alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
## Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas

J U D G M E N T

Metropolitan Telecommunications Holding Company, Appellant

No. 06

- 19

- 00016

- CV v.
Glenn Hegar, Comptroller of Public Accounts of the State of Texas, and Ken Paxton, Attorney General of the State of Texas, Appellee s Appeal from the 250th District Court of Travis County, Texas (Tr. Ct. No. D

- 1

- GN

17

- 005706 ). Memorandum Opinion delivered by Justice Stevens, Chief Justice Morriss and Justice Burgess participating.

As stated in the Court’s opinion of t his date, we find no error in the judgment of the court

below

. We affirm the judgment of the trial court

. We further order that the appellant, Metropolitan Telecommunications Holding Company, pay all costs of this appeal.

RENDERED AUGUST 21, 2019 BY ORDER OF THE COURT JOSH R. MORRISS, III CHIEF JUSTICE

ATTEST: Debra K. Autrey, Clerk
* Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS For the Fifth Circuit

___________________________

No. 01-30524 Summary Calendar

___________________________ In the matter of: WILLIAM PAUL LAWRENCE, II, Debtor, WILLIAM PAUL LAWRENCE, II; AND LAWRENCE & CO., INC. Appellants,
versus
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; DAVIDSON NIX & JONES, Appellees.

___________________________________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western

District of Louisiana, Shreveport Division

(00-CV-1775)

___________________________________________________ October 16, 2001 Before DAVIS, BENAVIDES, and STEWART, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * After reviewing the record and the briefs of the parties, we are satisfied that the district court correctly rejected appellant’s appeal from the order of the bankruptcy court. We therefore affirm the judgment of the district court essentiallyfor the reasons stated in the district court’s memorandum ruling

of March 23, 2001, AFFIRMED.
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

STEPHEN TRESSEL
, Appellant,

v.

LUCIA GATTA
, Appellee

.

No. 4D 14

- 3048

[ May 13, 2015 ]

Appeal of a non

- final order from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County ; Amy L. Smith , Judge; L.T. Case No.

213DR009852NB

.

Bruce S. Rosenwater of Bruce S. Rosenwater & Associates, P.A., West Palm Beach, for appellant.

John T. Christiansen, Jr. of Law Offices of John T. Christiansen, P.L., West Palm Beach, for appellee

.

P ER C URIAM

.

We affirm the order denying the former husband’s motion for contempt against the former wife for failure to pay his award of temporary attorney’s fees. Although the trial court at one point in the proceedings erroneously appeared to place the burden of proving an ability to pay on the husband, the husband did not object to the court’s statements. We also interpret those statements, not as requiring the husband to prove ability to pay but to identify a source from which the wife could pay a contempt order. Moreover, the wife presented evidence of her inability to pay the purge amount, which was the entire amount of the temporary award, and this evidence was accepted and relied on by the trial court in denying the motion for contempt. Thus , based upon the court’s findings and determinations of credibility, the wife satisfied her burden of overcoming the presumption of ability to pay. See Bowen v. Bowen

, 471 So. 2d 1274

, 1278

- 79 (Fla. 1985) ; see also Perez v. Perez , 599 So. 2d 682, 683 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007). The fact that the court did not find the evidence sufficient to warrant contempt, however, does not preclude other relief. Our affirmance, therefore, is without prejudice to the husband securing a2

judgment in his favor for the unpaid temporary award in the final judgment of dissolution, or alternatively, by the filing of an amended motion for contempt requesting a purge amount within the wife’s present ability to pay.

Affirmed

.

