alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA OF

NORTHERN DIVISION

MAY'S DISTRIBUTING COMPANY, )

INC., individually and as class )

representative of all those gasoline )

station owners similarly situated, )

)

Plaintiff, )

v. ) CASE NO. 2:06-cv-702-MEF

)

TOTAL CONTAINMENT, INC., et al., )

)

Defendants. )

O R D E R

Upon consideration of the Motion for Ann Koppel to Appear Pro Hac Vice (Doc.

#56) filed on October 5, 2006, it is hereby

ORDERED that the motion is GRANTED.

DONE this the 16th day of October, 2006.

 /s/ Mark E. Fuller 

CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:06-cv-00702-MEF-TFM Document 57 Filed 10/16/2006 Page 1 of 1
#### § 932.2 Act.

*Act* means Public Act No. 10, 73d Congress (May 12, 1933) as amended and as reenacted and amended by the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, as amended (48 Stat. 31, as amended; 7 U.S.C. 601-674).
#### Oleg Rivkin, Appellant, v Century 21 Teran Realty LLC et al., Respondents, et al., Defendants.

Submitted October 29, 2007;

decided November 15, 2007

Motion by New York State Association of Realtors, Inc. for leave to file a brief amicus curiae on consideration of the certified question herein granted and the proposed brief is accepted as filed. Two copies of the brief must be served and 24 copies filed within seven days.
#### Barbara Eckert, Respondent, v. Curtis D. Eckert, Appellant.

-In an action for a judicial separation, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated January 6, 1970, which granted plaintiff temporary alimony and other relief. Order reversed, without costs, and plaintiff’s motion for temporary alimony and other relief denied. It is undisputed that neither party has resided within this State for at least one year immediately preceding the institution of this action, as required by subdivision 1 of section 230 of the Domestic Relations Law, which is the applicable statute. As the court’s jurisdiction in matrimonial actions is wholly statutory and is limited to that which is expressly conferred by statute *(Langerman*v. *Lrnger- - man,*303 N. Y. 465, 470; *Matter of Seitz*v. *Drogheo,*21 N Y 2d 181, 185; *Adelman*v. *Adelman,*3 A D 2d 839), the failure to meet the statutory residence requirements for the bringing of this separation action deprived the court of jurisdiction of the subject matter of the action *(Gromel*v. *Gromel,*22 Mise 2d 33; *Poehna*V. *Poehna,*18 Mise 2d 413; *Gargiulo*v. *Gargiulo,*207 Mise. 427, 429; see, also, *Saeks*v. *Sacks,*47 Mise 2d 1050; *Elwell*v. *Elwell,*70 Mise. 61). It is irrelevant that defendant may have appeared generally and submitted his person to the court’s jurisdiction by arguing the merits of this motion. Since lack of jurisdiction of the subject matter cannot be waived, the defendant cannot be estopped to object on that ground, that objection can be raised at any time, and even the consent or agreement of the parties cannot confer on the court jurisdiction of the subject matter which it otherwise lacks (1 CarmodyWait 2d, New York Practice, § 2:80; 21 C. J. S., Courts, §§ 108, 109; 20 Am. Jur. 2d, Courts, § 95; *Bevona Beatty Go.*v. *Wasserman,*4 A D 2d 444, 447; *Kingston*v. *Kingston,*283 App. Div. 355, 357; *Kalfus*v. *Anderson,*186 Mise. 110,113, affd. 270 App. Div. 888; *Matter of Esser,*38 Mise 2d 963; *Solomon*v. *Kennedy,*38 Mise 2d 1090; *Poehna*v. *Poehna, supra-, Lang*v. *Merchants Mut. Gas. Go.,*203 Mise. 258, 260). Lacking jurisdiction of the subject matter of this action, Special Term had no power to make the appealed-from order. Rabin, Acting P. J., Martuscello, Latham, Kleinfeld and Benjamin, JJ., concur.
§ 906.151 Reports. ( a ) During each fiscal period, each handler shall upon request by the committee file with the committee within the time specified in the request an accurate report showing the total quantity or oranges and the total quantity of grapefruit received by him during such fiscal period or the preceding fiscal period, as requested.
( b ) Each handler who sells over 400 pounds of oranges or grapefruit or a combination of both for resale inside the production area shall, for each transaction, report to the committee on a form approved by it the following information: ( 1 ) Name and address of seller;
( 2 ) Name and address of buyer;
( 3 ) Description and quantity of oranges or grapefruit sold;
( 4 ) Destination of fruit;
( 5 ) A statement that the buyer certifies that fruit that is subsequently taken outside the production area for resale will be inspected; and
( 6 ) Such other pertinent information as the committee may require.
( c ) The handler shall prepare the report in triplicate. The buyer shall sign the certification statement. The pink copy shall be submitted to the committee within 7 days. The white copy shall be retained by the handler and the canary copy shall be given to the buyer. Such form shall be reviewed by the committee staff and the information compiled for the committee's use.
[34 FR 6651, Apr. 18, 1969, as amended at 61 FR 64255, Dec. 4, 1996; 62 FR 3603, Jan. 24, 1997]
#### § 948.54 Eligibility.

