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

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

September 26, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor,
Chief Justice

134445 Michael F. Cavanagh

Elizabeth A. Weaver 134446 Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, ERIC A. BRAVERMAN, Successor Justices Personal Representative of the Estate of Patricia Swann, Deceased, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 134445, 134446 COA: 264029, 264091 Wayne CC: 05-502345-NH GARDEN CITY HOSPITAL, a/k/a GARDEN CITY HOSPITAL, OSTEOPATHIC, Defendant,

and

JOHN R. SCHAIRER, D.O., GARY YASHINSKY, M.D., ABHINA V. RAINA, M.D., and PROVIDENCE HOSPITAL AND MEDICAL CENTERS, INC., Defendants-Appellants.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the June 5, 2007 judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is GRANTED. The parties are directed to include among the issues to be briefed: (1) whether there are any circumstances, other than the expiration of the three-year ceiling in MCL 600.5852, under which the appointment of a successor personal representative would not trigger the start of a new two-year savings period, despite Eggleston v Bio-Medica l Applications of
Detroit, Inc , 468 Mich 29 (2003), and (2) whethe r a successor personal representative may rely on a notice of intent filed by a predecessor personal representative.

The Clerk of the Court is directed to pl ace this case on the January 2008 session calendar for argument and submission. Appella nts' brief and appendi x must be filed no_______________________________________ __ 2

later than November 16, 2007 , and appellee's brief and appe ndix, if appellee chooses to submit an appendix, must be filed no later than December 17, 2007.

The Michigan Association for Justice and the Michigan Defense Trial Counsel, Inc., are invited to file briefs amicus curiae. Other persons or gro ups interested in the determination of the issues presented in th is case may move the Co urt for permission to

file briefs amicus curiae.

l0919 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

September 26, 2007

Clerk
624.203 Policy.       DOS regulations implementing the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552), as amended, are codified in Chapter 1, Department of State, Subchapter R, Access to Information, Part 171, Availability of information and records to the public, of Title 22 of the Code of Federal Regulations (22 CFR Part 171).    **Parent topic:** Subpart 624.2—Freedom of Information Act
Exhibit 32.2





Certification of Chief Financial Officer


Pursuant to


Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350)





In connection with this Annual Report on Form 10-K (the “Report”) of Harvest Capital Credit Corporation (the “Registrant”), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Craig R. Kitchin, the Chief Financial Officer of the Registrant, hereby certify, to the best of my knowledge, that:





(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 Registrant.





/s/ Craig R. KitchinName:Craig R. KitchinDate:March 16, 2015
Case 3:06-cv-00710-MHT-TFM Document 3 Filed 08/09/2006 Page 1 of 2
Case 3:06-cv-00710-MHT-TFM Document 3 Filed 08/09/2006 Page 2 of 2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

 _____________________________

JAMES PETTY, #124 252 *

Plaintiff, *

v. * 2:06-CV-639-WKW

RAY B. FINEDOR, et al., *

Defendants. *

 _____________________________

ORDER ON MOTION

On January 4, 2007 Plaintiff filed a Motion for Extension of Time to respond to

Defendants' written reports. (Doc. No. 25.) Plaintiff’s motion has been read, considered,

and shall be granted.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s Motion for Extension of Time (Doc. No. 25), is GRANTED;

2. Plaintiff is GRANTED an extension from January 3, 2007 to January 23, 2007 to

file a response to Defendants' written reports.

Done, this 5th day of January 2007.

