alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Robert Steve BRYAN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. WW-320.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

May 13, 1981.

P. Douglas Brinkmeyer, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.

Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., Carolyn M. Snur-kowski, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant appeals his conviction for sale or delivery of cannabis raising as his sole point on appeal the trial court’s alleged error in refusing to instruct the jury on the maximum and minimum penalties as required by *Tascano v. State,*393 So.2d 540 (Fla.1980), *rehearing denied*February 27, 1981. Appellant’s argument is clearly frivolous since the jury was instructed as required by *Tascano, supra.*(T-843-846). AFFIRMED.

SHAW, WENTWORTH and THOMPSON, JJ., concur.
# C_2006131EN.01002201.xml

| 3.6.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 131/22 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.6.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 131/22

---

Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 16 March 2006 — Commission of the European Communities v Hellenic Republic

(Case C-518/04) (1)

1

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations - Directive 92/43/EEC - Conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora - Protection of Species)

(2006/C 131/39)

Language of the case: Greek

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: M. Konstantinidis and M. van Beek, acting as Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: Hellenic Republic (represented by: E. Skandalou, acting as Agent)

Defendant:

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations — Infringement of Article 12(1)(b) of Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (OJ 1992 L 206, p. 7) — Protection of vipers Vipera Schweizeri on the island of Milos — Failure to adopt the measures necessary to prohibit disturbance of that species during the period of breeding and the deterioration or destruction of breeding sites

Vipera Schweizeri

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Declares that, by failing to adopt, within the prescribed period, the measures necessary to establish and implement an effective system of strict protection for the viper Vipera schweizeri on the island of Milos prohibiting deliberate disturbance of that species, particularly during the period of breeding, rearing and hibernation and deterioration or destruction of breeding sites or resting places of that species, the Hellenic Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 12(1)(b) and (d) of Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Declares that, by failing to adopt, within the prescribed period, the measures necessary to establish and implement an effective system of strict protection for the viper Vipera schweizeri on the island of Milos prohibiting deliberate disturbance of that species, particularly during the period of breeding, rearing and hibernation and deterioration or destruction of breeding sites or resting places of that species, the Hellenic Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 12(1)(b) and (d) of Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora;

Vipera schweizeri

| 2. | Orders the Hellenic Republic to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the Hellenic Republic to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 57 of 05.03.2005.

1

---
§ 425.100 General. ( a ) Under the Shared Savings Program, ACO participants may work together to manage and coordinate care for Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries through an ACO that meets the criteria specified in this part. The ACO must become accountable for the quality, cost, and overall care of the Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries assigned to the ACO.
( b ) An ACO is eligible to receive payments for shared savings under subpart G of this part if all of the following conditions are met: ( 1 ) The ACO meets or exceeds the applicable minimum savings rate established under §§ 425.604, 425.605 (except as provided under § 425.605(h)), 425.606, 425.609, or 425.610.
( 2 ) The ACO meets the minimum quality performance standards established under § 425.500 (for performance years or a performance period beginning on or before January 1, 2020), or under the quality performance standard established under § 425.512 (for performance years beginning on or after January 1, 2021).
( 3 ) The ACO otherwise maintains its eligibility to participate in the Shared Savings Program under this part.
( c ) ACOs that operate under a two-sided model and meet or exceed a minimum loss rate established under § 425.605, § 425.606, § 425.609 or § 425.610 must share losses with the Medicare program under subpart G of the part.
( d ) An ACO is eligible to receive advance investment payments if it meets the criteria under § 425.630(b).
[76 FR 67973, Nov. 2, 2011, as amended at 80 FR 32834, June 9, 2015; 83 FR 60092, Nov. 23, 2018; 83 FR 68083, Dec. 31, 2018; 85 FR 85038, Dec. 28, 2020; 87 FR 70232, Nov. 18, 2022]
Editorial Note on Part 422
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 422 appear at 70 FR 4741, Jan. 28, 2005.

