alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

AIKATERINI TSIOUPLI,

Plaintiff,

v.

KEVIN HENRY MCLAUGHLIN, JENNIFER V. MCLAUGHLIN, and NEAL R. MCLAUGHLIN,

Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) C.A. No. N22C

- 04

- 057 CLS ) ) ) ) ) )

Date Submitted: February 22, 2023 Date Decided: March 8 , 2023

Upon Plaintiff’s Motion in Limine Regarding Plaintiff’s Injuries and Damages. DENIED

.

ORDER

Vincent J.X. Hedrick, II, Esquire, Bove & Hedrick, Wilmington, Delaware, 19899, Attorney for Plaintiff, Aikaterini Tsioupli.

Miranda D. Clifton, Esquire, Heckler & Frabizzio, Wilmington, Delaware, 19899, Attorney for Defendants, Kevin Henry McLaughlin, J ennifer V. McLaughlin, and Neal R. McLaughlin

.

SCOTT, J.2

On this 8th day of March 2023, upon consideration of Plaintiff Aikaterini

Tsioupli ’s ( “Ms. Tsioupli ”) Motion in Limine Regarding Plaintiff’s Injuries and

Damages

, and Defendants Kevin Henry McLaughlin, Jennifer V. McLaughlin, and

Neal R. McLaughlin’s (“Defendants”) response, it appears that:

1. Ms. Tsioupli sustained injury as a result of a collision caused by Defendant

Kevi n McLaughlin. As a result of the accident, Ms. Tsioupli filed this suit and

identified two expert medical witnesses, Dr. Demetrios Zerefos and Dr.

Michael Brooks, to testify and provide reports on her behalf.

2. Defendants identified Dr. Frank Sarlo as thei r medical expert, and Dr. Sarlo

provided a defense medical evaluation report setting forth his opinions.

3. Ms. Tsioupli asks this Court to preclude Defendants from introducing any

evidence suggesting Ms. Tsioupli’s injuries are from any other cause, or that

a jury should award no damages, or insinuate , either th r ough documents,

questions of witnesses or otherwise, that Ms. Tsioupli’s injuries and resulting

damages were caused by anything other than this collision. Ms. Tsioupli

believes the Court should grant t his Motion because all experts establish that

Ms. Tsioupli suffered injuries from the collision.

4. Defendants argue they do not agree with Ms. Tsioupli’s representation that all

experts agree as to the nature of Plaintiff’s injuries. Defendants note all

exp erts agree Ms. Tsioupli had a pre

- existing degeneration in her cervical and3

lumbar areas of her spine, the areas she claims injury from this accident, and

all experts noted a prior accident in 2014.

5. This Court agrees with Defendants. Defendants should and will be given an

opportunity during the trial for testimony by an expert regarding the prior

accident and its similarities to this current injury, and degenerative findings.

The weight and credibility of the testimony is left to the jury to determine the

cause of the injury. This Court shall not preclude expert testimony regarding

the origin of injury or causation of injury.

6. Based on the foregoing reasons, the Plaintiff’s Motion in Limine Regarding

Plaintiff’s Injuries and Damages is DENIED.

IT IS SO OR DERED.

/s/ Calvin L. Scott Judge Calvin L. Scott, Jr.
#### Lebenthal & Co., Inc., Appellant, v. Third Manhattan Corp., Respondent.

Judgment unanimously affirmed, with costs to the respondent. No opinion. Concur — Breitel, J. P., Valente, McNally, Stevens and Steuer, JJ.
§ 912.772 Requirements for coal exploration. ( a ) Part 772 of this chapter, *Requirements for Coal Exploration,* shall apply to any person who conducts or seeks to conduct coal exploration operations.
( b ) The Office shall make every effort to act on an exploration application within 60 days of receipt or such longer time as may be reasonable under the circumstances. If additional time is needed, OSMRE shall notify the applicant that the application is being reviewed, but more time is necessary to complete such review, setting forth the reasons and the additional time that is needed.
[52 FR 13807, Apr. 24, 1987]
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

1 

79–012 2018

115th Congress, 2d Session – – – – – – – – – – – – House Document 115–105 

DESIGNATION OF FUNDING FOR OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS/GLOBAL WAR ON TERRORISM 

COMMUNICATION 

FROM

THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES 

TRANSMITTING

DESIGNATION FOR OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS/GLOBAL WAR ON TERRORISM ALL FUNDING (INCLUDING THE RESCISSION OF FUNDS) AND CONTRIBUTIONS FROM FOREIGN GOVERNMENTS SO DESIGNATED BY THE CONGRESS, PURSUANT TO THE 

CONSOLIDATED APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2018, SEC. 6 

MARCH 26, 2018.—Referred to the Committee on Appropriations and 

ordered to be printed 


dlhill on DSK3GLQ082PROD with HEARINGE:\Seals\Congress.#13

dlhill on DSK3GLQ082PROD with HEARING
(1) 

THE WHITE HOUSE, 

Washington, March 23, 2018. 