W ARNER , G ROSS and F ORST , JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
Disclaimer

### State Department of Education

Tennessee State Department of Education710 James Robertson ParkwayNashville, TN 37243-0375Phone: 615-741-5158Website: https://www.tn.gov/education

### State Higher Education Agency

Tennessee Higher Education Commission312 Rosa Parks Avenue, 9th FloorNashville, TN 37243Phone: (615) 741-3605Website: https://www.tn.gov/thec/

### Special Education Agency

Tennessee State Department of EducationSpecial Education Department710 James Robertson ParkwayNashville, TN 37243-0375Phone: 615-741-5158Website: https://www.tn.gov/education/student-support/special-education.html

### State Adult Education Agency

Division of Adult Education State Department of Labor and Workforce Development 220 French Landing Drive Nashville, TN 37243 Phone: (844) 224-5818 Toll-Free: (800) 531-1515 Fax: (615) 532-4899 Website: https://www.tn.gov/workforce/jobs-and-education/adult-education.html

Back to state map
§ 651.53 Modifications of the scoping process. ( a ) If a lengthy period exists between a decision to prepare an EIS and the time of preparation, the proponent will initiate the NOI at a reasonable time in advance of preparation of the DEIS. The NOI will state any tentative conclusions regarding the scope of the EIS made prior to publication of the NOI. Reasonable time for public participation will be allowed before the proponent makes any final decisions or commitments on the EIS.
( b ) The proponent of a proposed action may use scoping during preparation of environmental review documents other than an EIS, if desired. In such cases, the proponent may use these procedures or may develop modified procedures, as needed.
#### HAWLEY v. ROCHESTER & S. RY. CO.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.

October 27, 1903.)

Action by Emma Hawley against the Rochester & Suburban Railway Company.

No opinion. Motion for reargument denied. Motion for leave to appeal to the Court of Ap'peals granted; the form of the order to be settled by and before HISCOCK, J., on two days’ notice.
#### Agnes Schloop, Appellant, v. State of New York, Respondent.

Motion granted and order dismissing appeal vacated, on condition that original record and printed appellant’s briefs are filed on or before September 29, 1960. Respondent’s brief must be filed on or before October 6, 1960 if appeal is to he argued at October 1960 Term.
Case: 3:12-cr-50027 Document #: 52-10 Filed: 01/31/13 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:428
#### Lambert A. Coffin, Appellant, v. John P. Cunningham, Respondent.

— Judgment unanimously reversed on the law and facts and a new trial granted, with costs to the appellant to abide the event. Memorandum: Upon the trial a sharp issue of fact was presented as to how far into the highway defendant had backed his automobile from a driveway, as the tractor trailer in which the plaintiff was a passenger came down the highway. The testimony of the witness Mathous, who came upon the scene shortly after the accident, as to his observations of tire marks in new fallen snow in the highway and running to a vehicle parked in the driveway was admissible. The trial court erred in striking this testimony after the receipt thereof. It was for the jury to evaluate the testimony and draw such inferences as might be proper from the proven facts. (Appeal from judgment of Jefferson Trial Term for defendant for no cause of action in an automobile negligence action.) Present — Williams, P. J., Bastow, Halpern, McClusky and Henry, JJ.
#### 1852.243-70--1852.243-71 [Reserved]
#### 22.1015 Discovery of errors by the Department of Labor.

If the Department of Labor discovers and determines, whether before or after a contract award, that a contracting officer made an erroneous determination that the Service Contract Labor Standards statute did not apply to a particular acquisition or failed to include an appropriate wage determination in a covered contract, the contracting officer, within 30 days of notification by the Department of Labor, shall include in the contract the clause at 52.222-41 and any applicable wage determination issued by the Administrator. If the contract is subject to 41 U.S.C. 6707(f), the Administrator may require retroactive application of that wage determination. The contracting officer shall equitably adjust the contract price to reflect any changed cost of performance resulting from incorporating a wage determination or revision.

[54 FR 19816, May 8, 1989, as amended at 79 FR 24207, Apr. 29, 2014]
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service

Assabet River 

National Wildlife Refuge

u.s. l' ~R' A> 1liTT~n ~ 

SERVICE 

~ 

~ 

Legend 

~ ~ --...... e:;:::;J ---eoo ~DHpM.-.!1 

r--:=-MinnM ..... 

... '-"POI"Cl.Mr 

N 

+ 

- ··--, __ 07 RY STATE FOREST 

• 

Please stay on these trails. 