§ 422.612 Judicial review. ( a ) *Review of ALJ's or attorney adjudicator's decision.* Any party, including the MA organization, may request judicial review (upon notifying the other parties) of an ALJ's or attorney adjudicator's decision if— ( 1 ) The Council denied the party's request for review; and
( 2 ) The amount in controversy meets the threshold requirement established annually by the Secretary.
( b ) *Review of Council decision.* Any party, including the MA organization, may request judicial review (upon notifying the other parties) of the Council decision if it is the final decision of CMS and the amount in controversy meets the threshold established in paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
( c ) *How to request judicial review.* In order to request judicial review, a party must file a civil action in a district court of the United States in accordance with section 205(g) of the Act. See part 405 of this chapter for a description of the procedures to follow in requesting judicial review.
[63 FR 35107, June 26, 1998; 63 FR 52614, Oct. 1, 1998, as amended at 65 FR 40331, June 29, 2000; 70 FR 4740, Jan. 28, 2005; 82 FR 5125, Jan. 17, 2017]
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03
- 23
- 00305
- CV

In re Patrick Earl Tarkington

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING FROM COMAL COUNTY

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N
Relator has filed a petition for writ of mandamus complaining o f the tr ial court’s failure to set for hearing his ple a to the jurisdiction

. Having reviewed the petition and the record provided, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.8(a); see also
Tex. R. App. P. 52.7(a); In re Smith , No. 03

- 14

- 00 478

- CV, 2014 WL 4079922, at *2 (Tex. App.

— Austin Aug. 13, 2014, orig. proceeding) (denying mandamus relief when relator failed to provide sufficient record from which to evaluate claim for mandamus relief); In re Halley , No. 03

- 15

- 00310

- CV, 2015 WL 44 488 31 , at *2 (Tex. App.

— Austin July 14, 2015) (orig. proceeding) (concluding that a six

- month delay did not constitute an unreasonable length of time under “failure to rule” analysis)

.

_______________________ ___________________ Ed ward Smith , Justice Bef or e Chief Justi ce Byrne , Justices Baker and Smith Filed: July 13 , 2023
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Helen WILSON and Willie Wilson.

No. 66543.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

March 14, 1980.

In re Helen and Willie Wilson, applying for writs of review certiorari and stay order. Parish of East Baton Rouge. No. 3-79-591.

Denied. Defendant has an adequate remedy by appeal.
#### The COCA-COLA COMPANY-FOODS DIVISION (self-insured), Appellant, v. Alfred WARREN, Jr., Appellee.

No. TT-292.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Dec. 9, 1980.

Jesse F. Sparks, Jr., and Robert E. Sheridan, Orlando, for appellant.

Edward H. Hurt of Hurt & Parrish, and Bill McCabe of Shepherd, McCabe & Cooley, Orlando, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

We reverse and remand for reconsideration of the award of attorney’s fees. *See Casings, Florida, Inc. v. Williams,*389 So.2d 705 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980). Otherwise, the order is affirmed. *R. H. Coody &*Associates, *Inc. v. Shelton,*352 So.2d 852 (Fla.1977). *See also Redmer Sons Co. v. Waugh,*377 So.2d 815 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979).

AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part, and REMANDED for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

ROBERT P. SMITH, Jr. and THOMPSON, JJ., and LILES, WOODIE A., Associate Judge (Retired), concur.
HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPress Releases...Djibouti National Day

# 									Djibouti National Day							

Press Statement

Antony J. Blinken, Secretary of State

June 27, 2023

On behalf of the United States of America, I congratulate the Djiboutian people on the 46th anniversary of your nation’s independence.

The United States and Djibouti have enjoyed a strong partnership for many decades. We look forward to deepening our bonds through greater cooperation on common priorities including economic development, peace and security, and defending the rules-based international order.

The United States deeply appreciates Djibouti’s contributions to saving lives and securing lasting and sustainable peace in response to conflicts and crises in the region.

Tags

Bureau of African AffairsDjiboutiOffice of the SpokespersonThe Secretary of State

Back to Top
Home2022 Certificates of Competency for Nominees to be Chiefs of Mission...Fulton, Heide B. – Oriental Republic of Uruguay- May 2022

# 									Fulton, Heide B. – Oriental Republic of Uruguay- May 2022							

Certificate of Competency

May 20, 2022

REPORT FOR THE COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS

UNITED STATES SENATE

SUBJECT: Ambassadorial Nomination:  Certificate of Demonstrated Competence — Foreign ServiceAct, Section 304(a)(4)