Area committee members and alternates shall be individuals who shall be residents of, and producers or handlers, as the case may be, in the respective area. Also, each member or alternate to qualify as a representative (a) for producers shall be a producer, or an officer or employee of a producer; (b) for producer's cooperative marketing associations shall be members or employees of such associations; or (c) for handlers other than cooperative marketing associations shall be a handler, or an officer or employee of a handler.
| www.nws.noaa.gov  |
|------------------------|

|  |  |   |  |
|--|--|--------|--|
|  |

|  | Site Map | News | Organization | Search   |  |
|--|----------|------|--------------|--------------------|--|

| Search the CPCAbout Us               Our Mission               Who We AreContact Us               CPC Information               CPC Web Team | **HOME** >    Outreach >    Publications >    Atlases >    Tropospheric Climate     By  Vernon E. Kousky and Chester F. Ropelewski    February 1997NOAA/National Weather Service |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
§ 701.127 Maximum ECP payments per person or legal entity. ( a ) A person or legal entity, as defined in part 1400 of this title, is limited to a maximum ECP cost-share of $500,000 per person or legal entity, per natural disaster.
( b ) The Secretary may waive the maximum limitations described in paragraph (a) of this section to the maximum extent allowed by law.
[75 FR 7088, Nov. 17, 2010, as amended at 84 FR 32841, July 10, 2019; 88 FR 1883, Jan. 11, 2023]
Part 5248 - VALUE ENGINEERING

Subpart 5248.1 - POLICIES AND PROCEDURES

5248.103 Processing value engineering change proposals.

Subpart 5248.1 - POLICIES AND PROCEDURES

5248.103 Processing value engineering change proposals.

(a) HCAs are responsible for establishing procedures for processing and evaluating VECPs,

consistent with the requirements of FAR Part 48.
#### § 900.104 Inquiry by the Administrator.

Upon receipt of an application for mediation, the Administrator, through such officers or employees of the Service as he may designate, may make any inquiry which is deemed to be necessary or proper in order to determine whether a bona fide dispute exists.
§ 959.43 Accounting. ( a ) Assessments collected in excess of expenses incurred shall be accounted for in accordance with one of the following: ( 1 ) Excess funds not retained in a reserve, as provided in paragraph (a)(2) of this section shall be refunded proportionately to the persons from whom they were collected.
( 2 ) The committee, with the approval of the Secretary, may carry over excess funds into subsequent fiscal periods as reserves: *Provided,* That funds already in reserves do not equal approximately two fiscal periods' expenses. Such reserve funds may be used ( i ) to defray expenses during any fiscal period prior to the time assessment income is sufficient to cover such expenses,
( ii ) to cover deficits incurred during any fiscal period when assessment income is less than expenses,
( iii ) to defray expenses incurred during any period when any or all provisions of this part are suspended or are inoperative,
( iv ) to cover necessary expenses of liquidation in the event of termination of this part. Upon such termination, any funds not required to defray the necessary expenses of liquidation shall be disposed of in such manner as the Secretary may determine to be appropriate. To the extent practical, such funds shall be returned pro rata to the persons from whom such funds were collected.
( b ) All funds received by the committee pursuant to the provisions of this part shall be used solely for the purpose specified in this part and shall be accounted for in the manner provided for in this part. The Secretary may at any time require the committee and its members to account for all receipts and disbursements.
( c ) Upon the removal or expiration of the term of office of any member of the committee, such member shall account for all receipts and disbursements and deliver all property and funds in his possession to the committee, and shall execute such assignments and other instruments as may be necessary or appropriate to vest in the committee full title to all of the property, funds, and claims vested in such member pursuant to this part.
( d ) The committee may make recommendations to the Secretary for one or more of the members thereof, or any other person, to act as a trustee for holding records, funds, or any other committee property during periods of suspension of this subpart, or during any period or periods when regulations are not in effect and if the Secretary determines such action appropriate, he may direct that such person or persons shall act as trustee or trustees for the committee.
[26 FR 12751, Dec. 30, 1961, as amended at 34 FR 6440, Apr. 12, 1969]
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA 

