alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### In the matter of: Juan PEQUEÑO, Debtor. Juan Pequeño, Appellant, v. Michael B. Schmidt, Appellee.

No. 07-40113

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Aug. 28, 2007.

Juan Pequeño, Brownsville, TX, pro se.

Michael B. Schmidt, Law Offices of Michael B. Schmidt, Corpus Christi, TX, for pro se.

Before REAVLEY, SMITH, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Juan Pequeño challenges, *pro se,*the district court’s upholding a Chapter 7 bankruptcy settlement entered by his Trustee, Michael Schmidt. On the same day Schmidt filed his appellee brief, he moved separately to dismiss due to mootness.

“Many courts, including our own ... have employed the concept of ‘mootness’ to address equitable concerns unique to bankruptcy proceedings”. *Matter of Manges,*29 F.3d 1034, 1038 (5th Cir.1994). In that regard, mootness “is not an Article III inquiry as to whether a live controversy is presented; rather, it is a recognition by the appellate courts that there is a point beyond which they cannot order fundamental changes in [bankruptcy] actions”. *Id.*at 1038-39. This “test for mootness reflects a court’s concern for striking the proper balance between the equitable considerations of finality and good faith reliance on a judgment and the competing interests that underlie the right of a party to seek review of a bankruptcy order adversely affecting him”. *Id.*at 1039 (quoting *First Union Real Estate Equity and Mart. Inv. v. Club Assoc.,*956 F.2d 1065, 1069 (11th Cir.1992)).

*275Pequeño contests the district court’s December 2006 affirmance of the bankruptcy court’s September 2002 approval of a settlement between Schmidt, Pequeño’s Chapter 7 Trustee, and the City of Brownsville, successfully sued by Pequeño pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Pequeño contends Schmidt should not have been his Chapter 7 Trustee, because Pequeño moved to convert his Chapter 7 proceeding to Chapter 13. His motion to convert, however, was denied. More importantly for determining mootness, Pequeño never moved to stay the settlement entered by Schmidt and the City of Brownsville. Nor did he ever request a bond or otherwise act to prevent consummation of the settlement.

That has occurred. The funds from Pequeño’s judgment against Brownsville have been paid to the Trustee, who disbursed them, together with other bankruptcy-estate funds, to creditors.

Schmidt has acted irreversibly, relying on the settlement. To allow Pequeño, who never sought a stay, to attack the settlement’s basis would be inequitable. *In re Morningside Mobile Home RV Park,*32 Fed.Appx. 130 (5th Cir.2002). Therefore, the motion to dismiss is

*GRANTED.*

*

 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.
Subpart 8.1 - Excess Personal Property    **Parent topic:** Part 8 - Required Sources of Supplies and Services8.101 [Reserved]8.102 Policy.       When practicable, agencies shall use excess personal property as the first source of supply for agency and cost-reimbursement contractor requirements. Agency personnel shall make positive efforts to satisfy agency requirements by obtaining and using excess personal property (including that suitable for adaptation or substitution) before initiating a contract action.8.103           Information on available excess personal property.       Information regarding the availability of excess personal property can be obtained through—-                                       (a)                                      Reviewing and requesting available excess personal property in GSAXcess® (see https://gsaxcess.gov); and                                          (b)                                      Personal contact with GSA or the activity holding the property.8.104 Obtaining nonreportable property.       GSA will assist agencies in meeting their requirements for supplies of the types excepted from reporting as excess by the Federal Management Regulations (41 CFR 102-36.220). Federal agencies requiring such supplies should contact the appropriate GSA Personal Property Management office. Visit www.gsa.gov/ppmo for contact information.
**AMENDED AGREEMENT OF LIMITED PARTNERSHIP**

**OF SUNWOOD VILLAGE JO INT VENTURE LIMITED PARTNERSHIP**

 

This Agreement is made and entered into on this 9th day of August, 2001 by and between Sunwood Village Inc., a Nevada corporation (“General Partner”) and Secured Investment Resources Fund, L.P. II, Delaware limited partnership (“Limited Partner”). The General Partner and Limited Partner may be referred to collectively as the “Partners”. 

 

WITNESSETH THAT:

 

WHEREAS, the partners desire to form a Limited Partnership under the Nevada Revised Uniform Limited Partnership Act known as Sunwood Village Joint Venture, Limited Partnership, to hold and manage a single income-producing apartment complex known as Sunwood Village Apartments located in Las Vegas, Nevada (hereinafter the “Project”).