Access to other parts of the refuge is by permit only
400 MARYLAND AVE. S.W., WASHINGTON, DC 20202-2600

www.ed.gov

The Department of Education’s mission is to promote student achievement and preparation for global competitiveness

by fostering educational excellence and ensuring equal access.

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

OFFICE OF SPECIAL EDUCATION AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES

October 20, 2020 

Honorable Michael Rice 

State Superintendent of Education 

Michigan Department of Education 

608 W. Allegan Street 

P.O. Box 30008 

Lansing, Michigan 48909 

RiceM6@michigan.gov

Dear Superintendent Rice: 

This letter grants final approval under Section 421(b) of the General Education Provisions Act 

for grant awards H027A180110 and H173A180117. 

The Department received your July 13, 2020 request on behalf of the Michigan Department of 

Education for a waiver extending the period of availability for Federal fiscal year (FFY) 2018 

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) Part B grant award funds. 

With this approval, the FFY 2018 IDEA Part B grant award funds will be available for obligation 

through September 30, 2021 and may be liquidated through December 30, 2021. 

Please contact your Office of Special Education Programs’ State lead, Genee Norbert at

Genee.Norbert@ed.gov, if you have any questions. 

Sincerely, 

/s/

Mark Schultz 

Commissioner, Rehabilitation Services Administration. 

Delegated the authority to perform the functions and duties 

of the Assistant Secretary for the Office of Special 

Education and Rehabilitative Services. 

cc: State Director
Case: 1:12-cv-03233 Document #: 241-2 Filed: 07/14/16 Page 1 of 10 PageID #:5606
Case: 1:12-cv-03233 Document #: 241-2 Filed: 07/14/16 Page 2 of 10 PageID #:5607
Case: 1:12-cv-03233 Document #: 241-2 Filed: 07/14/16 Page 3 of 10 PageID #:5608
Case: 1:12-cv-03233 Document #: 241-2 Filed: 07/14/16 Page 4 of 10 PageID #:5609
Case: 1:12-cv-03233 Document #: 241-2 Filed: 07/14/16 Page 5 of 10 PageID #:5610
Case: 1:12-cv-03233 Document #: 241-2 Filed: 07/14/16 Page 6 of 10 PageID #:5611
Case: 1:12-cv-03233 Document #: 241-2 Filed: 07/14/16 Page 7 of 10 PageID #:5612
Case: 1:12-cv-03233 Document #: 241-2 Filed: 07/14/16 Page 8 of 10 PageID #:5613
Case: 1:12-cv-03233 Document #: 241-2 Filed: 07/14/16 Page 9 of 10 PageID #:5614
Case: 1:12-cv-03233 Document #: 241-2 Filed: 07/14/16 Page 10 of 10 PageID #:5615
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
This schedule  contains summary financial  information  extracted from Form 10-K
for the year ended December 31, 1997 for May Drilling Partnership  1983-2 and is
qualified in its entirety by reference to such Form 10-K.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0000711309
<NAME>                        May Drilling Partnership 1983-2
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000                    
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              Dec-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                   Dec-31-1997              
<CASH>                                         217
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  207
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               424
<PP&E>                                         16,652
<DEPRECIATION>                                 16,162
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 914
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          24
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                     890
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   914
<SALES>                                        818
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               827
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  283
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                544
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            544
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   544
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  27.94
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  27.94
        


</TABLE>
Exhibit 31.1
 
      a)
    
    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls
and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information
relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by
others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being
prepared;b)
    
    [Intentionally omitted];c)
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and
presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls
and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such
evaluation; andd)
    
    Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial
reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the
registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially
affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control
over financial reporting; and
  a)
    
