alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

STEVE SISOLAK, GOVERNOR OF NEVADA; AARON D. FORD, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF NEVADA; GEORGE TOGLIATTI, DIRECTOR OF THE NEVADA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY; AND MINDY MCKAY, ADMINISTRATOR OF THE RECORDS, COMMUNICATIONS, AND COMPLIANCE DIVISION OF THE NEVADA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, Appellants,

vs. POLYMER80, INC., Res s ondent. No. 83385 

# FILED
JAN 2 4 2022 ectrL E F u t E L. Z A B ogt tf l: o c r At

c 4 jar

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL Appellants have filed a document titled "Notice of Mootness." In that document, appellants state that this appeal should be dismissed as moot. No response has been filed. Accordingly, appellants' request that this appeal be dismissed is granted. This appeal is dismissed. See NRAP 42(b).

It is so ORDERED. C.J.

cc: Hon. John Schlegelmilch, District Judge Attorney General/Carson City Attorney General/Las Vegas Simons Hall Johnston PC/Yerington Third District Court Clerk

SUPREME COURT OF Newton (o) 1947A .s.10. ,O.P4R0
#### § 600.222 Allowable costs.

(a) *Limitation on use of funds.* Grant funds may be used only for:

(1) The allowable costs of the grantees, subgrantees and cost-type contractors, including allowable costs in the form of payments to fixed-price contractors; and

(2) Reasonable fees or profit to cost-type contractors but not any fee or profit (or other increment above allowable costs) to the grantee or subgrantee.

(b) *Applicable cost principles.* For each kind of organization, there is a set of Federal principles for determining allowable costs. Allowable costs will be determined in accordance with the cost principles applicable to the organization incurring the costs. The following chart lists the kinds of organizations and the applicable cost principles.

| For the costs of a— | Use the principles in— |
| --- | --- |
| State, local or Indian tribal government | OMB Circular A-87. |
| Private nonprofit organization other than an (1) institution of higher education, (2) hospital, or (3) organization named in OMB Circular A-122 as not subject to that circular | OMB Circular A-122. |
| Educational institutions. | OMB Circular A-21. |
| For-profit organization other than a hospital and an organization named in OBM Circular A-122 as not subject to that circular | 48 CFR part 31. Contract Cost Principles and Procedures, or uniform cost accounting standards that comply with cost principles acceptable to the Federal agency. |
| For-profit organization other than a hospital and an organization named in OMB Circular A-122 as not subject to that circular. | 48 CFR 931.2 |
| Hospitals | 45 CFR part 74, Appendix E |

[53 FR 8087, Mar. 11, 1988, as amended at 53 FR 8047, Mar. 11, 1988]
#### § 1000.337 Access to records.

The right of access under 2 CFR 200.337 shall not extend to client information held by attorneys or federally authorized tax practitioners under the Low Income Taxpayer Clinic program.

[86 FR 29483, June 2, 2021]
Exhibit 10.1


 


Named Executive Officers
Salary Increases


 


On May 1, 2006, the
Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors of Chevron Phillips Chemical
Company LLC approved an increase in annual salary to certain named executive officers, and on June 22, 2006,
approved an increase in annual salary to Raymond I. Wilcox.  The
annual salaries for the aforementioned executive officers, effective July 1,
2006, are as follows:


 


	
  Raymond I. Wilcox

  	
   

  	
  $

  	
  540,750

  	
   

  
	
  Greg
  G. Maxwell

  	
   

  	
  312,716

  	
   

  
	
  Greg
  C. Garland

  	
   

  	
  336,738

  	
   

  
	
  Craig
  B. Glidden

  	
   

  	
  338,746

  	
   

  
	
  Tim
  G. Taylor

  	
   