 

NOW, THEREOFRE, in consideration of the premises and the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth, the parties hereto agree as follows:

 

| 1. | Name, Place of Business, Registered Office and Registered Agent |
|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------|

 

|   | 1.1 | Name. The name of the Partnership is Sunwood Village Joint Venture, Limited Partnership or such other name as the General Partner shall hereafter designate in writing to the Limited Partners. |
|--------|-----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

|   | 1.2 | Place of Business.. The Partnership’s principal place of business and the address of the General Partner is Suite LH-06, 4200 Blue Ridge Blvd,. Kansas City, Missouri, 64113, or such other place or places as the General Partner may hereafter determine. |
|--------|-----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

|   | 1.3 | Registered Office and Agent. The Partnership’s registered office shall be 2300 W. Sahara Ave., Third Floor, Box 8, Las Vegas, Clark County, Nevada 89102 and the name of the registered agent at such address is Robert D. Martin. |
|--------|-----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

| 2. | Business and Purpose. |
|----|-----------------------|

 

|   | 2.1 | Purpose. The business and purpose of the Partnership is to own, maintain, operate and manage the Project, to lease the space therein and to acquire an own such personal property as may be necessary to effectuate the foregoing purposes. |
|--------|-----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

----
**PROPERTY MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT**

**Sunwood Village**

 

This **PROPERTY MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT**(the “Agreement”) is dated as of March 11, 2005 between SUNWOOD VILLAGE JOINT VENTURE, LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, a Nevada limited partnership (“Owner”), and CONAM MANAGEMENT CORPORATION, a California corporation (“Manager”). Owner owns the apartment building commonly known as Sunwood Village, located at 4020 S. Arville, Las Vegas, Nevada (the “Property”). Owner desires to engage Manager, and Manager desires to accept such engagement, to manage, lease, operate, and maintain the Property on the terms and subject to the conditions set forth herein.

 

THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows:

 

**ARTICLE 1. COMMENCEMENT AND TERM**

 

1.1       Commencement and Term. Manager’s duties and responsibilities under this Agreement shall begin on the date hereof (the “Start Date”) and shall terminate on the earlier of (i) the conveyance of the Property or any portion thereof, as to such conveyed portion thereof only, or (ii) termination as provided in Article 10.

 

**ARTICLE 2. MANAGER’S RESPONSIBILITIES**

 

2.1       Management. Manager shall manage, operate and maintain the Property in an efficient and economic manner and shall arrange the performance of everything reasonably necessary to accomplish the foregoing, subject to the budgets, policies and limitations provided to Manager in writing by Owner from time to time. Manager shall keep the Property clean and in good repair, shall promptly order and supervise the completion of such repairs as may be required and shall generally do and perform, or cause to be done or performed, all things necessary or desirable to ensure the proper and efficient management, operation, and maintenance of the Property. Manager shall perform all services in a diligent and professional manner. Additionally, Manager shall upon Owner’s request cooperate with any proposed purchaserof the Property, any proposed lender evaluating the Property as collateral or any broker named by Owner in connection with a sale or financing of the Property. Manager is hereby authorized to take any action with respect to the Property which Manager believes in good faith is necessary for Manager to comply with all laws, rules and regulations applicable to Manager, as a licensed real estate broker or otherwise, and, when possible, Manager agrees to provide advance notice to and consult with Owner about any such action that has not been previously authorized. Manager shall exercise reasonable efforts to comply with all directions or instructions from Owner pertaining to the Property. 

 

2.2       Employees; Independent Contractor. All arrangements and agreements with employees or independent contractors working at the Property shall confirm that Owner has no obligation or relationship with respect to such employees or independent contractors. Manager shall comply with all applicable governmental requirements relating to worker’s compensation, liability insurance, Social Security, unemployment 

 

----
QuickLinks
 -- Click here to rapidly navigate through this document









































 
 

  Exhibit 10.2    
    


 Summary of Non-Employee Director Compensation Arrangements  


        Effective April 15, 2009, each director of IAC who is not an employee of IAC or any of its businesses receives an annual
retainer of $50,000 and the Chairpersons of the Audit and Compensation and Human Resources Committees each receive an additional annual retainer of $20,000. Members of the Audit and Compensation and
Human Resources Committees (including the chairpersons) receive an additional annual retainer of $10,000 and $5,000, respectively. 


        In
addition, non-employee directors receive a grant of restricted stock units with a dollar value of $250,000 upon their initial election to office and annually thereafter
upon re-election on the date of IAC's annual meeting of stockholders. The terms of these restricted stock units provide for: (i) vesting in three equal annual installments
commencing on the first anniversary of the grant date, (ii) cancellation and forfeiture of unvested units in their entirety upon termination of board service and (iii) full acceleration
of vesting upon a change in control of IAC. IAC also reimburses non-employee directors for all reasonable expenses incurred by these directors as a result of attendance at IAC Board and
Committee meetings. 