    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of
internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect
the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information;
andb)
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who
have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.
 September 12, 2008
    /s/ Eugene S. KahnEugene S. KahnChief Executive Officer 34
15.303 Responsibilities. ( a ) Agency heads are responsible for source selection. The contracting officer is designated as the source selection authority, unless the agency head appoints another individual for a particular acquisition or group of acquisitions.
( b ) The source selection authority shall— ( 1 ) Establish an evaluation team, tailored for the particular acquisition, that includes appropriate contracting, legal, logistics, technical, and other expertise to ensure a comprehensive evaluation of offers;
( 2 ) Approve the source selection strategy or acquisition plan, if applicable, before solicitation release;
( 3 ) Ensure consistency among the solicitation requirements, notices to offerors, proposal preparation instructions, evaluation factors and subfactors, solicitation provisions or contract clauses, and data requirements;
( 4 ) Ensure that proposals are evaluated based solely on the factors and subfactors contained in the solicitation (10 U.S.C. 3303(c) and 41 U.S.C. 3703(c));
( 5 ) Consider the recommendations of advisory boards or panels (if any); and
( 6 ) Select the source or sources whose proposal is the best value to the Government (10 U.S.C. 3303(c) and 41 U.S.C. 3703(c)).
( c ) The contracting officer shall— ( 1 ) After release of a solicitation, serve as the focal point for inquiries from actual or prospective offerors;
( 2 ) After receipt of proposals, control exchanges with offerors in accordance with 15.306; and
( 3 ) Award the contract(s).
[62 FR 51230, Sept. 30, 1997, as amended at 79 FR 24201, Apr. 29, 2014; 87 FR 73897, Dec. 1, 2022]
#### 203.909-3 Solicitation provision and contract clause.

Use the provision at FAR 52.203-18, Prohibition on Contracting with Entities That Require Certain Internal Confidentiality Agreements or Statements—Representation, and the clause at FAR 52.203-19, Prohibition on Requiring Certain Internal Confidentiality Agreements or Statements, prescribed at FAR 3.909-3 to implement section 883 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021.

[87 FR 65512, Oct. 28, 2022]
Disclaimer

### State Department of Education

Oklahoma State Department of EducationOliver Hodge Building2500 North Lincoln BoulevardOklahoma City, OK 73105-4599Phone: (405) 521-3308Website: http://www.ok.gov/sde/

### State Higher Education Agency

Oklahoma State Regents for Higher EducationSuite 200655 Research ParkwayOklahoma City, OK 73104Phone: (405) 225-9100Website: http://www.okhighered.org/

### Special Education Agency

Special Education ServicesOklahoma State Department of EducationOliver Hodge Building2500 North Lincoln BoulevardOklahoma City, OK 73105-4599Phone: (405) 521-3351Website: https://sde.ok.gov/special-education

### State Adult Education Agency

Adult Education and Family Literacy 1500 West Seventh Avenue Stillwater, OK 74074 Phone: (405) 473-5556Website: https://www.okcareertech.org/about/state-agency/divisions/adult-basic-education

Back to state map
## 14 CFR §45.23 (B): Marking of the Aircraft

The regulation requires:

When marks include only the Roman capital letter “N” and

the registration number is displayed on limited, restricted or

light

- sport category aircraft or experimental or provisionally

certificated aircraft, the operator must also display on that

aircraf t near each entrance to the cabin, cockpit, or pilot

station, in letters not less than 2 inches nor more than 6

inches high, the words “limited,” “restricted”, “light

- sport,”

“experimental,” or “provisional,” as applicable.

Even though the UAS will ha ve no airworthiness certificate,

an exemption may be needed as the UAS will have no

entrance to the cabin, cockpit or pilot station on which the

word “Experimental” can be placed. Given the size of the

sUAV, two

- inch lettering will be impossible. The w ord

“Experimental” will be placed on the fuselage in compliance

with §45.29 (f).

The equivalent level of safety will be provided by having the

sUAV marked on its fuselage as required by §45.29 (f)

where the Pilot, Spotter (Observer) and others working with

the sUAV will see the identification of the UAS as

“Experimental.” The FAA has issued the following

exemptions to this regulation to Exemptions Nos. 10700,

8738, 10167 and 10167A.
AMENDMENT NO. 5 TO THE NASA RESEARCH ANNOUNCEMENT (NRA) ENTITLED

"RESEARCH OPPORTUNITIES IN SPACE AND EARTH SCIENCES (ROSES) 2010,"

NNH10ZDA001N, RELEASED FEBRUARY 12, 2010

Major revision of Appendix A.4: Land-Cover and Land-Use Change (LCLUC).

