alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Stephen J. Markman

, Chief Justice

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster , 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.

February 23, 2017

jam 

# Order

Clerk February 23, 2017

1 55339 ( 24 )

TERAH LEE STAMPS,

a/k/a TERAH LEE STAMPS BEY

,

Plaintiff

- Appellant,

v SC: 1 55339

COA: 334483

MACOMB CORRECTIONAL FACILITY

WARDEN

,

Defendant

- Appellee.

___________________________________

On order of the Chief Justice, the motion to waive fees is considered and it

is DENIED because MCL 600.2963 requires that a prisoner pursuing a civil action be

liable for filing fees.

Within 21 days of the certification of this order, plaintiff shall pa y to the

Clerk of the Court the initial partial filing fee of $ 42 .00, shall submit a copy of this order

with the payment, and shall refile the copy of the pleadings which is being returned

with this order. Failure to comply with this order shall result in the appeal not being

filed in this Court.

If plaintiff timely files the partial fee and refiles the pleadings, monthly

payments shall be made to the Department of Corrections in an amount of 50 percent of

the deposits made to plaintiff’s account until t he payments equal the balance due of

$3 33 .00. This amount shall then be remitted to this Court.

Pursuant to MCL 600.2963(8) plaintiff shall not file further appeals in civil

actions in this Court until the entry fee in this case is paid in full.

The Clerk of the Court shall furnish two copies of this order to plaintiff and

return plaintiff’s pleadings with this order.
# C_2008064EN.01003702.xml

| 8.3.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 64/37 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.3.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 64/37

---

Order of the Court of First Instance of 7 January 2008 — Marmara Import-Export v OHIM — Marmara Zeytin Tarim Satis (marmara)

(Case T-403/03) (1)

1

(Community trade mark - Opposition - Withdrawal of opposition - No need to adjudicate)

(2008/C 64/60)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Marmara Import-Export GmbH (Düsseldorf, Germany) (represented by: A. von Arnswaldt and G. Rother, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: J. Weberndorfer, Agent)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM intervening before the Court of First Instance: Marmara Zeytin Tarim Satis Kooperatifleri Birligi (Bursa, Turkey) (represented by: A. Andorfer-Erhard, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM intervening before the Court of First Instance:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 1 October 2003 (Case R 515/2002-1) concerning opposition proceedings between Marmara Import-Export GmbH and Marmara Zeytin Tarim Satis Kooperatifleri Birligi.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court orders:

| 1. | There is no need to adjudicate on the action. |
| --- | --- |

1.

There is no need to adjudicate on the action.

| 2. | The applicant and the intervener shall bear their own costs and pay one half each of the defendant's costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The applicant and the intervener shall bear their own costs and pay one half each of the defendant's costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 71, 20.3.2004.

1

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AT DECEMBER 31, 1998 (UNAUDITED) AND THE
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED
DECEMBER 31, 1998 (UNAUDITED) AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                           7,757
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    1,448
<ALLOWANCES>                                     (275)
<INVENTORY>                                      1,286
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                10,500
<PP&E>                                          16,424
<DEPRECIATION>                                  12,697
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  15,327
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            1,639
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            98
<OTHER-SE>                                      13,590
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    15,327
<SALES>                                         11,563
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                11,563
<CGS>                                            5,674
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    5,674
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 2,997
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   5
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  3,062
<INCOME-TAX>                                        91
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              2,971
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     2,971
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.31
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.30
        

</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 1017 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. RES. 1017

   Eliminating the restriction that witnesses may appear remotely at 
 proceedings of committees of the House of Representatives only at the 
               discretion of the chair of the committee.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 15, 2024

    Ms. Perez (for herself, Mr. Golden of Maine, and Mrs. Peltola) 
submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee 
                                on Rules

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
   Eliminating the restriction that witnesses may appear remotely at 
 proceedings of committees of the House of Representatives only at the 
               discretion of the chair of the committee.

    Resolved,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This resolution may be cited as the ``Bringing Real Ideas, Data, 
and Genuine Experience to Congress Resolution'' or the ``BRIDGE to 
Congress Resolution''.

SEC. 2. ELIMINATION OF RESTRICTION THAT WITNESSES MAY APPEAR REMOTELY 
              AT COMMITTEE PROCEEDINGS ONLY AT DISCRETION OF CHAIR.