Hon. PAUL D. RYAN, 

Speaker of the House of Representatives, 

Washington, DC. 

DEAR MR. SPEAKER: In accordance with section 6 of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018 (H.R. 1625; the ‘‘Act’’), I hereby designate for Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War on Terrorism all funding (including the rescission of funds) and contributions from foreign governments so designated by the Congress in 

the Act pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A) of the Balanced Budget 

and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985, as outlined in the enclosed list of accounts. 

The details of this action are set forth in the enclosed memorandum from the Director of the Office of Management and Budget. 

Sincerely, 

DONALD J. TRUMP. 


dlhill on DSK3GLQ082PROD with HEARING
2 


dlhill on DSK3GLQ082PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 3 here HD105.001
3 


dlhill on DSK3GLQ082PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 4 here HD105.002
4 


dlhill on DSK3GLQ082PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 5 here HD105.003
5 


dlhill on DSK3GLQ082PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 6 here HD105.004
FOR VALUE RECEIVED,             hereby sell, assign, and transfer unto                                                                                                                                                                           Units represented by the within Certificate, and do  hereby irrevocably  constitute and appoint                                                                             Attorney to transfer the said Units on the books of the within named Company with full power of substitution in the premises.



	
 



	
            Dated                                                  ,                       .



	
 



	
In Presence of



	
 



	                                                                                               	 


	 	                                                                                               


	 


	 


	 	                                                                                               


	
 



	 


	
 
	
The transferability of the Units represented by this certificate is restricted. Such Units may not be sold, assigned, or transferred, nor will any assignee, vendee, transferee, or endorsee thereof be recognized as having acquired any such Units for any purposes, unless and to the extent such sale, transfer, hypothecation, or assignment is permitted by, and is completed in strict accordance with, applicable state and federal law and the terms and conditions set forth in the Operating Agreement and agreed to by each Member.



	 


	
 
	
The securities represented by this certificate may not be sold, offered for sale, or transferred in the absence of either an effective registration under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and under applicable state securities laws, or an opinion of counsel satisfactory to the company that such transaction is exempt from registration under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and under applicable state securities laws.
#### MORRIS, Appellant, v. DEUTZ LITHOGRAPHING CO., Respondent.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Term.

June 22, 1903.)

Action by Robert C. Morris, trustee in bankruptcy of the American Bread Company, against the Deutz Lithographing Company. From a judgment for defendant on the dismissal of the complaint, plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.

Joseph A. Arnold, for appellant. Clarence E. Thornall, for respondent.

MacLEAN, J.

Failing of proof that the defendant knew or had reasonable cause to know of the insolvency of the American Bread Company, or of any intendment to suffer judgment and so create a preference obnoxious to the provisions of the bankruptcy law, the complaint was properly dismissed, and judgment entered thereon must be affirmed, with costs. Judgment affirmed, with costs. All concur.
# C_2023254EN.01000501.xml

| 19.7.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 254/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.7.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 254/5

---

Information communicated by Member States regarding closure of fisheries

(2023/C 254/05)

In accordance with Article 35(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 of 20 November 2009 establishing a Union control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy (1), a decision has been taken to close the fishery as set down in the following table:

| Date and time of closure | 26.6.2023 |
| --- | --- |
| Duration | 26.6.2023 – 31.12.2023 |
| Member State | European Union (All Member States) |
| Stock or Group of stocks | GHL/1N2AB. |
| Species | Greenland halibut (Reinhardtius hippoglossoides) |
| Zone | Norwegian waters of 1 and 2 |
| Type(s) of fishing vessels | — |
| Reference number | 05/TQ194 |

Date and time of closure

26.6.2023

Duration

26.6.2023 – 31.12.2023

Member State

European Union (All Member States)

Stock or Group of stocks

GHL/1N2AB.

Species

Greenland halibut (Reinhardtius hippoglossoides)

Zone

Norwegian waters of 1 and 2

Type(s) of fishing vessels

—

Reference number

05/TQ194

---

(1)  OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 1.

