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

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Elizabeth A. Weaver

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

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

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

August 6, 2009 

d0720 

Order 

 

August 6, 2009 

138120 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 138120 

 COA: 288637 

Wayne CC: 89-014852 

TERAH LEE STAMPS, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the December 23, 2008 

order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant’s 

motion for relief from judgment is prohibited by MCR 6.502(G).
exv10wccw1



 











Exhibit 10-CC-1




Terms and Conditions of Stock Option Agreement (Nonqualified Option)

(Regular Option Granted to Alan Mulally on

September 1, 2006 Covering 3,000,000 Shares)




Addition to Article 1 of the Terms and Conditions



“Notwithstanding anything contained herein, in the Agreement or in the Features and Highlights of
Your Stock Options booklet to the contrary, the vesting requirements for your Option granted on
September 1, 2006 covering 3,000,000 shares of Ford common stock will be removed in the event the
Company terminates your employment for reasons other than “for cause” during the first five years
of your employment or if there is a “Change of Control” of the Company during the first five years
of your employment accompanied by a termination of your employment for “Good Reason”, as more fully
described in the employment offer letter from Bill Ford to you dated August 29, 2006 and accepted
by you on September 1, 2006.”




Terms and Conditions of Stock Option Agreement (Nonqualified Option)

(Performance-Based Option Granted to Alan Mulally

on September 1, 2006 Covering 1,000,000 Shares)




Addition to Terms and Conditions



“Notwithstanding anything contained herein, in the Agreement or in the Features and Highlights of
Your Stock Options booklet to the contrary, your performance-based Option granted on September 1,
2006 covering 1,000,000 shares of Ford common stock has a five year term and vesting will be based
solely on the closing price of Ford common stock on the New York Stock Exchange trading regular way
reaching certain thresholds that are maintained for at least 30 consecutive trading days, as more
fully described in the employment offer letter from Bill Ford to you dated August 29, 2006 and
accepted by you on September 1, 2006.”
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                         137,181
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,352,436
<ALLOWANCES>                                   341,336
<INVENTORY>                                    107,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,348,254
<PP&E>                                       1,880,223
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,090,703
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               8,722,458
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        5,174,063
<BONDS>                                      2,140,486
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            2,948
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           202
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,404,759
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 8,722,458
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            11,028,039
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               10,953,076
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             (134,391)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               115,118
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             193,186
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   199,354
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .10
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .05
        

</TABLE>
----

----

I Information

Commission

----

Commission communication in the framework of the implementation of the Council Directive 89/106/EEC of 21 December 1988 on the approximation of laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States relating to construction products

(Text with EEA relevance)

(Publication of titles and references of harmonised standards under the Directive)

(2006/C 304/01)

Note:

More information about harmonised standards on the Internet at

http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/newapproach/standardization/harmstds/

----

(1)

(2)  The date of the end of the co-existence period is the same as the date of withdrawal of conflicting national technical specifications, after which presumption of conformity must be based upon harmonised European specifications (harmonised standards or European Technical Approvals).

(3)  In case of amendments, the referenced standard is EN CCCCC:YYYY, its previous amendments, if any, and the new, quoted amendment.

(4)OJ L 204, 21.7.1998, p. 37.

(5)OJ L 217, 5.8.1998, p. 18.

----
##### 



Exhibit 11
 POTASH CORPORATION OF SASKATCHEWAN INC.
COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE EARNINGS
FOR THE SIX MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30
 2006
    
    2005A
    
    Net income as reported, Canadian GAAP ($ millions)
    
    $
    300.6
    
    
    $
    295.5B
    
    Items adjusting net income ($ millions)
    
    $
    13.3
    
    
    $
    (8.8
    )C
    
    Net income, US GAAP ($ millions)
    
    $
    313.9
    
    
    $
    286.7D
    
    Weighted average number of shares outstanding
    103,718,000
    
    110,365,000E
    
    Net additional shares issuable for diluted earnings per share calculation
    
    
    2,161,000
    
    
    
    3,041,000CANADIAN GAAPBasic earnings per share (A/D)
    
    $
    2.90
    
    
    $
    2.68Diluted earnings per share (A/(D+E))
    
    $
    2.84
    
    
    $
    2.61UNITED STATES GAAPBasic earnings per share (C/D)
    
    $
    3.03
    
    
    $
    2.60Diluted earnings per share (C/(D+E))
    
    $
    2.96
    
    
    $
    2.53
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 21 -0585 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. CHARLES GEOFFREY SANTORO,

Defendant and Appellant.

