alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Hawley *vs.*Bates.

ALBANY,

Feb. 1839.

A replevin bond imperfect in itself and executed with but one surety, will be allowed to be amended after service of the writ, upon payment of costs of motion to set aside the proceedings.

Motion to set aside a *writ of replevin*and all subsequent proceedings upon the grounds that *no penalty*was inserted in the *replevin bond,*and that it was executed by the plaintiff with *but one surety.*On the part of the plaintiff it was shown, that previous to the service of *notice*of this motion, the bond was amended by the insertion of a penalty, and that a *new bond*with *two sureties*was delivered to the deputy sheriff who served the writ; and further, that the omission to insert a penalty was the fault of the deputy. Before the service of the new bond, the papers for the motion had been prepared, and it did not appear that any offer had been made to pay the costs of such proceedings.

*W. Tracy,*for the motion.

*W. Hunt,*contra.

*By the Court,*

Nelson, Ch. J.

The writ of replevin was irregular without the bond required by the statute, 18 Wendell, 584; but as a new bond conforming thereto has been made and duly delivered, and as the error in the first bond arose from the mistake of the sheriff, we will allow the proceedings to stand good, on payment of the costs of this motion. This saves the defendant harmless, and secures him the benefit of the statute, without imposing upon the plaintiff the trouble and expense of a new suit.

Rule accordingly.
Unassociated Document


    Exhibit
10.1

    


    Description
of Danny Stein’s Compensation for his Service as Interim Chief Executive
Officer

    


    On September 25, 2009, as a result of
the resignation of Greg Scholl, the Company’s Chief Executive Officer and
President, the Board of Directors of the Company appointed Danny Stein, a member
of the Board of Directors, as Interim Chief Executive Officer effective October
1, 2009 for a three-month period.  Mr. Stein was to receive $50,000 as
compensation for his role as Interim Chief Executive Officer.

     

    On
October 27, 2009, Danny Stein resigned as Interim Chief Executive Officer of the
Company.  Mr. Stein received a pro rated portion of his original
compensation for the period in which he served as Interim Chief Executive
Officer in the amount of $16,666.
#### § 33.81 Applicability.

This subpart prescribes the block tests and inspections for turbine engines.

[Doc. No. 3025, 29 FR 7453, June 10, 1964, as amended by Amdt. 33-6, 39 FR 35468, Oct. 1, 1974]
This opinion is subject to administrative correction before final disposition.

Before 

HOLIFIELD, STEWART, and BAKER

Appellate Military Judges

_________________________

UNITED STATES

Appellee

v.

Joseph W. DUDLEY, Jr.

Lance Corporal (E-3), U.S. Marine Corps

Appellant

No. 202200161

_________________________

Decided: 26 October 2022

Appeal from the United States Navy-Marine Corps Trial Judiciary 

Military Judge: 

Adam M. King

Sentence adjudged 10 March 2022 by a general court-martial convened 

at Marine Corps Base Camp Foster, Okinawa, Japan, consisting of a 

military judge sitting alone. Sentence in the Entry of Judgment: reduction to E-1, confinement for twenty-one months, forfeiture of all pay and 

allowances, and a dishonorable discharge.1

 

1 Appellant was credited with having served 210 days of pretrial confinement.
United States v. Dudley, NMCCA No. 202200161

Opinion of the Court

2

For Appellant: 

Lieutenant Daniel E. Grunert, JAGC, USN

_________________________

This opinion does not serve as binding precedent under 

NMCCA Rule of Appellate Procedure 30.2(a).

_________________________

PER CURIAM:

After careful consideration of the record, submitted without assignment of 

error, we have determined that the findings and sentence are correct in law 

and fact and that no error materially prejudicial to Appellant’s substantial 

rights occurred.2

The findings and sentence are AFFIRMED.

FOR THE COURT:

MARK K. JAMISON

Clerk of Court

 

2 Articles 59 & 66, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. §§ 859, 866.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Agriculture

###### Agricultural Marketing Service 

          - [Docket No. TB-00-14] 

      ( print page 30388)    
In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.) announcement is made of the following committee meeting:

*Name:*                         Burley Tobacco Advisory Committee.                     

