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

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra, Justices

Order 

March 9, 2011 

141727 & (70)(72) 

ESTATE OF DANIEL D. JILEK, by JOY 

A. JILEK, Personal Representative, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 141727 

 COA: 289488 

Washtenaw CC: 05-000268-NH 

CARLIN C. STOCKSON, M.D., and EPMG 

OF MICHIGAN, 

Defendants-Appellants, 

and 

MAPLE URGENT CARE, d/b/a MAPLE 

HEALTH BUILDING, TRINITY HEALTHMICHIGAN, CATHERINE MCAULEY 

HEALTH CENTER, IRWIN M. LUTWIN, 

CARPENTER HEALTH CARE, d/b/a 

CARPENTER HEALTH CENTER, and 

ROBERT E. ANDERSON, 

Defendants. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the July 29, 2010 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered. We direct the Clerk to schedule oral 

argument on whether to grant the application or take other peremptory action. MCR 

7.302(H)(1). At oral argument, the parties shall address: (1) whether the Court of 

Appeals erred in reversing the jury verdict in favor of the defendants on the basis of its 

conclusion that the trial court erred in determining the applicable standard of care, and (2) 

whether the Court of Appeals erred in holding that evidence of the defendants’ internal 

policies and procedures should have been admitted at trial. The parties may file 

supplemental briefs within 42 days of the date of this order, but they should not submit 

mere restatements of their application papers. 
I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

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

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

March 9, 2011 

d0302 

 

2

 The motions for leave to file brief amicus curiae are GRANTED. The Michigan 

Association for Justice, Michigan Health and Hospital Association, and Michigan 

Defense Trial Counsel, Inc., are invited to file briefs amicus curiae. Other persons or 

groups interested in the determination of the issues presented in this case may move the 

Court for permission to file briefs amicus curiae.
§ 247.32 Termination of agency participation. ( a ) *When may a State agency's participation in CSFP be terminated?* While paragraphs (a)(1), (a)(2), and (a)(3) of this section, as applicable, describe the circumstances and basic procedures for terminating State agency programs, specific actions and procedures relating to program termination are more fully described in 2 CFR part 200, subpart D, and USDA implementing regulations 2 CFR parts 400 and 415. ( 1 ) *Termination by FNS.* FNS may terminate a State agency's participation in CSFP, in whole or in part, if the State agency does not comply with the requirements of this part. FNS must provide written notification to the State agency of termination, including the reasons for the action, and the effective date.
( 2 ) *Termination by State agency.* The State agency may terminate the program, in whole or in part, upon written notification to FNS, stating the reasons and effective date of the action. In accordance with § 247.4(b)(6), which relates to the termination of agreements, either party must provide, at minimum, 30 days' written notice.
( 3 ) *Termination by mutual agreement.* The State agency's program may also be terminated, in whole or in part, if both parties agree the action would be in the best interest of the program. The two parties must agree upon the conditions of the termination, including the effective date.
( b ) *When may a local agency's participation in CSFP be terminated?* While paragraphs (b)(1), (b)(2), and (b)(3) of this section, as applicable, describe the circumstances and basic procedures in termination of local agency programs, specific actions and procedures relating to program termination are more fully described in 2 CFR part 200, subpart D, and USDA implementing regulations 2 CFR parts 400 and 415. ( 1 ) *Termination by State agency.* The State agency may terminate a local agency's participation in CSFP, or may be required to terminate a local agency's participation, in whole or in part, if the local agency does not comply with the requirements of this part. The State agency must notify the local agency in writing of the termination, the reasons for the action, and the effective date, and must provide the local agency with an opportunity to appeal, in accordance with § 247.35. (The local agency may appeal the termination in accordance with § 247.35.)
( 2 ) *Termination by local agency.* The local agency may terminate the program, in whole or in part, upon written notification to the State agency, stating the reasons and effective date of the action. In accordance with § 247.4(b)(6), which relates to the termination of agreements, either party must provide, at minimum, 30 days' written notice.
( 3 ) *Termination by mutual agreement.* The local agency's program may also be terminated, in whole or in part, if both the State and local agency agree that the action would be in the best interest of the program. The two parties must agree upon the conditions of the termination, including the effective date.
[70 FR 47063, Aug. 11, 2005, as amended at 83 FR 14174, Apr. 3, 2018]
#### § 1786.103 Security.