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including September 26, 2022, within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

August 19 2022

08/19/2022

Case Number: DA 21-0585
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE
F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER ON M OTION FOR R EHEARING E N B ANC

Appellate case name: Kaylen Dewayne Simmons v. The State of Texas

Appellate case number s : 01

- 17

- 00684

- CR , 01

- 17

- 00685

- CR

Trial court case number s : 11

- C R

- 3445 , 12

- CR

- 2519

Trial court: 212th District Court of Galveston County

The motion for rehearing en banc is DENIED

.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Richard Hightower

Acting for the Court

En banc court consists of: Chief Justice Radack, and Justices Keyes, Higl ey, Lloyd, Kelly, Goodman, Landau, Hightower, and Countiss.

Date: March 5, 2019
ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS 

Appeal of -- ) 

) 

The Boeing Company ) 

) 

Under Contract No. DAAH23-03-D-O 162 ) 

APPEARANCE FOR THE APPELLANT: 

APPEARANCES FOR THE GOVERNMENT: 

ASBCA No. 58976 

David Z. Bodenheimer, Esq. 

Crowell & Moring LLP 

Washington, DC 

Raymond M. Saunders, Esq. 

Army Chief Trial Attorney 

L TC Gregg A. Engler, JA 

Trial Attorney 

ORDER OF DISMISSAL 

The dispute which is the subject of the appeal having been settled, the appeal is 

hereby dismissed with prejudice subject to reinstatement only in the event the settlement 

is not consummated. Any request to reinstate the subject appeal must be filed within 90 

days of the date of this Order. 

Dated: 9 December 2014 

Administrative Judge 

Armed Services Board 

of Contract Appeals 

I certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the Order of Dismissal of the Armed 

Services Board of Contract Appeals in ASBCA No. 58976, Appeal of The Boeing 

Company, rendered in conformance with the Board's Charter. 

Dated: 

JEFFREY D. GARDIN 

Recorder, Armed Services 

Board of Contract Appeals
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          FEB-24-2001
<PERIOD-START>                             FEB-27-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               NOV-25-2000
<CASH>                                           9,767
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  100,527
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     97,897
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               241,936
<PP&E>                                       1,259,030
<DEPRECIATION>                                 896,212
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 861,658
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          193,163
<BONDS>                                        341,900
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           442
<OTHER-SE>                                     289,347
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   861,658
<SALES>                                         49,970
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               690,637
<CGS>                                           52,698
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  483,421
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              20,804
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 28,279
<INCOME-TAX>                                    11,029
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             17,250
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    17,250
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .50
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .50


</TABLE>
Exhibit 34.27  LOGO Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm To the Board of Managers of C-III Capital Partners LLC, the Sole Member of C-III Asset Management LLC: We have examined management of C-III Asset Management LLCs (the Company) assertion that the
Company complied with the servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) of the Securities and Exchange Commissions Regulation AB for all transactions for which the Company acted as servicer involving first lien commercial mortgage loans (the
Platform), excluding criteria 1122(d)(1)(iii), 1122(d)(2)(ii), 1122(d)(3)(i)  1122(d)(3)(iv), 1122(d)(4)(ii), 1122(d)(4)(v), 1122(d)(4)(ix) and 1122(d)(4)(xv), which management has determined are not applicable to the activities
performed by the Company with respect to the Platform, included in the accompanying Managements Report on Assessment of Compliance with Securities and Exchange Commissions Regulation AB Servicing Criteria dated January 31, 2019 as
of and for the year ended December 31, 2018. The Companys management is responsible for its assertion. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on managements assertion about the Companys compliance with the specified
requirements based on our examination. Our examination was conducted in accordance with attestation standards established by the American Institute
of Certified Public Accountants, as adopted by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the examination to obtain reasonable assurance about whether managements assertion
about compliance with the specified requirements is fairly stated, in all material respects. An examination involves performing procedures to obtain evidence about whether managements assertion is fairly stated, in all material respects. The
nature, timing, and extent of the procedures selected depend on our judgment, including an assessment of the risks of material misstatement of managements assertion, whether due to fraud or error. We believe that the evidence we obtained is
sufficient and appropriate to provide a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our examination does not provide a legal determination on the
Companys compliance with the specified requirements. In our opinion, managements assertion that the Company complied with the
aforementioned applicable servicing criteria included in the accompanying Managements Report on Assessment of Compliance with Securities and Exchange Commissions Regulation AB Servicing Criteria dated January 31, 2019 as of and for
the year ended December 31, 2018 is fairly stated, in all material respects.  /s/ Dixon Hughes Goodman LLPAsheville, North CarolinaJanuary 31, 2019
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 149 (Wednesday, August 5, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 39071-39072]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-18638]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. PR09-30-000]