  	
  345,092
§ 5.405 Housing. ( a ) *Generally.* A recipient shall not, on the basis of sex, apply different rules or regulations, impose different fees or requirements, or offer different services or benefits related to housing, except as provided in this section (including housing provided only to married students).
( b ) *Housing provided by recipient.* ( 1 ) A recipient may provide separate housing on the basis of sex.
( 2 ) Housing provided by a recipient to students of one sex, when compared to that provided to students of the other sex, shall be as a whole: ( i ) Proportionate in quantity to the number of students of that sex applying for such housing; and
( ii ) Comparable in quality and cost to the student.
( c ) *Other housing.* ( 1 ) A recipient shall not, on the basis of sex, administer different policies or practices concerning occupancy by its students of housing other than that provided by such recipient.
( 2 ) ( i ) A recipient which, through solicitation, listing, approval of housing, or otherwise, assists any agency, organization, or person in making housing available to any of its students, shall take such reasonable action as may be necessary to assure itself that such housing as is provided to students of one sex, when compared to that provided to students of the other sex, is as a whole: ( A ) Proportionate in quantity; and
( B ) Comparable in quality and cost to the student.
( ii ) A recipient may render such assistance to any agency, organization, or person that provides all or part of such housing to students of only one sex.
#### § 76.65 Inalienability of certificates.

The certificate granted under the regulations in this part may not be transferred, assigned, or in any manner disposed of, either voluntarily or involuntarily, directly or indirectly, through transfer of control of any certificate to any person unless the Commission, after securing full information, finds that the transfer is in accordance with the provisions of the Act, and consents in writing.
#### § 1125.40 What policies and procedures must I follow?

(a) *General.* You must follow the policies and procedures specified in applicable sections of the OMB guidance in subparts A through I of 2 CFR part 180, as implemented by this part.

(b) *Specific sections of OMB guidance that this part supplements.* In implementing the OMB guidance in 2 CFR part 180, this part supplements eight sections of the guidance, as shown in the following table. For each of those sections, you must follow the policies and procedures in the OMB guidance, as supplemented by this part.

| Section of OMB guidance | Section in this part where supplemented | What the supplementation clarifies |
| --- | --- | --- |
| (1) 2 CFR 180.135 | § 1125.137 | Who in DoD may grant an exception for an excluded person to participate in a covered transaction. |
| (2) 2 CFR 180.220 | § 1125.220 | Which lower-tier contracts under a nonprocurement transaction are covered transactions. |
| (3) 2 CFR 180.330 | § 1125.332 | What method a participant must use to communicate requirements to a lower-tier participant. |
| (4) 2 CFR 180.425 | § 1125.425 | When a DoD awarding official must check to see if a person is excluded or disqualified. |
| (5) 2 CFR 180.435 | § 1125.437 | What method a DoD official must use to communicate requirements to a participant. |
| (6) 2 CFR 180.930 | § 1125.930 | Which DoD officials are debarring officials. |
| (7) 2 CFR 180.1010 | § 1125.1010 | Which DoD officials are suspending officials. |

(c) *Sections of the OMB guidance that this part does not supplement.* For any section of OMB guidance in subparts A through I of 2 CFR 180 that is not listed in paragraph (b) of this section, DoD policies and procedures are the same as those in the OMB guidance.
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

MARK G. KEEGAN , Appellant,

v.

TRACEY NEFF
, Appellee.

No. 4D2023

- 2621

[ May 29, 2024 ]

Appeal of a nonfinal order from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County ; G

. Joseph Curley Jr. , Judge; L.T.

Case No. 502022CA002420

.

Mark G. Keegan of Keegan Law Group, Palm Beach, pro se

.

Brett L. Goldblatt of Goldblatt Law, PLLC, Boca Raton, for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.

We affirm the circuit court’s post

- judgment order denying appellant ’ s objection and motion to vacate a judicial sale of property in the underlying partition action.

Most of appellant ’ s arguments are untimely directed at the original final judgment ordering partition an d sale, which appellant characterizes as a

non

- final order. However, the judgment constituted a final order. See
Perez v. Jaimot

, 326 So. 3d 748, 749 (Fla. 3d DCA 2021) ( “[A] n order of partition is final at such time as the court directs the sale of the property .” ). The order was final even though the court retained jurisdiction to divide the proceeds. See Morrison v. Smolarick , 334 So. 3d 675, 676 (Fla. 2d DCA 2022) ( “ A partition order directing the sale of property is final even when
the court retains jurisdiction for the purpose of adjusting, by a further decree, the accounts between the parties. ” ) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted). Therefore, appellant cannot challenge the final judgment ordering partition.

Appellant’s remaining argum ents also lack merit without further
discussion

.2 Affirmed

.