*Date:*                         June 14, 2000.                     

*Time:*                         9 a.m.                     

*Place:*                         Campbell House Inn, South Colonial Hall, 1375 Harrodsburg Road, Lexington, Kentucky 40504.                     

*Purpose:*                         To elect officers, recommend opening dates, discuss selling schedules, review the operational policies and procedures, and other related matters for the 2000-2001 burley tobacco marketing season.                     

The meeting is open to the public. Persons, other than members, who wish to address the Committee at the meeting should contact John P. Duncan III, Deputy Administrator, Tobacco Programs, AMS, USDA, AG 0280, Room 502 Annex Building, P.O. Box 96456, Washington, D.C. 20090-6456; (202) 205-0567, prior to the meeting. Written statements may be submitted to the Committee before, at, or after the meeting. If you need any accommodations to participate in the meeting, please contact the Tobacco Programs at (202) 205-0567 by June 7, 2000, and inform us of your needs.

Dated: May 4, 2000.

John P. Duncan III,

Deputy Administrator, Tobacco Programs.

[FR Doc. 00-11838 Filed 5-10-00; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410-02-P
Order entered April 9 , 2014

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05
- 13
- 01584
- CR
BRIGHAM EUGENE KREBS , Appellant

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 6

Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 006
- 80655
- 2013



### O RDER
The Court REINSTATE S the appeal. On March 4, 2014, we ordered the tri a l court to make findings regarding why appellant’s
brief had not been filed. We ADOPT the findings that: (1) appellant desires to pursue the appeal; (2 ) appellant is not indigent; and (3) retained counsel’s explanation for the delay in filing appellant’s brief was due to a medical issue involving his left arm. Because appellant’s brief was not tendered by March 31, 2014, we DO NOT ADOPT the finding that the brief would be filed by that date.
We GRANT appellant’s April 3, 2014 motion to extend time to file his brief. We ORDER appellant’s brief filed as of the date of this order.The Court ORDERS Jennifer Corley, official court reporter of the County Court at Law

No. 6, to coordinate with court reporters Kristen Kopp and Crystal Cannon to file a supplemental record containing State’s Exhibit nos. 1 and 2, the videos that were admitted during the suppression hearing. The supplemental record is due within FI FTEEN DAYS of the date of this
order.
We DIRECT the Clerk to send copies of this order, by electronic transmission, to Jennifer Corley, official court reporter, County Court at Law No. 6; court reporters Kristen Kopp and Crystal Cannon; and to counsel for all parties.

/s/ CAROLYN WRIGHT CHIEF JUSTICE
#### LIBERTI, et al. v PALM BEACH COUNTY, et al.

Case No. AP 89-7606 AZ

Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County

August 9, 1989

Before LUPO, OFTEDAL, POULTON, JJ.

OPINION OF THE COURT

PER CURIAM.

This matter came before the appellate panel upon a motion for emergency hearing (D.E. 4) and motion to expedite order to show cause and final determination on writ of certiorari (D.E. 3) filed by the petitioners with the petition for writ of certiorari and complaint for declaratory and injunctive relief (D. E. 1).

It is the unanimous opinion of this appellate panel that the Circuit Court in its appellate capacity has no jurisdiction to consider by certiorari the action taken by the Board of County Commissioners.

The circuit court clerk is respectfully requested to assign at random this case from this appellate panel to a trial division of the circuit court.

APPEAL DISMISSED Lupo, Oftedal, and Poulton concur.
#### M. C. Dayis, as Chairman Board County Commissioners, Plaintiff in Error, v. J. M. Scales, Defendant in Error.

Writ of Error to a judgment of the Circuit Court for Manatee County.

Curry & Crichlow, for Plaintiff in Error.