 /s/Charles S. Coody 

CHARLES S. COODY

CHIEF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:06-cv-00639-WKW-TFM Document 26 Filed 01/05/2007 Page 1 of 1
945.000 Scope of part.       This part and 48 CFR part 45 are not applicable to the management of property by management and operating contractors, unless otherwise stated.    **Parent topic:** PART 945 - GOVERNMENT PROPERTY
Case 2:06-cv-00678-WKW-SRW Document 1 Filed 08/02/2006 Page 1 of 12
Case 2:06-cv-00678-WKW-SRW Document 1 Filed 08/02/2006 Page 2 of 12
Case 2:06-cv-00678-WKW-SRW Document 1 Filed 08/02/2006 Page 3 of 12
Case 2:06-cv-00678-WKW-SRW Document 1 Filed 08/02/2006 Page 4 of 12
Case 2:06-cv-00678-WKW-SRW Document 1 Filed 08/02/2006 Page 5 of 12
Case 2:06-cv-00678-WKW-SRW Document 1 Filed 08/02/2006 Page 6 of 12
Case 2:06-cv-00678-WKW-SRW Document 1 Filed 08/02/2006 Page 7 of 12
Case 2:06-cv-00678-WKW-SRW Document 1 Filed 08/02/2006 Page 8 of 12
Case 2:06-cv-00678-WKW-SRW Document 1 Filed 08/02/2006 Page 9 of 12
Case 2:06-cv-00678-WKW-SRW Document 1 Filed 08/02/2006 Page 10 of 12
Case 2:06-cv-00678-WKW-SRW Document 1 Filed 08/02/2006 Page 11 of 12
Case 2:06-cv-00678-WKW-SRW Document 1 Filed 08/02/2006 Page 12 of 12
#### In the Matter of Phoebe Surgan et al., Respondents, v. Theodore Silverman, Appellant, and Board of Elections of City of New York, Respondent.

In a proceeding to invalidate petitions designating appellant as a candidate in the Democratic Party Primary Election to be held on June 17, 1969 for nomination for the public office of Councilman for the 23d Council-manic District, Kings County, 'City of New York, the appeal is from an order of the 'Supreme Court, Kings County, entered June 9, 1969', which granted the application and enjoined the respondent Board of Elections accordingly. Order reversed, on the law and the facts, without costs; the designating petitions are adjudged to be valid; and petition in the proceeding dismissed. In our opinion, the evidence did not warrant the conclusions that fraud permeated the designating petitions or that the candidate participated in .the irregularities which *803may have accompanied the solicitation of signatures. Christ, Acting P. J., Brennan, Hopkins, Benjamin and Munder, JJ., concur.
744.202-170 Partner vetting.

If an acquisition is identified as subject to partner vetting, see (48 CFR) AIDAR 704.70 for the

applicable procedures and requirements.

Parent topic: Subpart 744.2—Consent to Subcontracts
#### DELILE, Respondent, v. LONG ISLAND REALTY CO. et al., Appellants.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

June 8, 1906.)

Action by Margaret C. Delile against the Long Island Realty Company, James J. Gormley, and Cadman H. J. Frederick.

No opinion. Judgment affirmed, with costs.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<CIK>                         0000763541
<NAME>                                                 PS PARTNERS V, LTD.
<MULTIPLIER>                                                             1
<CURRENCY>                                                          U.S. $
       
<S>                                                                    <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                                        3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                              DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                                 JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                                   MAR-31-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                                          1
<CASH>                                                           1,645,000
<SECURITIES>                                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                                       72,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                                             0
<INVENTORY>                                                              0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                                 1,717,000
<PP&E>                                                          72,616,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                                (27,586,000)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                                  69,466,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                            1,006,000
<BONDS>                                                                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                                              0
<COMMON>                                                                 0
<OTHER-SE>                                                      37,038,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                    69,466,000
<SALES>                                                                  0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                                 3,700,000
<CGS>                                                                    0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                    1,276,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                   692,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                                       0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                                    823,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                                             0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                                823,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                                       823,000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                         4.84
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                         4.84
        


</TABLE>
Case 2:06-cv-00693-ID-TFM Document 25 Filed 10/30/2006 Page 1 of 1
#### § 906.14 Committee.