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

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
#### Donald Moeller et al., Appellants, v Judith Pearl, as Administratrix of the Estate of Billie J. Pearl, Deceased, Respondent.

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., plaintiffs appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, entered June 28, 1979, which is in favor of defendant upon the trial court’s granting of *541defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint pursuant to CPLR 4401, following a jury trial limited to the issue of liability only. Judgment reversed, on the law, and new trial granted, with costs to abide the event. It was error for the trial court to refuse to apply the doctrine of *res ipsa loquitur*and hold that plaintiffs failed to make out a prima facie case of negligence. Application of the doctrine requires that plaintiffs prove that: " '(1) the event must be of a kind which ordinarily does not occur in the absence of someone’s negligence; (2) it must be caused by an agency or instrumentality within the exclusive control of the defendant; (3) it must not have been due to any voluntary action or contribution on the part of the plaintifF ” *(Corcoran v Banner Super Market,*19 NY2d 425, 430). In this case such proof was adduced and the court should not have dismissed the complaint (see *Reinzi v Tilyou, 252 NY*97; see, also, *Rafter v Dubrock’s Riding Academy, 75*Cal App 2d 621; *McComas v Barnes Shows Co., 215*Cal 685). Titone, J. P., Lazer, Gulotta and Martuscello, JJ., concur.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 579 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 579

 Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the symbols 
            and traditions of Christmas should be protected.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            December 6, 2005

 Mrs. Jo Ann Davis of Virginia (for herself, Mr. Bartlett of Maryland, 
  Mr. Goode, and Mr. Jones of North Carolina) submitted the following 
  resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Government Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
 Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the symbols 
            and traditions of Christmas should be protected.