    Section 3(j)(1) of House Resolution 5, agreed to January 9, 2023, 
is amended by striking ``at the discretion of the chair of the 
committee and''.
                                 <all>
```
#### In the Matter of Reginald Lush, Appellant, v. James E. Allen, Jr., as Commissioner of Education, Respondent, and Central School District No. 1, of the Towns of Manchester and Others, Intervenor-Respondent.

Motion for permission to reargue or in the alternative to appeal to the Court of Appeals denied, without costs.
Exhibit 3(b)
 BY-LAWS
OF
INTEGRA BANK CORPORATION
  Offices
 Principal Office.
 Other Offices.
  Meetings of Shareholders
 Annual Meeting.
 Special Meetings.
 Place of Meetings.
 Notice of Meetings.




---



##### 



Waiver of Notice.
 Quorum
   Proxies.
  Voting.
  -2-




---



##### 



Business of Shareholder Meetings
  Directors
 Number of Directors; Vote Required; Term of Office.
   -3-




---



##### 



Vacancies.
 Meetings of the Board.
    Quorum.
  -4-




---



##### 



Action Without Meeting.
 Compensation.
 Retirement.
 Nominations.
  -5-




---



##### 



Committees
 Joint Committees
 Nominating and Governance Committee
 ALCO and Finance Committee
 Credit and Risk Management Committee
  -6-




---



##### 



Compensation Committee
 Audit Committee
 Other Committees
          -7-




---



##### 



Committee Vacancies
  Officers
 General Provisions.
 Term of Office.
   Compulsory Retirement of Executive Officers.
  Duties of Officers
 Chairman of the Board.
  -8-




---



##### 



President.
 Executive Vice President.
 Senior Vice President
 Vice President
 Secretary.
 Treasurer.
  -9-




---



##### 



Assistant and Subordinate Officers.
  Duties of Officers may be Delegated.
  Capital Stock
 Certificates for Shares
  -10-




---



##### 



Transfer of Shares
 Addresses of Shareholders
 Lost, Destroyed and Mutilated Certificates
 Regulations
  -11-




---



##### 



Fixing Date for Determination of Shareholders of Record
  Fiscal Year
   Seal
   Amendments
   -12-




---



##### 



Indemnification of Officers, Directors, and Other Eligible Persons
 Mandatory Indemnification
 Definitions
      -13-




---



##### 



Procedure for Claiming Indemnification
  -14-




---



##### 



Alternative Procedures
 Advancement
 Additional Rights
 Contract Right
 Application
  -15-




---



##### 



Enforcement
  Control Share Acquisition Statute
   -16-
### §308301. Definition

In this chapter, the term "national network" means the National Underground Railroad Network to Freedom established under section 308302 of this title.

(Pub. L. 113–287, §3, Dec. 19, 2014, 128 Stat. 3234.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 308301 | no source. | |

Section

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Purposes of Pub. L. 105–203

Pub. L. 105–203, §2(b), July 21, 1998, 112 Stat. 679, provided that: "The purposes of this Act [see 54 U.S.C. 308301 et seq.] are the following:

"(1) To recognize the importance of the Underground Railroad, the sacrifices made by those who used the Underground Railroad in search of freedom from tyranny and oppression, and the sacrifices made by the people who helped them.

"(2) To authorize the National Park Service to coordinate and facilitate Federal and non-Federal activities to commemorate, honor, and interpret the history of the Underground Railroad, its significance as a crucial element in the evolution of the national civil rights movement, and its relevance in fostering the spirit of racial harmony and national reconciliation."
#### PEOPLE, Respondent, v. LAKE, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

February 20, 1903.)

Proceeding by the people of the state of New York against Pater Lake. L. Loewenstein, for appellant. R., C. Taylor, for the People.

No opinion. Judgment affirmed.
**OMNI A IR INTERNA** **TIONA L** 

**P.O. BOX 582527**  **TULSA, OK 74158**  **918 -** **836 -** **5393**  **FAX: 918 -** **831 -** **3098** 12 March 2014 U. S. Department of Transportation Docket Operations, M -30 West Building ground floor, Room W1 2- 140 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE. Washington, DC 20590 Ladies/Gentlemen: In accordance with the Code of Federal Regulations, 14 CFR §11.25, Omni Air International petitions the Administrator for an extension of Exemption No. 10583 (docket number FAA

– 20 12 - 0053 ).This exemption is set to expire on July 31 st 2014

. Exemption 10583 provides relief, under certain conditions and limitations, from 14 CFR 121. 652 (a) and (c), to the extent necessary to allow Omni to substitute crosswind component and braking action restriction, along with a requirement to utilize automatic landing and approach coupler (ALAC) equipment, at the destination and alternate a irports in place of the existing restrictions to decision height (DH) and visibility minimums for pilots- in -command (PIC) who have not yet accumulated 100 hours (50, if reducible) in their current aircraft type. This exemption has been used to the benefit of the traveling public for many years, with no known compromise of safety. With regard to public interest and equivalent levels of safety, the circumstances that warranted the initial grant of exemption continue to exist. The renewal of this exemption is not a controversial issue. For this reason, and the reasons stated above, Omni Air International requests that a finding of good cause be made for waiving publication in the Federal Register. Granting the request for relief will set no precedents. The existence of the exemption is well known and widely accepted. If any further information is required, please call me at (918) 831 -3067. Respectfully, Robert E. Zeng Director of Operations Omni Air International