O. C. Whitaker, for Defendant in Error.

Writ of Error dismissed on motion of counsel for Defendant in Error.
# Materials Not Included in **Airworthiness Directive (AD) Docket**

Docket Number: FAA- 2012 - 0329 Directorate Identifier: 2011NM139AD

A320 - 53 - 1218 --- 2/8/10

Name/Description of Item(s) Not Included in FDMS Docket and Maintained in the Supplemental AD Docket 

### MA **Y BE VIEWED AT:** Federal Aviation Administration

Transport Airplane Directorate Rules Docket 1601 Lind Ave. SW., Renton, WA 98057 425.227.1221 **DURING THE HOURS OF:** 9 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Form Date: 03/05/2008
**EXHIBIT 23.1** **Consent    of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**     We consent to the incorporation by reference in this Annual    Report    (Form 10-K)    of Digital River, Inc. of our report dated February 29,    2008, with respect to the consolidated financial statements of    Digital River, Inc., included in the 2007 Annual Report to    Stockholders of Digital River, Inc.     Our audits also included the financial statement schedule of    Digital River, Inc. listed in Item 15(a)(2). This schedule    is the responsibility of Digital River, Inc.’s management.    Our responsibility is to express an opinion based on our audits.    In our opinion, as to which the date is February 29, 2008,    the financial statement schedule referred to above, when    considered in relation to the basic financial statements taken    as a whole, presents fairly in all material respects the    information set forth therein.     We consent to the incorporation by reference in the following    Registration Statements:     (1) Registration Statement    (Form S-3No. 333-81626,333-85996,333-118519,333-120602,333-122068,    and    333-131433)    of Digital River, Inc.,     (2) Registration Statement    (Form S-4No. 333-122069)    of Digital River, Inc. and in the related prospectus, and     (3) Registration Statement    (Form S-8No. 333-67085,333-79269,333-36680,333-47026,333-53332,333-69036,333-101759,333-105864,    and    333-130626)    pertaining to Digital River, Inc.;     of our report dated February 29, 2008, with respect to the    consolidated financial statements of Digital River, Inc.    incorporated herein by reference, our report dated    February 29, 2008, with respect to the effectiveness of    internal control over financial reporting of Digital River,    Inc., included herein, and our report included in the preceding    paragraph with respect to the financial statement schedule of    Digital River, Inc. included in this Annual Report    (Form 10-K)    of Digital River, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2007. /s/  Ernst &    Young LLP     Minneapolis, Minnesota    February 29, 2008
#### § 25.563 Structural ditching provisions.

Structural strength considerations of ditching provisions must be in accordance with § 25.801(e).
#### In the Matter of the Accounting of George S. Shirk et al., as Temporary Administrators of the Estate of Ella V. von E. Wendel, Deceased, etc. The Presbyterian Hospital in the City of New York et al., Appellants; George S. Shirk et al., as Surviving Temporary Administrators of the Estate of Ella V. von E. Wendel, Deceased, et al., Respondents.

Argued January 13, 1937;

decided March 9, 1937.

*533
      *Ben*A. *Matthews*for appellants.

*John Edmond Hewitt, Edward O. Werner*and *George Flint Warren, Jr.,*for respondents.

Order affirmed, with costs payable out of the estate. No opinion.

Concur: Crane, Ch. J., Lehman, O’Brien, Hubbs, Loughran and Rippey, JJ. Taking no part: Finch, J.
**EXHIBIT 23.1**

 

**Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**

 

The Board of Directors Buffalo Wild Wings, Inc.:

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements (Nos. 333-110767, 333-134513, and 333-151137) on Form S-8 of Buffalo Wild Wings, Inc. and subsidiaries of our report dated February 25, 2011, with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of Buffalo Wild Wings, Inc. and subsidiaries as of December 26, 2010 and December 27, 2009, and the related consolidated statements of earnings, stockholders’ equity, and cash flows for each of the fiscal years in the three-year period ended December 26, 2010, and the related financial statement schedule, and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of December 26, 2010, which report appears in the December 26, 2010 annual report on Form 10-K of Buffalo Wild Wings, Inc.