EASTERN DIVISION 

BELINDA GAIL BROWN, * 

 * 

 Plaintiff, * 

 * 

v. * Case No. 3:06cv00710-MHT 

 * 

LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE* 

COMPANY, et al, * 

 * 

 Defendants. * 

NOTICE CONCERNING SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE

AND MEDIATION

 Come now the parties hereto and notify the Court that they have conferred 

about settlement of this matter but have been unable to reach a settlement of this case. 

The attorneys for both parties feel that mediation might be beneficial in reaching a 

settlement and will be wiling to have a judicial officer as a mediator. 

 S/Stephen D. Heninger

 Stephen D. Heninger (ASB 5228E68S) 

 

 HENINGER GARRISON DAVIS, LLC 

 P. O. Box 11310 

 Birmingham, AL 35202 

 Tel: 205-326-3336 

 

 Attorney for Plaintiff 

 s/Richard B. Garrett

 Richard B. Garrett (ASB-0782-A29R) 

RUSHTON, STAKELY, JOHNSTON 

& GARRETT, P.A. 

Case 3:06-cv-00710-MHT-TFM Document 16 Filed 06/04/2007 Page 1 of 2
Post Office box 270 

Montgomery, Alabama 36101-0270 

Telephone: 334/206-3100 

 

 Attorney for Defendant 

 

Case 3:06-cv-00710-MHT-TFM Document 16 Filed 06/04/2007 Page 2 of 2
449.501 General.       Use of special purpose termination clauses pursuant to the authority of FAR 49.501 shall be approved in advance by the HCA.    **Parent topic:** Subpart 449.5 - Contract Termination Clauses
#### § 983.82 Personal liability.

No member or alternate member of the committee, nor any employee, representative, or agent of the committee shall be held personally responsible to any handler, either individually, or jointly with others, in any way whatsoever, to any person, for errors in judgment, mistakes, or other acts, either of commission or omission, as such member, alternate member, employee, representative, or agent, except for acts of dishonesty, willful misconduct, or gross negligence.

[69 FR 17850, Apr. 4, 2004. Redesignated at 74 FR 56540, Nov. 2, 2009]
§ 983.44 Powers. The committee shall have the following powers: ( a ) To administer the provisions of this part in accordance with its terms;
( b ) To make and adopt bylaws, rules and regulations to effectuate the terms and provisions of this part with the approval of the Secretary;
( c ) To receive, investigate, and report to the Secretary complaints of violations of this part; and
( d ) To recommend to the Secretary amendments to this part.
[69 FR 17850, Apr. 4, 2004. Redesignated at 74 FR 56541, Nov. 2, 2009]
PART 50 –– EXTRAORDINARY CONTRACTUAL ACTIONS AND THE SAFETY ACT       SUBPART 50.1 EXTRAORDINARY CONTRACTUAL ACTIONS                                                         50.102 Delegation of and limitations on exercise of authority.                                                            50.102-2 Contract adjustment boards.    SUBPART 50.1 EXTRAORDINARY CONTRACTUAL ACTIONS     50.102 Delegation of and limitations on exercise of authority.50.102-2 Contract adjustment boards.    The DISA Contract Adjustment Board shall be composed of the following members:       SPE                   ChairpersonHCA                   Vice Chairperson and MemberGeneral Counsel                   MemberThe Board considers and evaluates requests for contract adjustments and recommends appropriate action to the Director. The findings of the Board are advisory. The HCA shall assume staff and administrative cognizance of contract adjustment matters and supply secretarial and recorder services for the operation of the Board.       A majority constitutes a quorum for any purpose and the concurring vote of a majority of the total board membership constitutes an action of the board. Alternates may be appointed to act in the absence of any member.
COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS

§ IN RE : No. 08

- 1 3

- 00 2 92

- C R § BRIAN ANTHONY ENGLETON, A N ORIGINAL PROCEEDIN G § R elator

. IN MANDAMUS § §
MEM ORANDUM OPINION Brian Anthony Engleton, a Texas inmate, has filed a pro se petition for writ of mandamus alleging that the Honorable Maria Salas

- Mendoza, Judge of the 120th District Court of El Paso County, Texas, has not ruled on a pre - trial motion to quash the indictment or a petition for writ of habeas corpus. 1 Relator is currently appealing a murder conviction in cause number 08

- 13

- 00077

- CR and is represented by court

- appointed counsel, Ruben P. Morales, in that appeal. A party s eeking a writ of mandamus in a criminal case must make two showings: (1) that there is no adequate remedy at law to redress the alleged harm; and (2) that the act the relator seeks to compel must be ministerial rather than discretionary in nature. See e.g . Board of Pardons and Paroles ex rel. Keene v. Court of Appeals for the Eighth District , 910 S.W.2d 481, 483 (Tex.Crim.App. 1995) (orig. proceeding); In re State of Texas , 304 S.W.3d 581, 583

1 Relator mailed the petition for writ of mandamus to Judge Salas

- Mendoza even though the writ is directed to the Eighth Court of Appeals. Judge Salas

- Mendoza forwarded the petition to the Clerk of the Court who filed it on October 10, 2013.- 2

-

(Tex.App.

- - El Paso 2010, orig. proceeding). Although mandamus will not issue to compel a particular result in what is manifestly a discretionary decision, mandamus may be appropriate to impel consideration of a motion or the issuance of a ruling, the doing of which is not discretionary. White v. Reiter , 640 S.W.2d 5 86, 593

– 94 (Tex.Crim.App. 1982); State ex rel. Rodriguez , 196 S.W.3d 454, 458 (Tex.App.

- - El Paso 2006, orig. proceeding). With regard to Relator’s complaint that the trial court has not ruled on his pre

- trial motion to quash the indictment, we addressed th at issue in a prior mandamus proceeding and denied relief. See In re Brian Engleton , No. 08

- 12

- 00350

- CR, 2012 WL 6013428 (Tex.App.

-- El Paso November 30, 2012, orig. proceeding). We will not revisit the issue. Relator also seeks mandamus relief because t he trial court has allegedly failed to rule on a post

- conviction writ of habeas corpus. Neither a trial court nor an appellate court should entertain an application for writ of habeas corpus when , as in this case, there is an adequate remedy by appeal. E x parte Weise , 55 S.W.3d 617, 619 (Tex.Crim.App. 2001). Because Relator has not established his entitlement to mandamus relief, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus.

GUADALUPE RIVERA, Justice October 18, 2013 Before McClure, C.J., Rivera, and Rodriguez, JJ. (Do Not Publish)
## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 04-1930

___________ Terry Jordan, * * Appellant, * * v. * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the Iowa Quality Beef, * Northern District of Iowa. * Appellee. * [UNPUBLISHED] *

___________ Submitted: August 5, 2004 Filed: October 12, 2004

___________ Before WOLLMAN, MELLOY, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Terry Jordan appeals the district court’s preservice dismissal of his complaint for failure to state a claim. Jordan, who is African-American, alleged he was rehired by Iowa Quality Beef; on the day he was to start work he was informed the offer of rehire was rescinded; and the decision not to rehire him was based upon his race and other impermissible factors. We grant Jordan leave to appeal in forma pauperis. Having carefully reviewed the record, we conclude preservice dismissal was inappropriate because Jordan’s pro se complaint, liberally construed, satisfied federal pleading requirements by providing-2- Iowa Quality Beef notice of his claim of discrimination in its decision not to rehire him. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2); Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N.A. , 534 U.S. 506, 514-15 (2002); Smith v. St. Bernards Reg’l Med. Ctr. , 19 F.3d 1254, 1255 (8th Cir. 1994). Accordingly, we reverse the dismissal and remand for further proceedings in accordance with this opinion.