        Under
IAC's Deferred Compensation Plans for Non-Employee Directors, non-employee directors may defer all or a portion of their annual retainer(s). Eligible
directors who defer their retainer(s) can elect to have such deferred amounts applied to the purchase of share units, representing the number of shares of IAC Common Stock that could have been
purchased on the relevant date, or credited to a cash fund. If any dividends are paid on IAC Common Stock, dividend equivalents will be credited on the share units. The cash fund will be credited with
deemed interest at an annual rate equal to the weighted average prime lending rate of JPMorgan Chase Bank. 



        Upon
termination, a director will receive: (i) with respect to share units, such number of shares of IAC Common Stock as the share units represent and (ii) with respect to
the cash fund, a cash payment. Payments upon termination will be made in one lump sum or up to five installments, as previously elected by the eligible director at the time of the related deferral
election. 











QuickLinks



Exhibit 10.2
162 So.2d 13

#### STATE of Louisiana, through the DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS, v. S. Allan NORRIS.

No. 47179.

April 1, 1964.

In re: State of Louisiana, through the Department of Highways, applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, Parish of Lincoln. 160 So.2d 255.

Writ refused. No error of law under the facts found by the Court of Appeal.
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2585 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2585

  To amend the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 to 
enhance the use of Juvenile Accountability Block Grants for programs to 
  prevent and address occurrences of bullying and to reauthorize the 
             Juvenile Accountability Block Grants program.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 28, 2013

 Ms. Jackson Lee (for herself, Mr. Honda, Mr. Holt, and Mr. Hinojosa) 
 introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 
                             the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 to 
enhance the use of Juvenile Accountability Block Grants for programs to 
  prevent and address occurrences of bullying and to reauthorize the 
             Juvenile Accountability Block Grants program.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Juvenile Accountability Block Grant 
Reauthorization and the Bullying Prevention and Intervention Act of 
2013''.

SEC. 2. BULLYING PREVENTION AND INTERVENTION PROGRAMS; REAUTHORIZATION 
              OF JUVENILE ACCOUNTABILITY BLOCK GRANTS.