If, after prepayment of RUS Notes, the Government should continue to hold liens on the borrower's property, the Administrator of RUS will consider a request for the accommodation of such liens for the purpose of providing security for loans the proceeds of which were used to prepay RUS Notes. Such lien accommodations shall be limited in amount to the Discounted Present Value of the RUS Notes plus such costs, as the Administrator shall determine to be reasonable, incurred by the borrower in obtaining such loans.
###### Editorial Note on Part 1980

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 1980 appear at 80 FR 9905, Feb. 24, 2015.

#### §§ 1980.415-1980.418 [Reserved]
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

GABRIEL MARIN, § No. 08

- 19

- 00 186

- CR

Appellant, § Appeal from the

v. § County Criminal Court #4

THE STATE OF TEXAS

, § of El Paso County, Texas

Appellee. § (TC# 20180C03247 )

J U D G M E N T

The Court has considered this cause on the record and concludes there was no error in the

judgment. We therefore affirm the judgment of the court below. This decision shall be certified

below for observance.

IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 1 5 TH DAY OF APRIL , 20 21

.

JEFF ALLEY, Justice

Before Rodriguez, C.J., Palafox, and Alley, JJ.
2006-0691.

#### State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Reid.

Cuyahoga App. No. 87718. On motion for stay of court of appeals’ judgment. Motion denied.
* 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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-31300

Summary Calendar

DWAYNE BROWN

Plaintiff-Appellant

v.

LOUISIANA STATE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; RICHARD L

STALDER

Defendants-Appellees

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Middle District of Louisiana

USDC No. 3:06-CV-568

Before JOLLY, DAVIS, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges:

PER CURIAM:*

Dwayne Brown, Louisiana prisoner # 96518, appeals the dismissal of his

42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint as frivolous. Brown argues that the defendants, the

Louisiana Department of Public Safety and Corrections (the Department) and

Richard Stalder, have erroneously classified him as a fourth felony offender, a

determination which has rendered him ineligible for parole. The Louisiana

Supreme Court, however, has held thatthe Departmentis not bound by a court’s

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

April 14, 2008

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk
No. 06-31300

2

habitual offender adjudication in calculating parole eligibility. Townley v. Dep’t

of Public Safety & Corr., 681 So. 2d 951, 953 (La. 1996). Because Brown’s civil

rights action is factually frivolous, the district court’s judgment is affirmed. See

Bickford v. Int’l Speedway Corp., 654 F.2d 1028, 1031 (5th Cir. 1981). We warn

Brown that our affirmance of the district court’s dismissal of his complaint

counts as one strike under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) and that, if he accumulates three

strikes, he will not be able to proceed in forma pauperis in any civil action or

appeal filed while he is incarcerated or detained in any facility unless he is

under imminent danger of serious physical injury. See Adepegba v. Hammons,

103 F.3d 383, 388 (5th Cir. 1996). 

AFFIRMED; SANCTION WARNING ISSUED.
February 8, 1980.

Appeal No. 79-403.

#### Margaret Scherer *et al. v.*B. & Y. Realty Co., *et al.*

This matter was heard on February 5, 1980 in accord with a Show Cause Order issued December 28, 1979, that directed defendants to show why their appeal should not be dismissed for failure to file notices of appeal together with filing fees within the time period required by Sup. Ct. R. 4(a).

The defendants having shown insufficient cause, their appeals are dismissed and the papers are remanded to the Superior Court.

*913Mr. Justice Doris not participating.