Whereas Christmas is a national holiday celebrated on December 25; and
Whereas the Framers intended that the First Amendment to the Constitution of the 
        United States would prohibit the establishment of religion, not prohibit 
        any mention of religion or reference to God in civic dialog: Now, 
        therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
            (1) recognizes the importance of the symbols and traditions 
        of Christmas;
            (2) strongly disapproves of attempts to ban references to 
        Christmas; and
            (3) expresses support for the use of these symbols and 
        traditions.
                                 <all>
```
**Exhibit 31.1****CERTIFICATIONS**I, Thomas M. Duff, Chief Executive Officer of Wellman, Inc., certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Wellman, Inc.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material factnecessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstancesunder which such statements were made, not misleading with respect tothe period covered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all materialrespects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flowsof the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (asdefined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) and internalcontrol over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) for the registrant and have: (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, orcaused such disclosure controls and procedures to bedesigned under our supervision, to ensure thatmaterial information relating to the registrant,including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made knownto us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is beingprepared;  (b) Designed such internal control over financialreporting, or caused such internal control overfinancial reporting to be designed under oursupervision, to provide reasonable assurance regardingthe reliability of financial reporting and thepreparation of financial statements for externalpurposes in accordance with generally acceptedaccounting principles;  (c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’sdisclosure controls and procedures and presented inthis report our conclusions about the effectiveness ofthe disclosure controls and procedures, as of the endof the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and  (d) Disclosed in this report any change in theregistrant’s internal control over financial reportingthat occurred during the registrant’s most recentfiscal quarter that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financialreporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation ofinternal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of theregistrant’s board of directors: a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information;and  b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal controls over financial reporting.        Date       November 8, 2005 By: /s/ Thomas M. Duff   Chief Executive Officer
#### MALLIETT, Appellant, v. PRATT, Respondent.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.

November 25, 1914.)

Action by Alphonse V. Malliett against L. H. Pratt.

PER CURIAM.

Judgment reversed, and new trial granted, with costs to appellant to abide event. Held, that the evidence was sufficient to present for the consideration of the jury the question whether or not the defendant aided and abetted in the wrongful detention and imprisonment of the plaintiff.
#### In the Matter of Raer Corporation, Appellant, v Village Board of Trustees of the Village of Clifton Springs, Acting as the Board of Assessment Review of the Village of Clifton Springs, Respondent.

Order unanimously affirmed, without costs. Memorandum: In its application to respondent board of assessment review for reduction of the new assessment on its real property petitioner appeared by attorney and made an oral request. On an adjourned date it presented several evidentiary documents to the board. It filed no complaint or document specifying the relief which it sought. After further adjournment respondent board denied the application. In response to petitioner’s petition for judicial review of that denial, respondent moved for dismissal on the ground that the court lacks jurisdiction for failure of petitioner to comply with sections 512, 706 and 1408 of the Real Property Tax Law. Such statutes provide that an owner of real property may protest the tax assessment thereon by timely filing with the board of assessment review a complaint, certified or under oath, specifying the grounds upon which the assessment is claimed to be incorrect. Although in construing such statutes the courts have stated that basic compliance therewith is jurisdictional, they have ruled in general that if a complaint or a reasonable substitute therefor has been timely filed with the review board, that gives jurisdiction, and that other requirements are procedural and may be supplied by amendment or may be deemed waived by action of the board *(Matter of City of LittleFalls v Board of Assessors of Town of Salisbury,*68 AD2d 734; *Matter of DHI Mgt. Agency v City of Yonkers,*67 AD2d 913; *Matter of Henderson v Silco,*36 AD2d 439; *People ex rel. Irving Trust Co. v Miller,*264 App Div *270, 272; People ex rel. Empire Mtge. Co. v Cantor,*190 App Div 512,516; *Matter of Romas v Huffcut,*39 Misc 2d 872). In the case at bar petitioner contends that respondent had jurisdiction and waived the deficiencies in the application. Despite our desire to give liberal construction to these statutes, we are not at liberty to disregard them or in effect annul them. As the above cases indicate, some written complaint must be filed with the board of assessment review indicating the owner’s grievance; and such was not done here. Absent that, the board and the court are without jurisdiction *(Matter of Onteora Club v Board of Assessors of Town of Hunter,*17 AD2d 1008, affd 13 NY2d 1170; *Matter of City of Little Falls v Board of Assessors of Town of Salisbury,*68 AD2d 734, 738-739, *supra; Matter of Rab Co. Highland House Apts, v Tompkins County Bd. of Assessment Review,*68 AD2d 374; *People ex rel. Irving Trust Co. v Miller,*264 App Div 270,272, *supra; Matter of 1600 Elmwood Ave. v Wiles, 42*Misc 2d 759). (Appeal from order of Monroe Supreme Court — assessment.) Present: Dillon, P. J., Schnepp, Callahan, Doerr and Witmer, JJ.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 755 Engrossed in House (EH)]

H. Res. 755

                 In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

                                                         April 5, 2006.
    Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it shall be in order 
without intervention of any point of order to consider in the House the bill 
(H.R. 513) to amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to clarify when 
organizations described in section 527 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 must 
register as political committees, and for other purposes. The bill shall be 
considered as read. The amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by 
the Committee on House Administration now printed in the bill, modified by the 
amendment numbered 1 for printing in the Congressional Record pursuant to clause 
8 of rule XVIII, shall be considered as adopted. All points of order against the 
bill, as amended, are waived. The previous question shall be considered as 
ordered on the bill, as amended, to final passage without intervening motion 
except: (1) one hour of debate on the bill, as amended, equally divided and 
controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on House 
Administration; and (2) one motion to recommit with or without instructions.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
 FDS for first quarter 1999 10-q
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  114,376
<ALLOWANCES>                                     3,992
<INVENTORY>                                    181,827
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               301,364
<PP&E>                                       1,334,076
<DEPRECIATION>                                 408,124
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,495,030
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          592,951
<BONDS>                                         80,490
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            34
<OTHER-SE>                                     634,185
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,495,030
<SALES>                                        218,891
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               218,891
<CGS>                                          194,074
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  194,074
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               3,332
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  2,813
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,027
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,786
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                        1,769
<NET-INCOME>                                        17
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.00
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.00
        

</TABLE>
§ 182.215 What must I include in my drug-free awareness program? You must establish an ongoing drug-free awareness program to inform employees about— ( a ) The dangers of drug abuse in the workplace;
( b ) Your policy of maintaining a drug-free workplace;
( c ) Any available drug counseling, rehabilitation, and employee assistance programs; and
( d ) The penalties that you may impose upon them for drug abuse violations occurring in the workplace.