    (a) Bullying Prevention and Intervention.--
            (1) In general.--Paragraph (13) of section 1801(b) of the 
        Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 
        3796ee(b)) is amended to read as follows:
            ``(13) establishing and maintaining accountability-based 
        programs that are designed to enhance school safety, which 
        programs may include research-based bullying prevention, 
        cyberbullying prevention, and gang prevention programs, as well 
        as intervention programs regarding bullying;''.
            (2) Sense of congress.--It is the sense of the Congress 
        that the use of best practices is encouraged for all activities 
        for which grants under part R of title I of the Omnibus Crime 
        Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 may be used.
    (b) Reauthorization of Juvenile Accountability Block Grants.--
Section 1810(a) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 3796ee-10(a)) is amended by 
inserting before the period at the end the following: ``and such funds 
as may be necessary for each of fiscal years 2014 through 2018''.
                                 <all>
```
#### §§ 400.170-400.177 [Reserved]
EXHIBIT 23.1


            CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We consent to the use of our report dated March 13, 2006 ("Report"), in the 2005
Annual  Report on Form  10-KSB of ANTS  software  inc.  (the  "Company")  and we
further  consent  to  the  incorporation  by  reference  of  our  Report  in the
Registration  Statements  on Form  S-8 (No.  333-46766,  No.  333-62206  and No.
333-105507) of the Company.


Date:    March 23, 2006                        /s/ Burr, Pilger, & Mayer, LLP
                                               ------------------------------
                                               Burr, Pilger, & Mayer, LLP
#### § 46.25 Auction sales.

Commission merchants, dealers and brokers who offer produce for sale through auction companies which publish catalogs of offerings will be responsible for furnishing the auction company for publication true and correct information concerning the ownership of the produce. When the produce is offered for sale by an owner, his name shall be shown in the catalog listing as owner. When a joint account partner makes an offering, his name as well as that of his joint partner, or partners, shall be shown. When any person offers produce for sale at auction for the account of another, the name, or names of the owner, if known, and of his principal shall be shown. In addition to listing such name or names he may show that he is acting in the capacity of agent. If a person instructs an auction company to catalog a shipment without disclosing true ownership, if known, or the name of an agent's principal, he shall be deemed to have made a false or misleading statement within the meaning of the Act. Since sales at auctions normally involve additional expenses, a broker, grower's agent or commission merchant shall have prior consent from his principal before such disposition is accomplished. Where a dispute exists regarding the ownership of produce, it may be listed in the auction catalog as being offered for sale “for the account of whom concerned” with the name of the party making the offering shown as agent.
###### Editorial Note on Part 1942

#### Editorial Notes:

Nomenclature changes to part 1942 appear at 80 FR 9878, Feb. 24, 2015.

#### § 1942.14 Subsequent loans.

Subsequent loans will be processed under this subpart.
22.1603 Exceptions.

(a) The requirements of this subpart do not apply to-

(1) Contracts under the simplified acquisition threshold;

(2) Subcontracts of $10,000 or less; and

(3) Contracts or subcontracts for work performed exclusively outside the United States.

(b) Exemptions granted by the Secretary.

(1) If the Secretary finds that the requirements of the Executive Order impair the ability of the

Government to procure goods and services on an economical and efficient basis or if special

circumstances require an exemption in order to serve the national interest, the Secretary may

exempt a contracting department or agency, or groups of departments or agencies, from the

requirements of any or all of the provisions of this Executive Order with respect to a particular

contract or subcontract, or any class of contracts or subcontracts, including the requirement to

include the clause at 52.222-40, or parts of that clause, in contracts.

(2) Requests for exemptions may be submitted in accordance with Department of Labor regulations

at 29 CFR 471.3.

Parent topic: Subpart 22.16 - Notification of Employee Rights Under the National Labor Relations

Act
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

IN RE: CASES ASSIGNED TO Misc. No. 4:95mc40111

MAGISTRATE JUDGE

ALLAN KORNBLUM

ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER

United States Magistrate Judge Allan Kornblum passed away on

February 12, 2010. To effect the efficient processing of cases pending

appointment of a new magistrate judge, the following procedures will be used.

1. Cases referred to Magistrate Judge Kornblum will be handled by 

the assigned district judge.

2. For administrative and case management purposes, referral of 

cases to the magistrate judges will continue in accordance with existing

administrative orders. The docketing system and CMECF will continue to show

cases being referred to Magistrate Judge Kornblum, although a district judge will

be issuing all orders. Thus, for dispositive matters, final orders will be issued

directly by the district judge without a Report and Recommendation and

objections. Motion orders will be entered directly by the district judge, and thus

the process of the magistrate judge entering an order which can be appealed to

the district judge will not apply.

Case 1:02-cr-00038-MP-AK Document 208 Filed 03/10/10 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

3. For scheduling and other routine matters, the parties and litigants

should continue to communicate with Magistrate Judge Kornblum’s staff and

courtroom deputy.

4. Nothing in this Administrative Order shall prohibit the district judge

from making a specific referral to another magistrate judge in this district for

purposes of conducting evidentiary hearings or other such proceedings, pursuant

to Northern District of Florida Local Rule 72.3. 

SO ORDERED this 10th th day of March, 2010.

 S/ Stephan P. Mickle 

Stephan P. Mickle

United States District Judge

Case 1:02-cr-00038-MP-AK Document 208 Filed 03/10/10 Page 2 of 2
#### Mildred G. Ball, as Administratrix of the Estate of Margaret S. Blake, Deceased, et al., Appellants, v B. Gertz, Inc., Respondent, and 20th Century Wear, Inc., Third-Party Defendant.

In a products liability action, the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, entered August 29, 1979, which granted the motion of the defendant third-party plaintiff to dismiss their complaint. Order reversed, without costs or disbursements, complaint reinstated and motion denied upon condition that plaintiffs file a note of issue and statement of readiness within 45 days after service upon them of a copy of the order to be made hereon, together with notice of entry thereof; in the event the condition is not complied with, then order affirmed, with $50 costs and disbursements. It appears that the plaintiffs never received the benefit of a full 90-day period for the filing of their note of issue as intended under CPLR 3216 since their complaint was stricken by Special Term when only half that period had run. The reinstatement of the complaint requires that they be accorded an additional opportunity for such filing before the statutory sanction of dismissal may be invoked against them. Mollen, P. J., Gibbons, Martuscello and Weinstein, JJ., concur.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

EASTERN DISTRICT 

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, : No. 62 EM 2023 

Respondent 

V. 

ROBERT WASIUTA, 

Petitioner 

ORDER

PER CURIAM 

AND NOW, this 4t" day of January, 2024, the Application for Extraordinary Relief 

is DENIED. 

Justice McCaffery did not participate in the consideration or decision of this matter.