POST: Oriental Republic of Uruguay

CANDIDATE:Heide B. Fulton

Heide B. Fulton, a career member of the Senior Foreign Service with the rank of Minister-Counselor, currently serves as Deputy Assistant Secretary of State in the Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs.  In this capacity she is responsible for State Department programs combating illicit drugs and organized crime, as well as support for law enforcement and rule of law, in the Western Hemisphere and INL’s global aviation program.  Before that, she served as Director of the Office of Mexican Affairs.  Previously, she led the U.S. Embassy in Honduras as Deputy Chief of Mission and Charge d’Affairsa.i.  Fulton has served overseas in Afghanistan, Ecuador, Cambodia, and Manila.  Her Washington assignments include Director of the Main Press Office, Pearson Fellow in the Office of Senator Robert Menendez, Press Advisor for the Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs, and Special Assistant to the Under Secretary for Political Affairs. Fulton has devoted much of her career, spanning nearly25 years, to the Western Hemisphere region.  This extensive and substantive regional experience, coupled with her management experience and demonstrated ability to lead large interagency teams as well as policy-oriented offices, makes her a well-qualified candidate to be the U.S. Ambassador to Uruguay.  Prior to joining the Foreign Service, Fulton served on active duty as a Quartermaster Officer with the U.S. Army in Europe.  She returned to active duty as a Civil Affairs Officer to deploy to Iraq.  Fulton retired from the U.S. Army Reserve in 2020 after 28 years of service.   She is the recipient of five Senior Foreign Service Performance awards and multiple State Department Superior Honor Awards.  A native of New York, she has a Bachelor’s degree from Boston College and a Master’s degree in International Relations from Troy State University.  She speaks Spanish.

Back to Top
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                          38,679
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                 5,000
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                    198,759
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                        607,927
<ALLOWANCE>                                      8,507
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 883,862
<DEPOSITS>                                     742,057
<SHORT-TERM>                                    13,320
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              7,928
<LONG-TERM>                                     48,375
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         5,222
<OTHER-SE>                                      66,960
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 883,862
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 51,051
<INTEREST-INVEST>                               11,463
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   950
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                63,464
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              26,291
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              32,451
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           31,013
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                    2,112
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                  96
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                 29,825
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 11,631
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                      11,631
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     8,414
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.63
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.60
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    4.17
<LOANS-NON>                                      5,164
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                   404
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 8,360
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                    2,563
<RECOVERIES>                                       598
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                8,507
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             8,507
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        

</TABLE>
Air Quality Flag Program

How will air pollution affect my health 

and activity today?

EPA-456/H-15-003

January 2016

Go for 150!

The CDC recommends 150 minutes of 

moderate-intensity activity or 75 minutes 

of vigorous-intensity activity every week 

for adults.

Watch for symptoms.

Coughing or shortness of breath are 

signs to take it easier. Air pollution can 

also make asthma symptoms worse and 

trigger attacks.

Take it easier.

Take breaks. Be active for a shorter 

amount of time. Do less intense activities, 

like walking instead of running.

Plan ahead for ozone.

There is less ozone in the morning, so 

plan your intense outdoor activities early 

on high ozone days.

How YOU can improve your local air quality:

Tune your vehicle’s engine and 

keep your tires properly inflated.

www.airnow.gov/flag Air Quality Flag

PROGRAM

Take public transportation, 

carpool, walk or bike.

Avoid idling and schedule 

errands together.

Install a programmable 

thermostat.

green GOOD

It’s a great day to be active outside.

yellow

MODERATE

It’s a good day to be active outside. Take it 

easier if you are unusually sensitive to air 

pollution.

orange

UNHEALTHY FOR SENSITIVE GROUPS 

Older adults, children and teens, people 

with certain health conditions, and people 

who are active outdoors should take it 

easier.

red UNHEALTHY

Everyone should take it easier.

purple

VERY UNHEALTHY

Sensitive groups, avoid outdoor exertion. 

Everyone else, avoid long or intense 

outdoor exertion.
#### STATE of Louisiana ex rel. Felton WILLIAMS v. Hon. Israel AUGUSTINE, Judge, Section “I”, Parish of Orleans.

No. 54741.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

June 7, 1974.

In re: Felton Williams, applying for Writs of Mandamus and Habeas Corpus.

Granted. See Order.

On considering the petition of the relator Felton Williams in the above entitled and numbered cause.

Ordered that the Honorable Israel Augustine, Judge, Criminal District Court, Parish of Orleans, act on relator’s petition for habeas corpus filed in that court on October 29, 1973 forthwith, advising this Court of the action taken.
#### PUBLIX SUPER MARKETS, INC., Appellant, v. Ann C. DEMARCO, etc., et al., Appellees.

No. 78-65.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

June 13, 1979.

Nancy Little Hoffman, and K. P. Jones, Ft. Lauderdale, for appellant.