 

 

Minneapolis, Minnesota February 25, 2011

 

----
§ 375.40 Permits for commercial air operations. ( a ) *Permit required.* Except for aircraft being operated under a foreign air carrier permit, an exemption, or as otherwise provided in subpart D or H of this part, foreign civil aircraft may engage in commercial air operations only if there is carried on board the aircraft a permit issued by the Department in accordance with this subpart authorizing the operations involved.
( b ) Aircraft are not authorized to engage in air transportation under this section. Where an operation involves the carriage of persons, property or mail for compensation or hire, the Department will determine whether particular flights for which a permit is sought will be in common carriage, and therefore in air transportation, based on all the facts and circumstances surrounding the applicant's entire operations. The burden rests upon the applicant in each instance to demonstrate by an appropriate factual showing that the contemplated operation will not constitute common carriage from, to or within the United States. In general, an applicant that holds itself out to the public, or to a particular class or segment, as willing to furnish transportation for hire is a common carrier.
#### Catherine Nevins, as Administratrix of the Estate of William Nevins, Deceased, Respondent, *v.*Steeplechase Amusement Company, Inc., Appellant.

Argued January 21, 1937;

decided March 9, 1937.

*555
      *William B. Shelton*for appellant.

*Thomas J. O’Neil*and *L. Daniel Danziger*for respondent.

Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: Crane, Ch. J., Lehman, O’Brien, Loughran, Finch and Rippey, JJ. Taking no part: Hubbs, J.
§ 91.173 ATC clearance and flight plan required. No person may operate an aircraft in controlled airspace under IFR unless that person has— ( a ) Filed an IFR flight plan; and
( b ) Received an appropriate ATC clearance.
#### § 435.43 Payload reentry review requirements and procedures.

Unless otherwise indicated in this subpart, regulations contained in part 431, subpart D of this subchapter applicable to a payload reentry review and determination for reentering a payload using an RLV shall apply to the payload reentry review conducted for a license to reenter a reentry vehicle under this part.
#### Sallie E. Cummings, Appellant, v. W. J. Hannah, Appellee.

Escambia County, Florida.

E. T. Davis, Attorney for Appellant.

Appeal dismissed October 12th, 1911, on praecipe of counsel for. Appellant.
§ 93.211 Applicability. ( a ) This subpart prescribes rules applicable to the allocation and withdrawal of IFR operational authority (takeoffs and landings) to individual air carriers and commuter operators at the High Density Traffic Airports identified in subpart K of this part except for Newark Airport.
( b ) This subpart also prescribes rules concerning the transfer of allocated IFR operational authority and the use of that authority once allocated.
From: "Davis, Carlos E." <Carlos.E.Davis@saint-gobain.com>

To: Susan Fairchild/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

Cc: "Alterman, Lauren P." <Lauren.P.Alterman@saint-gobain.com>

Date: 12/23/2011 01:14 PM

Subject:CertainTeed 114 Response - Wool Fiberglass Information

Susan:

I am sending to the attention of R Morales at USEPA RTP, NC a CD that

contains a partial response to the Section letter sent to Lauren

Alterman dated 28 October 2011. The CD is clearly marked as Business

Confidential Information.

The CD contains a labeled section for each of operating locations:

Athens, GA

Chowchilla, CA

Kansas City, KS

Each of these sections contains a partially completed spreadsheet, Forms

A and B only. Form C is only completed for the K2 furnace in Kansas City

at this time.

Also included are copies of the refractory PO’s that are available for

each of the furnaces and in some cases associated drawings.

Should have any questions or need any additional information please let

me know.

Best Regards,

Carlos E. Davis

Manager - Environment, Health and Safety

Western Region

Saint-Gobain North America

913-544-8888 (Cell)

913-342-6624, ext 53571 (Office)

EHS Portal
#### § 100.101 Cross-reference to financial disclosure requirements and other conduct rules.

Employees of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) should refer to the executive branch-wide Standards of Ethical Conduct at 5 CFR part 2635; the NLRB's regulations at 5 CFR part 7101, which supplement the executive branch-wide standards; the employee responsibilities and conduct regulations at 5 CFR part 735; and the executive branch financial disclosure regulations at 5 CFR part 2634.

[62 FR 6448, Feb. 12, 1997]
N OTE : This order is nonprecedential. 

# United States Court of Appeals **for the Federal Circuit**

__________________________ CLEARVALUE, INC., Plaintiff, AND RICHARD ALAN HAASE, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v. PEARL RIVER POLYMERS, INC., POLYCHEMIE, INC., SNF, INC., POLYDYNE, INC., AND SNF HOLDING COMPANY,

Defendants-Appellees.