#### § 912.701 General.

Sections 700.5, 700.11, 700.12, 700.13, 700.14, 700.15 and part 701 of this chapter shall apply to surface coal mining and reclamation operations in Idaho.
M. P. No. 77-143.

#### Frank T. Canario *v.*Department of Natural Resources.

*Dolbashian, Chappell & Chace, N. Jameson Chace,*for petitioner.

*Julius C. Michaelson,*Attorney General, *John R. McDermott,*Special Asst. Attorney General, for respondent.

Petition for writ of certiorari is granted.

The Public Defender is directed to represent the petitioner in the further proceedings in this court.

Because of the importance of this case to our criminal justice system, The Rhode Island Bar Association is requested to file an amicus curiae brief discussing both sides of the issues presented.
Exhibit 99

Certification

Pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

(Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code)



Pursuant to section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), each of the undersigned officers of FNB Corp., a North Carolina corporation (the Corporation), does hereby certify that:



The Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal
year ended December 31, 2002 (the Form 10-K) of the Corporation fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in the Form 10-K fairly presents, in all
materials respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Corporation.



|                     |  |  |  | 
|-------------------- |  |  |  | 
|                    
|Date: March 25, 2003 |  |  |  | 
|                     |  |  |  | 



|                     |  |  |  | 
|-------------------- |  |  |  | 
|                    
|Date: March 25, 2003 |  |  |  | 
|                     |  |  |  | 



The
foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code) and is not being filed as part of the Form 10-K or as a
separate disclosure document.
(December 11, 1978)

#### Arlene Benarroch, Appellant, v Leon Benarroch, Respondent.

On the court’s own motion, the decision and order of this court, both dated November 6, 1978, are vacated and recalled and the following substituted decision is rendered: In a matrimonial action, the plaintiff wife appeals, as limited by her notice of appeal and brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated December 30, 1976, as granted defendant’s application to reduce his alimony and child support obligations. Order reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law and the facts, without costs or disbursements, (1) the first, second and fourth decretal paragraphs thereof are deleted and defendant’s application to modify the judgment of divorce by reducing his alimony and child support obligations is denied and (2) all language in the third decretal paragraph thereof, beginning with the words "and that after the counsel fees have been” and ending with the words "Defendant’s income increases”, is deleted. The action is remanded to Special Term for further proceedings on plaintiff’s application for a wage assignment. Special Term abused its discretion when it modified the alimony and support provisions of the judgment of divorce in the absence of a showing by defendant that he had suffered a " 'substantial change of circumstances’ ” (see *Kover v Kover,*29 NY2d 408, 413). Consequently, the original provisions for alimony and child support, as modified by this court, must remain in effect (see *Benarroch v Benarroch,*55 AD2d 943). Special Term should reconsider plaintiff’s application for a wage assignment in the light of our determination herein. Hopkins, J. P., Martuscello, Latham and Hawkins, JJ., concur.
**Judgment of the Court of First Instance (Second Chamber) of 12 December 2006 – Asociación de Estaciones de Servicio de Madrid
and Federación Catalana de Estaciones de Servicio v Commission**

**(Case T-146/03)**

State aid – Spanish law providing for measures in favour of the agricultural sector following an increase in fuel prices – Formal examination procedure under Article 88(2) EC – Decision finding that certain measures did not constitute aid – Action for annulment – Admissibility – Standing to bring proceedings – Duty to state reasons

1.                     *Actions for annulment – Natural or legal persons – Measures of direct and individual concern to them (Arts 88(2) EC and 230,
fourth para., EC) (see paras 40-47, 49, 51, 54-56)*

2.                     *Acts of the Community institutions – Statement of reasons – Obligation – Scope (Arts 87(1) EC and 253 EC) (see paras 78-79,
92)*

**Re:**

| |
| --- |
| APPLICATION for partial annulment of Commission Decision 2003/293/EC of 11 December 2002 on the measures implemented by Spain in the agricultural sector following the increase in fuel prices (OJ 2003 L 111, p. 24) |

**Operative part**

The Court:

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | | Declares that Article 1 of Commission Decision 2003/293/EC of 11 December 2002 on the measures implemented by Spain in the agricultural sector following the increase in fuel prices is annulled in so far that it finds that the measures to support agricultural cooperatives provided for by Royal Decree Law 10/2000 de medidas urgentes de apoyo a los sectores agrario, pesquero y del transporte (Decree Law on emergency support for agriculture, fisheries and transport) do not constitute aid within the meaning of Article 87(1) EC; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | | Orders the Commission to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the applicants; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | | Orders the Kingdom of Spain to bear its own costs. |
## CDC Outreach for Tick- Borne Disease Prevention • Includes IPM, though traditionally focused more 

### on personal prevention • New “toolkit” coming

– Trail signs, PSAs, fact sheets for various audiences 

### • Studies ongoing to better 

### document IPM/household strategies

## Challenges to Outreach for Tick IPM • U nderstanding and perception of risk

– 20% of respondents in Lyme endemic areas didn’t know ticks spread LD near them • Moving from knowledge to action • Prevention options not always clear • Fear/discomfort with methods

– Environmental effect of pesticides

– Only ~50% of respondents would use currently available acaricides to reduce ticks (10% were doing so)

– Studies suggest willingness to pay for service is <$100

## Outreach Research and

Implementation Needs • Better understanding of barriers to household IPM

– Landscaping, acaricide etc 

### • Development of methods acceptable to consumers

– Multidisciplinary teams 

### • Use of social marketing and other strategies to 

### increase movement from knowledge to action
§ 735.27 Records. ( a ) The agency shall maintain complete records in accordance with Office of Management and Budget Circular No. A-102. This includes books, documents, maps, and other evidence and accounting procedures and practices, sufficient to reflect properly— ( 1 ) The amount, receipt, and disposition by the agency of all assistance received for the program.
( 2 ) The total costs of the program, including all direct and indirect costs of whatever nature incurred for the performance of the program for which the grant has been awarded.
( b ) Subgrantees and contractors, including contractors for professional services, shall maintain books, documents, papers, maps, and records which are pertinent to specific grant award.
( c ) The agency's records and the records of its subgrantees and contractors, including professional services contracts, shall be subject at all reasonable times to inspection, reproduction, copying, and audit by the Office, the Department of the Interior, the Comptroller General of the United States, the Department of Labor or any authorized representative.
( d ) For completed or terminated grants the agency, subgrantees, and contractors shall preserve and make their records available to the Office, the Department of the Interior, the Comptroller General of the United States, Department of Labor, or any authorized representative pursuant to OMB Circular No. A-102.
United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 01-3708

___________

William Pledger, III, *

*

Appellant, * Appeal from the United States

* District Court for the Eastern

v. * District of Arkansas.

*

Pulaski County Circuit Court, Seventh * [UNPUBLISHED]

Division; State of Arkansas, *

*

Appellee. *

___________

Submitted: April 5, 2002

Filed: April 8, 2002

___________

Before WOLLMAN, FAGG, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

William Pledger, III purports to appeal from the district court's dismissal of

Pledger's complaint. Having carefully reviewed the record, we observe that the

district court has not entered a separate judgment, as required by Federal Rule of Civil

Procedure 58. Accordingly, Pledger's appeal is premature, and we dismiss without

prejudice to the taking of an appeal once the district court enters judgment on a

separate document. See Sanders v. Clemco Indus., 862 F.2d 161, 166-67 (8th Cir.

1988).
-2-

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
PUBLIC LAW 115–140—MAR. 20, 2018 132 STAT. 347 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.R. 1988: 

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD: 

Vol. 163 (2017): July 11, considered and passed House. 

Vol. 164 (2018): Mar. 7, considered and passed Senate. 

Æ 

Public Law 115–140 

115th Congress 

An Act 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 1730 18th 

Street in Bakersfield, California, as the ‘‘Merle Haggard Post Office Building’’. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. MERLE HAGGARD POST OFFICE BUILDING. 

(a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States Postal 

Service located at 1730 18th Street in Bakersfield, California, shall 

be known and designated as the ‘‘Merle Haggard Post Office 

Building’’. 

(b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, regulation, 

document, paper, or other record of the United States to the facility 

referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference 

to the ‘‘Merle Haggard Post Office Building’’. 

Approved March 20, 2018. 

Mar. 20, 2018 

[H.R. 1988]
Appeal No. 77-109.

#### Arnold N. Montaquila *et al. v.*Albert St.Cyr, *Town Manager et al.*

*Edward John Mulligan,*for plaintiffs.

*Frank J. Williams,*Solicitor, *Arthur A. Thovmasian, Jr.,*Asst. Solicitor, for defendants.

The plaintiffs’ motion for an extension of time to May 24, 1977 to file their brief is granted.

The plaintiffs’ motion for special assignment is denied.