*Milton Bernstein,*for plaintiffs, *Stephen A. Gordon Ltd.,*for defendants.
Comment Info: ================= General Comment:See Attached
Document headings vary by document type but may contain
                    the following: the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document
the number of the CFR title and the number of each part
                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly
                      related to
the agency docket number / agency internal file number
the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in
                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory
                      Actions See the
                    Document Drafting Handbook
                    for more details.
 Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
 AGENCY: Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.
 ACTION: Update Listing of Financial Institutions in Liquidation.
 SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (Corporation) has been appointed the sole receiver for the following financial institutions effective as of the Date Closed as indicated in the listing. This list (as updated from time to time in the 
                        **Federal Register**
                        ) may be relied upon as “of record” notice that the Corporation has been appointed receiver for purposes of the statement of policy published in the July 2, 1992 issue of the 
                        **Federal Register**
                         (57 FR 29491). For further information concerning the identification of any institutions which have been placed in liquidation, please visit the Corporation Web site at 
                        *http://www.fdic.gov/​bank/​individual/​failed/​banklist.html*
                         or contact the Manager of Receivership Oversight in the appropriate service center. Dated: November 8, 2010. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Pamela Johnson, Regulatory Editing Specialist.
 
 
 Institutions in Liquidation
[In alphabetical order]
FDIC Ref. No.
Bank name
City
State
Date closed10307
First Vietnamese American Bank
Westminster
CA
11/05/2010.10308
K Bank
Randallstown
MD
11/05/2010.10309
Pierce Commercial Bank
Tacoma
WA
11/05/2010.10310
Western Commercial Bank
Woodland Hills
CA
11/05/2010.


[FR Doc. 2010-28628 Filed 11-12-10; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
§ 1970.152 EIS funding and professional services. ( a ) *Funding for EISs.* Unless otherwise approved by the Agency, an applicant must fund an EIS and any supplemental documentation prepared in support of an applicant's proposal.
( b ) *Acquisition of professional services.* Applicants shall solicit and procure professional services in accordance with and through the third-party contractor methods specified in 40 CFR 1506.5(c), and in compliance with applicable state or local laws or regulations. Applicants and their officers, employees, or agents shall not engage in contract awards or contract administration if there is a conflict of interest or receipt of gratuities, favors or any form of monetary value from contractors, subcontractors, potential contractors or subcontractors, or other parties performing or to perform work on an EIS. To avoid any conflicts of interest, the Agency is responsible for selecting the EIS contractor and the applicant must not initiate any procurement of professional services to prepare an EIS without prior written approval from the Agency. The Agency reserves the right to consider alternate procurement methods.
( c ) *EIS scope and content.* The Agency will prepare the scope of work for the preparation of the EIS and will be responsible for the scope, content and development of the EIS prepared by the contractor(s) hired or selected by the Agency.
( d ) *Agreement Outlining Party Roles and Responsibilities.* For each EIS, an agreement will be executed by the Agency, the applicant, and each third-party contractor, which describes each party's roles and responsibilities during the EIS process.
( e ) *Disclosure statement.* The Agency will ensure that a disclosure statement is executed by each EIS contractor. The disclosure statement will specify that the contractor has no financial or other interest in the outcome of the proposal.
**Exhibit32.2**

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection withthe Annual Report of M.L. Macadamia Orchards, L.P. (the “Company”) on             Form 10-K/A for the period endedDecember 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on thedate hereof (the “Report”), we, the undersigned management of the Company,certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that,

(3)          The Report fullycomplies with the requirements of section 13 (a) or 15 (d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

(4)          The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| /s/                      | Wayne W.  Roumagoux |   |
|--------------------------|---------------------|--------|
|                     |
| Wayne W.  Roumagoux      |
| Chief Financial  Officer |
| April 12, 2007           |

 

----
December 20, 1979.

M.P. No. 79-440.

#### Regina Smith *v.*Housing Authority of the City of Providence.

Mr. Justice Doris did not participate.