__________________________ 2012-1595

__________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas in case no. 06-CV-0197, Chief Judge Leonard Davis.

__________________________ ON MOTION

__________________________ O R D E R Case: 12-1595 Document: 23 Page: 1 Filed: 12/07/2012CLEARVALUE , INC . V . PEARL RIVER POLYMERS , INC . 2 Richard Alan Haase moves for a 60-day extension of time, until February 13, 2013, to f ile his brief. Haase states that the appellees oppose. Upon consideration thereof, I T I S O RDERED T HAT : The motion is granted. F OR T HE C OURT /s/ Jan Horbaly Jan Horbaly Clerk s27 Case: 12-1595 Document: 23 Page: 2 Filed: 12/07/2012
### To

:U S Departmen t o f Transportatio

n Federa l Aviatio n Administratio

n 80 0 Independenc e Ave. , S.W . Washingto n D C 2059 1 From :Mr . Thaddeu s Porebsk i Jr . UA S Projec t Manage r LG P Realt y O f Wes t Milford , LLC . 1 4 Spli t Roc k Roa d Wes t Milford , Ne w Jerse y 0748 0 Dea r Brittan y Newton , Jul y 8,201 5 Pleas e accep t thi s lette r a s respons e t o you r lette r date d Jul y 6 , 201 5 fo r requestin g furthe r informatio n wit h th e requirement s o f § 11.81 , i n answerin g reason s wh y grantin g th e reques t woul d b e i n th e publi c interest . I t i s th e reques t o f th e petitione r fo r exemption s liste d abov e i n orde r t o legall y an d safel y operat e th e DJI , PHANTO M 3 UAS , i n th e Nationa l Airspac e System , fo r th e purpos e o f Unmanne d Aeria l Photograph y an d Videograph y fo r th e rea l estat e an d constructio n fo r commercia l gai n an d enhancemen t o f Publi c awarenes s o f UA S operation , an d finall y enhance d safet y fo r th e Genera l Public . T o benefi t th e publi c a s a whole , th e informatio n gathere d b y us e o f th e DJ I Phanto m 3 i n genera l awarenes s an d educatio n pertainin g t o th e specifi c land/structur e surveyed . I n suppor t o f thi s exemptio n I referenc e th e following : Exemptio n No . 1194 5 FAA-2015-145

7 Hom e Debu t Inc . Exemptio n No . 1194 0 FAA-2015-139

7 Aeria l Associate s Photograph y Inc . Exemptio n No . 1191 5 FAA-2015-134

0 Willia m K . Pederse n Al l o f whic h ar e i n th e parameter s a s m y petitio n fo r exemptio n an d hav e bee n granted . I see k th e sam e withou t prejudice .I

f an y othe r infonnatio n o r change s ar e neede d wit h m y appliication , Pleas e contac t m e at : Mailin g address : Mr . Tliaddeu s Porebsk i Jr . UA S Projec t Manage r LG P Realt y o f Wes t Milfor d LL C 1 4 Spli t Roc k Roa d Wes t Milfor d Ne w Jerse y 0748 0 Email :lgprealtv@optonline.ne

t O r Telephone :973-417-346

4 I than k yo u fo r you r tim e an d consideration

.
§ 91.209 Aircraft lights. No person may: ( a ) During the period from sunset to sunrise (or, in Alaska, during the period a prominent unlighted object cannot be seen from a distance of 3 statute miles or the sun is more than 6 degrees below the horizon)— ( 1 ) Operate an aircraft unless it has lighted position lights;
( 2 ) Park or move an aircraft in, or in dangerous proximity to, a night flight operations area of an airport unless the aircraft— ( i ) Is clearly illuminated;
( ii ) Has lighted position lights; or
( iii ) is in an area that is marked by obstruction lights;
( 3 ) Anchor an aircraft unless the aircraft— ( i ) Has lighted anchor lights; or
( ii ) Is in an area where anchor lights are not required on vessels; or
( b ) Operate an aircraft that is equipped with an anticollision light system, unless it has lighted anticollision lights. However, the anticollision lights need not be lighted when the pilot-in-command determines that, because of operating conditions, it would be in the interest of safety to turn the lights off.
[Doc. No. 27806, 61 FR 5171, Feb. 9, 1996]