*Committee* means the Texas Valley Citrus Committee, established pursuant to § 906.18.
§ 917.43 Special purpose shipments. ( a ) Except as otherwise provided in this section, any person may, without regard to the provisions of §§ 917.37, 917.41, and 917.42, and the regulations issued thereunder, handle fruit ( 1 ) for consumption by charitable institutions;
( 2 ) for distribution by relief agencies; or
( 3 ) for commercial processing into products.
( b ) Upon the basis of recommendations and information submitted by the commodity committee, or from other available information, the Secretary may relieve from any or all requirements, under or established pursuant to § 917.41, § 917.42, § 917.45, or § 917.37, the handling of fruit; ( 1 ) To designated market areas outside the continental United States;
( 2 ) for such specified purposes (including shipments to facilitate the conduct of marketing research and development projects established pursuant to § 917.39); or
( 3 ) in such minimum quantities or types of shipments, as may be prescribed.
( c ) The commodity committee shall, with the approval of the Secretary, prescribe such rules, regulations, and safeguards as it may deem necessary to prevent fruit handled under the provisions of this section from entering the channels of trade for other than the specified purposes authorized by this section. Such rules, regulations, and safeguards may include the requirements that handlers shall file applications and receive approval from the commodity committee for authorization to handle fruit pursuant to this section, and that such applications be accompanied by a certification by the intended purchaser or receiver that the fruit will not be used for any purpose not authorized by this section.
Effective Date Note
Effective Date Note: At 76 FR 66605, Oct. 27, 2011, § 917.43 was suspended indefinitely, effective Oct. 28, 2011.
#### In the Matter of the Claim of Fred Abramowitz, Appellant. Philip Ross, as Industrial Commissioner, Respondent.

from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed January 25, 1980. By initial determination, claimant was ruled ineligible to receive benefits *563effective June 18 through July 19, 1979 on the ground that he was not available for employment. During this time claimant resided in Miami Beach, Florida. The referee sustained the initial determination. By decision filed December 5, 1979, the board affirmed the decision of the referee finding that during the period in issue claimant made approximately 20 job contacts the majority of which were by phone because he had no automobile available to him. In a decision filed January 25, 1980, the board on its own motion, reopened for reconsideration its decision filed December 5, 1979, rescinded that decision, and dismissed claimant’s appeal on the ground that he did not appear at the hearing. On this appeal, it is conceded by respondent that claimant did have a right to appeal notwithstanding his failure to appear at the hearing and that the board’s decision of January 25, 1980 was in error. Consequently, the board’s decision filed January 25, 1980 must be reversed leaving for review the decision filed December 5, 1979 (see *Matter of Piro [Ross],*76 AD2d 392). Whether a claimant’s efforts to secure employment are sufficiently diligent to establish availability is a question of fact for the board’s resolution and its determination must be sustained if based upon substantial evidence *(Matter of Oestreicher [Levine],*52 AD2d 706). Considering the present record in its entirety, we conclude that there is substantial evidence to support the decision of the board filed December 5, 1979 and, therefore, it must be affirmed. Decision filed January 25, 1980 reversed, and decision filed December 5, 1979 affirmed, without costs. Greenblott, J. P., Sweeney, Kane, Main and Mikoll, JJ., concur.
spp_Ex1012



		

			Exhibit 10.12

		





		
			Executive Officer Compensation
		

		
			 
		

		
			Base Salary
		

		
			The following table sets forth the base salary for each named executive officer of Sanchez Midstream Partners GP LLC, the general partner of Sanchez Midstream Partners LP (the “Partnership”).  Each person is an employee of Sanchez Oil & Gas Corporation (“SOG”) and provides services to the Partnership, with the amounts listed being the portion of the salary allocated to the Partnership, effective as of January 1, 2018.
		