*Rhode Island Legal Services, Inc., William Rutzik, Barbara Hurst,*for petitioner, *Francis B. Brown,*for respondent.

The petitioner’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis is granted. The District Court judgments which petitioner asks us to review were appealable to Superior Court.

Therefore, the petition for writ of certiorari is denied.
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 Igene Biotechnology, Inc. (the "Company")
Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31,
2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date  hereof (the "Report"), I, Stephen F. Hiu, President 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,
to the best of my knowledge:

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

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


Date:  March 31, 2009    By: /s/ STEPHEN F. HIU
                             ____________________________________
                                 STEPHEN F. HIU
                                 President
                                 (principal executive officer)


A  signed original of this written statement required by  Section
906  has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the
Company  and furnished to the Securities and Exchange  Commission
or its staff upon request.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

IN RE: 3M COMBAT ARMS EARPLUG CASE NO. 3:19md2885

PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION

 Judge M. Casey Rodgers

This Document relates to All Cases Magistrate Judge Gary R. Jones

 

REFERRAL AND ORDER

Referred to Judge M. Casey Rodgers on May 20, 2019

Motion/Pleadings: MOTION TO APPEAR PRO HAC VICE 

Filed by Adam Wolfson on May 17, 2019 Doc. # 361 

JESSICA J. LYUBLANOVITS

CLERK OF COURT

/s/Kathy Rock

Deputy Clerk: Kathy Rock

On consideration, temporary admission is GRANTED for a period of 30

days. If the identified case or cases in which movant is attorney of record are

timely consolidated in the MDL, this temporary admission will automatically

convert to a traditional PHV admission, without further order of the Court. If no

case in which the movant is attorney of record is timely filed, this temporary

admission will be automatically revoked. See ECF No. 86, ¶ II.

DONE and ORDERED this 20th day of May 2019.

 M. Casey Rodgers 

M. CASEY RODGERS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:19-md-02885-MCR-HTC Document 365 Filed 05/20/19 Page 1 of 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 

PENSACOLA DIVISION 

IN RE: 3M COMBAT ARMS 

EARPLUG PRODUCTS

 Case No. 3:19md2885 

LIABILITY LITIGATION 

This Document Relates to: 

Vilsmeyer, 7:20cv113 

 

Judge M. Casey Rodgers 

Magistrate Judge Gary R. Jones 

EXHIBITS ORDER NO. 2 

This Order addresses Plaintiff’s objections to exhibits identified on 

Defendants’ first priority exhibit list dated February 15, 2022. The Court’s rulings 

are set forth and highlighted in the attached Exhibit A. 

SO ORDERED this 11th day of March, 2022. 

 

 M. CASEY RODGERS 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 7:20-cv-00113-MCR-GRJ Document 116 Filed 03/11/22 Page 1 of 1
1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

IN RE: 3M COMBAT ARMS

EARPLUG PRODUCTS LIABILITY

LITIGATION

THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO: 

CISEK et al v. 3M COMPANY et al

Case No.: 3:22-cv-21686-MCR-HTC; 

MDL NO. 2885

Hon. Judge M. Casey Rodgers

Magistrate Judge Gary R. Jones

PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE AMENDED SHORT FORM 

COMPLAINTS

 Plaintiffs Christopher Cisek and Sarah Cisek, through their undersigned counsel

respectfully bring this Motion pursuant to Local Rule 15.1(B). Plaintiffs hereby move for leave 

to file the Amended Short Form Complaints, as attached hereto. In support of their motion, 

Plaintiffs state as follows:

Plaintiffs bring this motion to amend their Short Form Complaints to conform to the Order 

issued on October 27, 2022 [Dckt no, 3568], removing Defendant 3M Occupational Safety LLC

as a Defendant in these cases. 