Robert Orseck and Joel D. Eaton of Pod-hurst, Orseck & Parks, P. A., Miami, and J. Jay Simons of Simons & Schlesinger, Fort Lauderdale, for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

DOWNEY, C. J., and CROSS, J., concur.

BERANEK, J., dissents with opinion.

BERANEK, Judge,

dissenting.

I respectfully dissent. In this case the trial court allowed plaintiff to present the testimony of an expert witness over the defendant’s objection. This witness had not formed an opinion until the Friday before the Monday of the trial. Plaintiff had not answered defendant’s interrogatories propounded early in the case as to the opinions of experts which plaintiff intended to call. Under the circumstances I believe the Court should not have allowed the expert to testify and would, therefore, reverse for a new trial.
§ 425.650 Benchmarking methodology. ( a ) *Scope and purpose.* The methodology by which CMS establishes, adjusts, updates and resets an ACO's historical benchmark is described within this subpart G. The benchmarking methodology for agreement periods beginning before January 1, 2024, is specified in §§ 425.601, 425.602, 425.603, and 425.659. The benchmarking methodology for agreement periods beginning on or after January 1, 2024, is specified in §§ 425.652 through 425.660.
( b ) [Reserved]
[87 FR 70243, Nov. 18, 2022, as amended at 88 FR 79548, Nov. 16, 2023]
# Un itedSta tes C our t of A pp eals For the First C ircuit

No. 03-1215

RUTH GONZÁLEZ-PÉREZ; ANACLETO ORTIZ-VILLANUEVA;

MIRIAM LEMOINE; FRITZ F. LEMOINE; GLORIA GONZÁLEZ-PÉREZ; LUCY GONZÁLEZ-PÉREZ,

Plaintiffs, Appellants,

v. HOSPITAL INTERAMERICANO DE MEDICINA AVANZADA (HIMA);

MIGUEL LÓPEZ-NAPOLEONI; JANE DOE; CONJUGAL PARTNERSHIP LÓPEZ-DOE, Defendants, Appellees.

ERRATA SHEET The opinion of this Court issued on January 14, 2004 is amended as follows: On page 5, inside footnote 4, line 3: Replace "determing" with "determining"
Abatement Order filed September 27, 2011

.

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14

- 11

- 00683

- CV

____________ JOHN MARSHALL HARLAN AND CAROLE V. HARLAN , Appellants

V.
NANCY HOLMES AND DON HOLMES , Appellee s

On Appeal from the 269th District Court

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2010

- 23597



### ABATEMENT ORDER
We have determined that this case is appropriate for referral to mediation, an alternative dispute resolution process. See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code ' ' 154.021

— .073

. Mediation is a forum in which an impartial person, the mediator, facilitates communication between parties to promote reconciliation or settlement. Id. ' 154.023(a). Any communication relating to the subject matter of the appeal made by a participant in the mediation proceeding is confidential. See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code ' 154.053. After mediation, the parties shall advise the court whether the case settled, or whether any further negotiation efforts are planned.2

The court ORDERS the appeal ABAT ED for a period of sixty days and refers the underlying dispute to mediation. Any party may file a written objection to this order with
the clerk of this court within 10 days of the date of this order

. See Tex. Civ. Prac. &
Rem. Code ' 154.022. If this court finds that there is a reasonable basis for the objection, the objection shall be sustained and the appeal reinstated on this court’s active docket.
See id.

The court ORDERS that the mediation be held within 60 days of the date of this
order. The court ORDERS that all parties or their representatives with full settlement authority shall attend the mediation process, with their counsel of record. The court
FURTHER ORDERS that within 48 hours of completion of the mediation, the part ies shall advise the court in writing whether the case settled.
If mediation fully resolves the issues in the case, the court ORDERS the parties to file a motion to dismiss the appeal, other dispositive motion, or a motion for additional
time to file the d ispositive motion, within 10 days of the conclusion of the mediation

. The court ORDERS the appellate timetable in this case suspended for 60 days
from the date of this order.
The appeal is ABATED , treated as a closed case, and removed from this court = s

a ctive docket for a period of sixty days. The appeal will be reinstated on this court = s active docket after sixty days. Any party may file a motion stating grounds for reinstating the appeal before the end of the sixty

- day period. Any party may also file a motion to dismiss the appeal or other dispositive motion at any time. Any party may file a motion to extend the abatement period for completion of mediation or to finalize a
settlement.

PER CURIAM