---
§ 904.20 Approval of Arkansas abandoned mine land reclamation plan. The Secretary approved the Arkansas abandoned mine land reclamation plan, as submitted on July 7, 1982, effective May 2, 1983. Copies of the approved plan are available at: ( a ) Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality, 8001 National Drive, P.O. Box 8913, Little Rock, AR 72219-8913.
( b ) Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, Tulsa Field Office, 5100 East Skelly Drive, Suite 470, Tulsa, OK 74135-6548.
[64 FR 20166, Apr. 26, 1999]
§ 1290.8 Procedures. ( a ) *The U.S. Magistrate Court Provides DLA* with: ( 1 ) The means to process and dispose of certain categories of minor offenses by mail. Under this system, U.S. Magistrate and District Courts will, by local court rule, preset fines for the bulk of petty violations (Federal or Assimilated) and permit persons charged with such violations, who do not contest the charge nor wish to have a court hearing, to pay their fines by using mail-in, preaddressed, postage paid envelopes furnished to them with the violation notice.
( 2 ) Efficient, minimal commitment of judicial and clerical time by using uniform procedures which centralize the collection of fines, the scheduling of mandatory hearings or hearings where violators request them, and the keeping of violator records.
( 3 ) A simple but sure method of accounting for fines collected and tickets issued.
( 4 ) Impartial enforcement of minor offense laws.
( b ) *Court Appearances* — ( 1 ) *Mandatory Appearances.* ( i ) As required by the Administrative Office of the United States Courts, each District Court will determine, by local court rule, those offenses requiring mandatory appearance of violators. PLFA Counsels will coordinate with local magistrates or district courts and secure a court approved list of offenses requiring mandatory appearance of violators before the local U.S. Magistrate.
( ii ) Mandatory appearance offense categories normally include: ( A ) Indictable offenses.
( B ) Offenses resulting in accidents.
( C ) Operation of motor vehicle while under the influence of intoxicating alcohol or a narcotic or habit producing or other mind altering drug, or permitting another person who is under the influence of intoxicating alcohol, or a narcotic or habit producing or mind altering drug to operate a motor vehicle owned by the defendant or in his/her custody or control.
( D ) Reckless driving or speeding.
( 2 ) Voluntary Appearances— ( i ) *Requested by violators at the time DD Form 1805 is issued.* ( A ) Personnel issuing DD Form 1805 will refer violator for hearings before U.S. Magistrates in each instance where a hearing is requested by the violator.
( B ) Command security officers will provide security force personnel with necessary information to facilitate scheduling violators to appear before U.S. Magistrates. Box B of the DD Form 1805 will be marked by the issuing official for each violator requesting a hearing. Additionally procedures set forth in appendix A will be accomplished by the official issuing violation notice.
( ii ) *Requested by violators by mail.* ( A ) Voluntary appearance procedures are also available for violators who are not present at the time a DD Form 1805 is issued (i.e., parking violations) or who subsequently decide to voluntarily appear before a U.S. Magistrate rather than pay the fine indicated in the DD Form 1805.
( B ) Violators who use the mail-in procedure to voluntarily appear before a U.S. Magistrate must follow the instructions in Box B of the DD Form 1805 (violator copy). The violator will be notified by the clerk of the District Court of the time and place to appear for the scheduled hearing.
<PAGE>   1

EXHIBIT 21

LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES

COMPANY                                                 STATE OF INCORPORATION
-------                                                 ----------------------
IMPACT Center of Albany, LLC                                   Tennessee
IMPACT Center of Bayonne, LLC                                 New Jersey
IMPACT Center of Billings, LLC                                 Tennessee
IMPACT Center of Fort Smith, LLC                               Tennessee
IMPACT Center of Glendale, LLC                                 Tennessee
IMPACT Center of Mobile, LLC                                   Tennessee
IMPACT Center of Mt. Diablo, LLC                               Tennessee
IMPACT Center of Northridge, LLC                               Tennessee
IMPACT Center of St. Johns, LLC                                Tennessee
IMPACT Center of Tri-City Medical Center, LLC                  Tennessee
IMPACT Center of Washington, D.C., LLC                         Tennessee
Response Acquisition Company, Inc.                             Tennessee
Response Oncology of Fort Lauderdale, Inc.                      Florida
Response Oncology of Miami Beach, Inc.                          Florida
Response Oncology of New York IPA, Inc.                        New York
Response Oncology of St. Petersburg, Inc.                       Florida
Response Oncology of Tamarac, Inc.                              Florida
Response Oncology of Treasure Coast, Inc.                       Florida
Response Oncology of West Fort Lauderdale, Inc.                 Florida
Response Oncology Management of South Florida, Inc.            Tennessee
South Florida Response Oncology, Inc.                           Florida
<PAGE>
 
                                                                   EXHIBIT 23.1
 
                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS
 
The Board of Directors
STM Wireless, Inc.:
 
We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statements (Nos.
33-50806, 33-99570, 33-99572) on Form S-8 and registration statements (Nos.
33-73962, 33-70650, 33-99568, 333-50485) on Form S-3 of STM Wireless, Inc. of
our report dated March 26, 1999, except as to the second paragraph of note 8,
which is as of April 13, 1999, relating to the consolidated balance sheets of
STM Wireless, Inc. and subsidiaries as of December 31, 1998 and 1997, and the
related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders' equity and cash
flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 1998,
and the related schedule, which report appears in the December 31, 1998 annual
report on Form 10-K of STM Wireless, Inc.
 