January 24, 2023 Respectfully submitted,

GOMEZ TRIAL ATTORNEYS

/s/ Lindsay R. Stevens

John H. Gomez (CA Bar # 171485) T.A

Lindsay R. Stevens (CA Bar # 256811)

655 West Broadway, Suite 1700

Case 3:19-md-02885-MCR-HTC Document 3647 Filed 01/24/23 Page 1 of 2
San Diego, California 92101

Telephone: (619) 237-3490

Facsimile: (619) 237-3496

john@thegomezfirm.com

lstevens@thegomezfirm.com

CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 7.1(B)

Pursuant to Local Rule 7.1(B), counsel for Plaintiffs certify that December 22, 2022, 

counsel for Plaintiffs contacted Defendants’ counsel and obtained consent to the relief requested 

in Plaintiffs’ Motion for Leave to File Amended Short Form Complaints referred to herein. See, 

Ex. A, email exchange between Kimberly Branscome and Mike Brock.

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on January 24, 2023, I electronically filed the foregoing with the 

Clerk of the Court by using the CM/ECF system, which will send a notice of electronic filing to 

all counsel of record who are CM/ECF participants.

/s/ Lindsay R. Stevens

Lindsay R. Stevens (CA Bar # 256811)

GOMEZ TRIAL ATTORNEYS

655 West Broadway, Suite 1700

San Diego, California 92101

Telephone: (619) 237-3490

Facsimile: (619) 237-3496

lstevens@thegomezfirm.com

Case 3:19-md-02885-MCR-HTC Document 3647 Filed 01/24/23 Page 2 of 2
###### Editorial Note on Part 1955

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 1955 appear at 80 FR 9895, Feb. 24, 2015.

#### §§ 1955.67-1955.71 [Reserved]
2006-0378.

#### State ex rel. McCray v. West.

Hamilton App. No. C-050955. Reported at 109 Ohio St.3d *1448,*2006-Ohio-2158, *846*N.E.2d 875. On motion for reconsideration. Motion denied.
<PAGE>   1
                    [Wipfli Ullrich Bertelson LLP letterhead]

                                                                      Exhibit 23
                                                                      1998 10-K


                        Independent Accountants' Consent

We consent to incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on Form
S-4 (No. 333-26373), the Registration Statement on Form S-3 (No. 33-45385), and
the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (Nos. 33-81178, 33-81180, 33-81182 and
333-01937) of F&M Bancorporation, Inc. of our report dated February 4, 1999,
relating to the consolidated balance sheets of F&M Bancorporation, Inc. and
Subsidiaries as of December 31, 1998 and 1997, and the related consolidated
statements of income, changes in stockholders' equity, and cash flows for each
of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 1998, which report is
included in the December 31, 1998 annual report on Form 10-K of F&M
Bancorporation, Inc., and to the continued references to our firm as experts in
those Registration Statements.



                                             /s/ Wipfli Ullrich Bertelson LLP
                                             --------------------------------
                                             Certified Public Accountants

Appleton, Wisconsin
March 22, 1999
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsEvaluation of copper slag blast media for railcar maintenanceCopper slag was tested as a blasting substitute for zirconium silicate which is used to remove paint from railroad cars. The copper slag tested is less costly, strips paint faster, is produced near the point of need, provides a good bonding surface for paint, and permits the operator to work in a more comfortable position, i.e., standing nearly erect instead of having to crouch. Outdoor blasting with the tested Blackhawk (20 to 40 mesh) copper slag is also environmentally acceptable to the State of Utah. Results of tests for the surface erosion rate with copper slag blasting are included.Document ID19900004365Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeContractor Report (CR)AuthorsSagers, N. W.*(Morton Thiokol Brigham City, UT, United States)*Finlayson, Mack H.*(Morton Thiokol Brigham City, UT, United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateJune 1, 1989Subject CategoryEngineering (General)Report/Patent NumberNAS 1.26:183744NASA-CR-183744TWR-19105Accession Number90N13681Funding Number(s)CONTRACT_GRANT: NAS8-30490Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19900004365.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