			
					
						 

					
					
						 

				
	
					
						Sanchez Production Partners LP, Officer

					
					
						Base Salary

				
	
					
						Gerald F. Willinger

					
						Chief Executive Officer

					
					
						$600,000

				
	
					
						Charles C. Ward

					
						Chief Financial Officer & Secretary

					
					
						$275,000

				
	
					
						Patricio D. Sanchez

					
						President & Chief Operating Officer

					
					
						$400,000

				



		
			 
		

		
			Other Benefits
		

		
			SOG does not maintain a defined benefit pension plan for its employees because it believes that such plans primarily reward longevity rather than performance. SOG provides a basic benefits package generally to all employees, which includes a 401(k) plan, parking costs, and health, disability and life insurance.  In addition, SOG, in its discretion, may permit executive officers to utilize company-owned or chartered aircraft for personal use.  In its discretion, SOG and/or the board of directors of the Partnership’s general partner may award the named executive officers cash bonuses and/or equity compensation.
MARVIN KURT NATION #141669

ELMORE CORRECTIONAL CENTER

P.O. BOX 8

ELMORE, AL 36025

Melissa Rittenour. Clerk

Federal Bldg. & U.S. Coi rthouse

15 Lee St.

P.O. Box 711

Montgomery, Al 36101-0711

L

2UQ JUL 23 4 /Q: 3S

LiR4 P. HAr

U.s. 015T -KE

110CLE

Ref Change of Address (CV-693-ID) (WO)

Dear Ms. Rittenour,

This letter is to not1f- the court of the address change in the above styled cause. Please

enter this change of adi ress to the records.

Marvin Kurt Nation i4i 69

- LI 4

4/

In closing many thanks to any and all information concerning this matter.

Thanks,

/—O

Case 2:06-cv-00693-ID-TFM Document 42 Filed 07/23/2008 Page 1 of 2
I

•Cjr(\

tc\&u AL

o-c 4- OLC1J&-r;(JI c2J

1 t

/

L

Case 2:06-cv-00693-ID-TFM Document 42 Filed 07/23/2008 Page 2 of 2
#### § 920.45 Contributions.

The committee may accept voluntary contributions, but these shall only be used to pay expenses incurred pursuant to § 920.47 and § 920.48. Furthermore, such contributions shall be free from any encumbrances by the donor, and the committee shall retain complete control of their use.

[79 FR 30445, May 28, 2014]
52.246-25 Limitation of Liability-Services.       As prescribed in 46.805, insert the following clause:          Limitation of Liability-Services (Feb 1997)                                       (a) 						            Except as provided in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this clause, and except to the extent that the Contractor is expressly responsible under this contract for deficiencies in the services required to be performed under it (including any materials furnished in conjunction with those services), the Contractor shall not be liable for loss of or damage to property of the Government that-                                                         (1) 								                Occurs after Government acceptance of services performed under this contract; and                                                            (2) 								                Results from any defects or deficiencies in the services performed or materials furnished.                                                                             (b) 						            The limitation of liability under paragraph (a) of this clause shall not apply when a defect or deficiency in, or the Government’s acceptance of, services performed or materials furnished results from willful misconduct or lack of good faith on the part of any of the Contractor’s managerial personnel. The term "Contractor’s managerial personnel," as used in this clause, means the Contractor’s directors, officers, and any of the Contractor’s managers, superintendents, or equivalent representatives who have supervision or direction of-                                                         (1) 								                All or substantially all of the Contractor’s business;                                                            (2) 								                All or substantially all of the Contractor’s operations at any one plant, laboratory, or separate location at which the contract is being performed; or                                                            (3) 								                A separate and complete major industrial operation connected with the performance of this contract.                                                                             (c) 						            If the Contractor carries insurance, or has established a reserve for self-insurance, covering liability for loss or damage suffered by the Government through the Contractor’s performance of services or furnishing of materials under this contract, the Contractor shall be liable to the Government, to the extent of such insurance or reserve, for loss of or damage to property of the Government occurring after Government acceptance of, and resulting from any defects and deficiencies in, services performed or materials furnished under this contract.                                 (End of clause)    **Parent topic:** 52.246 [Reserved]
Faison, George 

From: Faison, George 

Sent: 

To: 

Thursday, April 23, 2015 4:16PM 

'Hunt, Tim' 

Subject: RE: NHSM timing 

We are reviewing final rule language per our Agency regulatory development process. 