______________________________
Subpart 1409.2 - Qualifications

Requirements

Parent topic: PART 1409 - CONTRACTOR QUALIFICATIONS

1409.202 Policy.

(a) The HCA is the official responsible for establishing the qualification requirement in FAR

9.202(a)(1). This authority is not redelegable.

(b) The HCA is the approval official referenced in FAR 9.202(e).

1409.206 Acquisitions subject to qualification requirements.

1409.206-1 General.

The HCA is the approval official referenced in FAR 9.206-1(b).
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3165 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

109th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 3165

        To extend temporarily the suspension of duty on 5-MPDC.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 25, 2006

   Mr. Bond introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
        To extend temporarily the suspension of duty on 5-MPDC.

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

SECTION 1. 5-MPDC.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.01.14 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to 5-MPDC) is amended by 
striking ``12/31/2006'' and inserting ``12/31/2009''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
Case 2:06-cv-00717-ID-SRW Document 92 Filed 10/05/2007 Page 1 of 4
Case 2:06-cv-00717-ID-SRW Document 92 Filed 10/05/2007 Page 2 of 4
Case 2:06-cv-00717-ID-SRW Document 92 Filed 10/05/2007 Page 3 of 4
Case 2:06-cv-00717-ID-SRW Document 92 Filed 10/05/2007 Page 4 of 4
159 So.2d 290

#### John ST. PAUL, Jr. v. Mrs. Richard A. MACKENROTH et al.

No. 47046.

Jan. 21, 1964.

Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit.

157 So.2d 634.

It is ordered that the writ of review issue; that the Court of Appeal send up the record in duplicate of the case; and that counsel for plaintiff and defendant be notified.
§ 981.55 Interhandler transfers. ( a ) Any handler may, upon notice to and under the supervision and direction of the Board, transfer almonds or reserve credits to another handler. Any such transfers shall be accounted for in such manner that the reserve obligation and assessments on the combined transactions of the participating handlers shall be fully met and such reserve withholding obligation and assessments may be divided between such handlers in accordance with their arrangements subject to approval of the Board.
( b ) When salable and reserve percentages are in effect, any handler may transfer reserve withholding obligation to other handlers. Terms and conditions implementing this provision must be recommended by the Board and approved by the Secretary.
[35 FR 11372, July 16, 1970, as amended at 61 FR 32921, June 26, 1996]
#### In the Matter of John G. Didio, Jr., Appellant, v William M. Lombard,as Sheriff of Monroe County, Respondent, and Lawrence T. Kurlander, as District Attorney, Intervenor-Respondent.

(Appeal No. 2.)

Appeal unanimously dismissed as academic. (Appeal from judgment of Monroe Supreme Court— art 78.) Present—Dillon, P. J., Cardamone, Simons, Doerr and Moule, JJ.
439.101 Policy.       (a) In addition to policy and regulatory guidance contained in the FAR and AGAR:          (1) The USDA Information Technology Capital Planning and Investment Control Guide (CPIC) establishes requirements for the acquisition of information technology.          (2) Specific thresholds at which USDA Office of the Chief Information Officer Information Technology Acquisition Approval is required have been established.          (3) The procurement authority delegated to USDA Agencies is established in Departmental Regulations 5000 series.          (4) The CPIC Guide and USDA CIO policy and procedural guidance are available on the USDA OCIO Web site at *http://www.ocio.usda.gov.* Notices of changes in the Information Technology Acquisition Approval Thresholds are also promulgated by AGAR Advisory.          (b) Acquisition of on-line courseware libraries and learning management system services requires specific approval of the ASA and CIO. Information regarding the specific approval requirements and processes is promulgated by AGAR Advisory.    **Parent topic:** Subpart 439.1 - General