Orange County, California
April 13, 1999
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsEffects of Experiment Location and Orbiter Attitude on the Residual Acceleration On-Board STS-73 (USML-2)A knowledge of the quasi-steady acceleration environment on the NASA Space Shuttle Orbiter is of particular importance for materials processing experiments which are limited by slow diffusive processes. The quasi-steady (less than 1 HZ) acceleration environment on STS-73 (USML-2) was measured using the Orbital Acceleration Research Experiment (OARE) accelerometer. One of the facilities flown on USML-2 was the Crystal Growth Furnace (CGF), which was used by several Principal Investigators (PIS) to grow crystals. In this paper the OARE data mapped to the sample melt location within this furnace is presented. The ratio of the axial to radial components of the quasi-steady acceleration at the melt site is presented. Effects of Orbiter attitude on the acceleration data is discussed.Document ID19970026091Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeConference PaperAuthorsHakimzadeh, Roshanak*(NASA Lewis Research Center Cleveland, OH United States)*McPherson, Kevin M.*(NASA Lewis Research Center Cleveland, OH United States)*Matisak, Brian P.*(Teledyne Brown Engineering Huntsville, AL United States)*Wagar, William O.*(NASA Lewis Research Center Cleveland, OH United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateJune 1, 1997Subject CategoryMaterials ProcessingReport/Patent NumberE-10778NAS 1.15:107483NASA-TM-107483Meeting InformationMeeting: Materials Research in Low GravityLocation: San Diego, CACountry: United StatesStart Date: July 27, 1997End Date: August 1, 1997Sponsors:International Society for Optical EngineeringAccession Number97N25440Funding Number(s)PROJECT: RTOP 963-60-0KDistribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19970026091.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
§ 585.235 What are the lease periods for a commercial lease? ( a ) The lease periods within the term of your commercial lease are defined as follows: ( 1 ) *Preliminary period.* Each commercial lease has a preliminary period of up to five years. During the preliminary period, the lessee must submit a COP. The preliminary period begins on the effective date of the lease and ends either when a COP is received by BOEM for review or at the expiration of five years, whichever occurs first.
( 2 ) *COP review period.* A commercial lease has a COP review period. The COP review period begins when BOEM receives a COP from the lessee and ends upon COP approval, disapproval, or approval with conditions pursuant to § 585.628. During the COP review period, BOEM conducts the necessary reviews and consultations associated with the COP.
( 3 ) *Design and construction period.* The design and construction period begins at COP approval and ends when the operations period begins. During the design and construction period BSEE completes the FDR and FIR review(s), and the lessee undertakes project construction.
( 4 ) *Operations period.* A commercial lease has an operations period of 35 years; or the duration specified in the lease; or the duration included and approved as part of your COP. The operations period begins when the requirements of 30 CFR 285.637(a) are met through the submission of final reports and records for your project. Additional time may be added to the operations period through a lease suspension under § 585.415 issued during this period; a lease extension requested pursuant to paragraph (b) of this section; or a lease renewal under § 585.425.
( b ) You may request an extension of any of the lease periods outlined in paragraph (a) of this section for good cause, including if the project is designed and verified for a longer duration. In its discretion, BOEM may approve your request.
( c ) If you intend to develop your lease in phases under § 585.238, you must propose lease period schedules for each phase in your COP.
( d ) If you intend to segregate or consolidate your lease under §§ 585.408 through 585.413, you and your assignees may propose lease period schedules in your segregation or consolidation application.
Searched for **https://www.communitybanking.org/**

 

19961997199819992000200120022003200420052006200720082009201020112012201320142015201620172018201920202021202220232024

*Note:* This calendar view maps the number of captures of **https://www.communitybanking.org/**, *not* how many times the site was actually updated.

Look Up URL in general Internet Archive web collection.
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF

THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Quarterly Report of Constar International Inc. (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2003, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Michael J. Hoffman, President and Chief Executive Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and



(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|/s/ Michael J. Hoffman               
|-------------------------------------
|Michael J. Hoffman                   
|President and Chief Executive Officer



November 14, 2003