Corning Natural Gas Company; Notice of Rate Election

July 29, 2009.
    Take notice that on July 27, 2009, Corning Natural Gas Company 
(Corning) filed a Notice of Rate Election and a Statement of Operating 
Conditions for NGPA section 311 firm transportation service pursuant to 
sections 284.123(b)(ii) and 284.123(e) of the Commission's regulations. 
Corning proposes to adopt as its transportation rate its rate schedule 
Service Classification 7 which is an existing transportation rate 
schedule approved by the New York Public Service Commission.
    Any person desiring to participate in this rate filing must file a 
motion to intervene or a protest in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 
of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 
385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining 
the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make 
protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a 
party must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as 
appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests must be filed on or 
before the date as indicated below. Anyone filing an intervention or 
protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant. Anyone 
filing an intervention or protest on or before the intervention or 
protest date need not serve motions to intervene or protests on persons 
other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and 
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an 
original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal 
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the 
``eLibrary'' link and is available for

[[Page 39072]]

review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. 
There is an ``eSubscription'' link on the Web site that enables 
subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a document is added to 
a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, 
please e-mail <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#9cdad9cedfd3f2f0f5f2f9cfe9ececf3eee8dcfaf9eeffb2fbf3ea"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="23656671606c4d4f4a4d46705653534c515763454651400d444c55">[email protected]</span></a>, or call (866) 208-3676 (toll 
free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday August 14, 2009.

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-18638 Filed 8-4-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1003 Introduced in House (IH)]

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1003

      To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to increase the 
deductibility of business meal expenses for individuals who are subject 
                    to Federal hours of limitation.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 21, 1995

 Mrs. Johnson of Connecticut (for herself, Mr. Neal of Massachusetts, 
and Mr. Jefferson) introduced the following bill; which was referred to 
                    the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
      To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to increase the 
deductibility of business meal expenses for individuals who are subject 
                    to Federal hours of limitation.

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

SECTION 1. INCREASED DEDUCTIBILITY OF BUSINESS MEAL EXPENSES FOR 
              INDIVIDUALS SUBJECT TO FEDERAL HOURS OF SERVICE.

    (a) In General.--Section 274(n) of the Internal Revenue Code of 
1986 (relating to only 50 percent of meal and entertainment expenses 
allowed as deduction) is amended by adding at the end the following new 
paragraph:
            ``(3) Special rule for individuals subject to federal hours 
        of service.--In the case of any expenses for food or beverages 
        consumed by an individual during, or incident to, the period of 
        duty subject to the hours of service limitations of the 
        Department of Transportation, paragraph (1) shall be applied by 
        substituting `80 percent' for `50 percent'.''
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) shall 
apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 1994.
                                 <all>
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-02-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             DEC-28-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               APR-04-1998
<CASH>                                           1,721
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   45,091
<ALLOWANCES>                                     8,112
<INVENTORY>                                     65,906
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               125,389
<PP&E>                                          20,057
<DEPRECIATION>                                   5,719
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 194,592
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           78,978
<BONDS>                                        101,456
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            8,796
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             4
<OTHER-SE>                                       2,506
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   194,592
<SALES>                                         52,981
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                52,981
<CGS>                                           43,085
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   43,085
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                16,153
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   346
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               3,663
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (9,907)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (3,962)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (5,945)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (5,945)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (1.40)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.40)
        

</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 17 (Wednesday, January 28, 2009)]
[Presidential Documents]
[Pages 4905-4906]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-1939]




                        Presidential Documents 



Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 17 / Wednesday, January 28, 2009 / 
Presidential Documents

[[Page 4905]]


                Memorandum of January 26, 2009

                
State of California Request for Waiver Under 42 
                U.S.C. 7543(b), the Clean Air Act

                Memorandum for the Administrator of the Environmental 
                Protection Agency

                Under the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q), the 
                Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) sets emissions 
                standards for new motor vehicles. California may also 
                adopt standards for new motor vehicles if the 
                Administrator of the EPA, based on criteria set out in 
                the statute, waives the general statutory prohibition 
                on State adoption or enforcement of emissions 
                standards. Other States may adopt emissions standards 
                for new motor vehicles if they are identical to the 
                California standards for which a waiver has been 
                granted and comply with other statutory criteria.

                For decades, the EPA has granted the State of 
                California such waivers. The EPA's final decision to 
                deny California's application for a waiver permitting 
                the State to adopt limitations on greenhouse gas 
                emissions from motor vehicles was published in the 
                Federal Register on March 6, 2008.

                In order to ensure that the EPA carries out its 
                responsibilities for improving air quality, you are 
                hereby requested to assess whether the EPA's decision 
                to deny a waiver based on California's application was 
                appropriate in light of the Clean Air Act. I further 
                request that, based on that assessment, the EPA 
                initiate any appropriate action.

                This memorandum is not intended to, and does not, 
                create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, 
                enforceable at law or in equity by any party against 
                the United States, its departments, agencies, or 
                entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any 
                other person.

[[Page 4906]]

                You are hereby authorized and directed to publish this 
                memorandum in the Federal Register.
                <GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
                
                    (Presidential Sig.)

                THE WHITE HOUSE,

                    Washington, January 26, 2009

[FR Doc. E9-1939
Filed 1-27-09; 8:45 am]
Billing code 6560-50-P