George Faison 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

OSWER, ORCR 

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW 

Mail Code 5303P 

Washington, DC 20460 

Phone - (703 )305-7652 

faison.george@epa.gov 

-----Original Message-----

From: Hunt, Tim [mailto:Tim_Hunt@afandpa.org] 

Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2015 1:56 PM 

To: Faison, George 

Subject: RE: NHSM timing 

Thanks George. So decisions made or to be made? Tim 

-----0 rig ina I Message-----

From: Faison, George [mailto:Faison.George@epa.gov] 

Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2015 2:10PM 

To: Hunt, Tim 

Subject: RE: NHSM timing 

Hi Tim -- were in our final management review -- our latest EPA Reg Agenda has a date of June 15th for issuance. 

George Faison 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

OSWER, ORCR 

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW 

Mail Code 5303P 

Washington, DC 20460 

Phone - (703)305-7652 

faison .geo rge@e pa .gov 

-----Original Message-----

From: Hunt, Tim [mailto:Tim_Hunt@afandpa.org] 

Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2015 12:06 PM 

To: Faison, George 

Subject: NHSM timing 

1 
George, I was going to check in with Barnes again. Can you tell me where the proposal stands in the internal process? 

Barnes said April/May signature when we talked in late February. Thanks. 

Tim Hunt 

Sent from my iPhone 

2
§ 925.52 Issuance of regulations. ( a ) The Secretary shall regulate, in the manner specified in this section, the handling of grapes upon finding from the recommendations and information submitted by the committee, or from other available information, that such regulation would tend to effectuate the declared policy of the act. Such regulation may: ( 1 ) Limit the handling of any grade, size, quality, maturity, or pack, or any combination thereof, of any or all varieties of grapes during any period or periods;
( 2 ) Limit the handling of any grade, size, quality, maturity, or pack of grapes differently for different varieties, or any combination of the foregoing during any period or periods;
( 3 ) Limit the handling of grapes by establishing in terms of grades, sizes, or both, minimum standards of quality and maturity during any period when season average prices are expected to exceed the parity level;
( 4 ) Fix the size, capacity, weight, dimensions, markings, materials, or pack of the container which may be used in handling of grapes;
( 5 ) Establish holidays by prohibiting the packing of all varieties of grapes during a specified period or periods.
( b ) No handler shall handle grapes that were packed during any period when such packing was prohibited by any regulation issued under paragraph (a)(5) of this section unless such grapes are handled under § 925.54.
#### Edwards, trustee, *v.*Wysong & Miles Company *et al.*

May 13, 1913.

Petition for injunction. Before Judge Edwards. Haralson superior court. February 15, 1913.

*Lloyd Thomas, Walter Matthews,*and *James Beall,*for plaintiff.

*PL. J. McBride,*for defendants.

Lumpkin, J.

Under the pleadings and evidence, the refusal to grant an interlocutory injunction was not error.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*All the Justices concur.*
5643.105 Availability of Funds    *(Revised October 2012)*       (c)       (1) Prior to issuing a modification that affects contract funding after the contract is physically complete, for which the appropriations may be either expired, cancelled, or closed, contracting officers must coordinate the action with the servicing Comptroller Office to ensure fund availability and prevent improper or illegal adjustments to cancelled appropriations. The contract file must contain documentation of the coordination efforts.       (2) Contracting officers will coordinate all modifications to contracts with expired, cancelled, or closed appropriation with the serving legal office prior to execution.       (d) Modifications must not be executed for the purpose of using or redistributing unspent balances of expired, closed, or cancelled appropriations without prior coordination with the serving legal office.              HQ, United States Special Operations Command       Special Operations Forces Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics (SOF AT&L)       SOFARS 5643       February 2007 **Parent topic:** Subpart 5643.1 - GENERAL