This solicitation is focused on two major themes: 1) Synthesis of prior Land Use and 

Land Cover Change studies and 2) Vulnerability, Impacts, and Adaptation (VIA), as 

related to climate interactions with land-use changes around the world, for example 

addressing the vulnerability of current land use systems and related social systems and 

their adaptability to climate variability and change and other major global stressors. 

Amendment 5 makes two changes: 1) The vulnerability, impacts and adaptation (VIA) 

theme is now focused on wetlands. VIA proposals should focus on changes in wetlands 

areas in response to changes in climate, economic development, policies and their 

interactions. 2) Both themes emphasize the social science component of this program 

element. For a proposal to be competitive, it must include a social science component, 

such as the use of socio-economic data associated with a land-use or socio-economic 

model as an integral part of the study, preferably based on available data or data being 

collected by an ongoing study funded by another agency. Note that the remote sensing 

component is a necessary attribute for each proposal.

Due dates are unchanged: Step-1 proposals are due December 1, 2010 and Step-2 

proposals are due June 1, 2011. 

Questions concerning this program may be addressed to Garik Gutman, Earth Science 

Division, Science Mission Directorate, NASA Headquarters, Washington, DC 20546-0001; 

Telephone: (202) 358-0276; E-mail: ggutman@nasa.gov.
Publications
- n=number of samples  
- Percent of samples (scat, stomach, etc.) examined that contained the   identified prey. This is not the percentage of that prey in the total diet.   Only species that occurred in quantities equal to or greater than 10% were   included in this table (except salmonids, which were reported at any level).   
- National Marine Fisheries Service/Alaska Fisheries Science Center   
- Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife   
- Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife 

Table of Contents
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FIFTH DISTRICT

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

JULIAN CHRISTIAN MCINTOSH

,

Appellant

,

v. Case No. 5D 17

- 3844

STATE OF FLORIDA

,

Appellee

.

________________________________/

Opinion filed April 27, 2018

3.850 Appeal from the Circuit

Court for Orange County

, Alan S. Apte , Judge.

Julian C hristian Mc I ntosh,

De F uniak Springs, pro se.

No Appearance for Appellee.

PER CURIAM

.

Appellant, Julian Christian McIntosh, appeals the summary denial of his Florida

Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 post

- conviction motion alleging six claims of ineffective

assistance of counsel. We reverse the portion of the order summarily denying ground

one and otherwise affirm without discussion

.2

Appellant was charged with three counts: aggravated assault of Jose Barci a,

aggravated assault of Britta ny DeLe mos

, 1 and possession of a firearm by a convicted

felon. Prior to trial, t he State nolle prossed t he charge of aggravated assault against

Brittany DeL e mos, and Appellant was acquitted in a bifurcated j ury trial of aggravated

assault against Jose Barcia. He was convicted as charged

, however, f ollowing a separate

trial on the count for possession of a f irearm by a convicted felon

.

In ground one , Appellant alleges that his counsel was ineffective for failing to call

Brittany DeLe mos at the second trial

, claiming that she would have testified that he did

not posses s a firearm. Although Ms. DeLe mos’ s proffered testimony could have been

impeached with a prior inconsistent statement , Appellant alleges that she would have

explained at trial that she lied in her 911 call because , at the time, she was “filled with

emotions ” and “was desperate ” to have Appe llant out of her house. 2 Given our record,

we conclude that Appellant is entitled to an evidentiary hearing on ground one unless the

trial court on remand is able to attach record s conclusively refuting Appellant’s claim

.

AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in pa rt ; and REMANDED.

ORFINGER

, TORPY and EISNAUGLE, JJ., concur.

1 The record indicates that Brittany DeLemos is also known as Brittany McIntosh.

2 Appellant attached an affidavit signed by Brittany DeLemos that is consistent with his allegations.