner shall maintain an operating reserve account in an amount sufficient to cover the operating expenses of the development for at least a three-month period.
( b ) Project income, project rental assistance, tenant rents, and tax credit equity may be used to fund the operating reserve account.
( c ) Amounts derived from Section 202 or 811 (*e.g.*, project income, project rental assistance, and tenant rents) in operating reserve accounts may only be used for the operating expenses of the 202 or 811 units.
United States Court of Appeals

For the First Circuit

No. 20-1495

MARGARET BENSON,

Appellant-Plaintiff,

v.

WAL-MART STORES EAST, L.P.,

Appellee-Defendant.

ERRATA SHEET

The opinion of this Court, issued on September 15, 2021, is 

amended as follows:

On page 5, line 8, replace “surveillances” with

“surveillance”

On page 13, line 11, insert “the” between “as” and “result”

On page 36, line 11, replace 'very close' with 'very close'"