alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 24.106 Objections to the findings and order and request for a hearing. ( a ) Any party who desires review, including judicial review, of the findings and order must file any objections and/or a request for a hearing on the record within 30 days of receipt of the findings and order pursuant to § 24.105(b). The objection and/or request for a hearing must be in writing and state whether the objection is to the findings and/or the order. The date of the postmark, facsimile transmittal, email communication, or electronic submission will be considered to be the date of filing; if the objection is filed in person, by hand-delivery or other means, the objection is filed upon receipt. Objections must be filed with the Chief Administrative Law Judge, U.S. Department of Labor, in accordance with 29 CFR part 18, and copies of the objections must be served at the same time on the other parties of record, the OSHA official who issued the findings and order, the Assistant Secretary, and the Associate Solicitor, Division of Fair Labor Standards, U.S. Department of Labor.
( b ) If a timely objection is filed, all provisions of the order will be stayed. If no timely objection is filed with respect to either the findings or the order, the findings and order will become the final decision of the Secretary, not subject to judicial review.
[76 FR 2820, Jan. 18, 2011, as amended at 86 FR 1782, Jan. 11, 2021]
§ 4022.93 Who will get benefits PBGC may owe me at the time of my death? ( a ) *In general.* Except as provided in paragraphs (b), (c), and (d) of this section, we will pay any benefits we owe you at the time of your death to the person(s) surviving you in the following order— ( 1 ) *Designee with the PBGC.* The person(s) you designated with us to get any benefits we may owe you at the time of your death. See § 4022.94 for information on designating with us.
( 2 ) *Spouse.* Your spouse. We will consider a person to whom you are married to be your spouse even if you and that person are separated, unless a decree of divorce or annulment has been entered in a court.
( 3 ) *Children.* Your children and descendants of your deceased children. ( i ) *Adopted children.* In determining who is a child or descendant, an adopted child is treated the same way as a natural child.
( ii ) *Child dies before parent.* If one of your children dies before you, any of your grandchildren through that deceased child will equally divide that deceased child's share; if one of your grandchildren through that deceased child dies before that deceased child, any of your great-grandchildren through that deceased grandchild will equally divide that deceased grandchild's share; and so on.
( 4 ) *Parents.* Your parents. A parent includes an adoptive parent.
( 5 ) *Estate.* Your estate, provided your estate is open.
( 6 ) *Next of kin.* Your next of kin in accordance with applicable state law.
( b ) *Pre-trusteeship deaths.* If you die before the date we take over your plan and, by that date, the plan administrator has not paid all benefits owed to you at the time of your death, we will pay any benefits we owe you at the time of your death to the person(s) designated by or under the plan to get those benefits (provided the designation clearly applies to those benefits). If there is no such designation, we will pay those benefits to your spouse, children, parents, estate, or next of kin under the rules in paragraphs (a) (2) through (a)(6) of this section.
( c ) *Deaths shortly after trusteeship.* If you die within 180 days after the date we take over your plan and you have not designated anyone with the PBGC under paragraph (a)(1) of this section, we will pay any benefits we owe you at the time of your death to the person(s) designated by or under the plan to get those benefits (provided the designation clearly applies to those benefits) before paying those benefits to your spouse, children, parents, estate, or next of kin under the rules in paragraphs (a) (2) through (a)(6) of this section.
( d ) *Lump-sum payments to surviving spouses.* For a deceased participant whose benefit under § 4022.7(b) has a lump-sum value not exceeding the dollar amount specified in section 203(e)(1) of ERISA, payment will be made to the surviving spouse (if any) if such spouse would otherwise be entitled to receive a qualified preretirement survivor annuity under section 205(a)(2) of ERISA, and the surviving spouse will receive highest priority under paragraph (a) of this section.
[67 FR 16957, Apr. 8, 2002, as amended at 88 FR 44052, July 11, 2023]
EXHIBIT
10.10





FIRST
2010 AMENDMENT TO


LA-Z-BOY
INCORPORATED


2004
LONG-TERM EQUITY AWARD PLAN





La-Z-Boy
Incorporated (the “Company”) adopts this First 2010 Amendment to the La-Z-Boy
Incorporated 2004 Long-Term Equity Award Plan (the “Plan”).





WITNESSETH:





WHEREAS the Company previously
established the Plan for the benefit of certain of its eligible employees;
and





WHEREAS pursuant to Article X,
Section 10.2 of the Plan, the Company reserved the right to amend the Plan
subject to the conditions provided therein; and




WHEREAS the Company believes
it advisable and in the Company’s best interests to make certain changesto the
Plan;




NOW, THEREFORE, the Plan is
amended to add the following section 3.8:





3.8.  Cessation of
Awards.  Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, no
Awards pursuant to this Plan shall be granted on or after June 11, 2010;
provided, however, that if, at the Company’s annual meeting of shareholders on
August 18, 2010, the Company’s shareholders fail to approve the La-Z-Boy
Incorporated 2010 Omnibus Incentive Plan, this Section 3.8 shall be null and
void.





The above amendment shall be effective
June 11, 2010.





Except
as specifically amended by this Amendment, the provisions of the Plan are
reaffirmed and shall remain in full force and effect.





IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the
undersigned has signed this Amendment to evidence adoption of this Amendment on
the _____ day of June, 2010.








LA-Z-BOY
INCORPORATED








By           ________________________________





Its           _____________________________
§ 1954.10 Reports from the States. ( a ) In addition to any other reports required by the Assistant Secretary under sections 18(c)(8) and 18(f) of the Act and § 1902.3(1) of this chapter, the State shall submit quarterly and annual reports as part of the evaluation and monitoring of State programs.[1]
( b ) Each State with an approved State plan shall submit to the appropriate Regional Office an annual occupational safety and health report in the form and detail provided for in the report and the instructions contained therein.
( c ) Each State with an approved State plan shall submit to the appropriate Regional Office a quarterly occupational safety and health compliance and standards activity report in the form and detail provided for in the report and the instructions contained therein.
Footnotes -
1954.10
[1] Such quarterly and annual reports forms may be obtained from the Office of the Assistant Regional Director in whose Region the State is located.
§ 1917.116 Elevators and escalators. ( a ) “Elevator” means a permanent hoisting and lowering mechanism with a car or platform moving vertically in guides and serving two or more floors of a structure. The term excludes such devices as conveyors, tiering or piling machines, material hoists, skip or furnace hoists, wharf ramps, lift bridges, car lifts and dumpers.
( b ) “Escalator” means a power-driven continuous moving stairway principally intended for the use of persons.
( c ) No elevator or escalator with a defect which affects safety shall be used.
( d ) Elevator safety devices shall not be overridden or made inoperable.
( e ) Elevators and escalators shall be thoroughly inspected at intervals not exceeding one year. Additional monthly inspections for satisfactory operation shall be conducted by designated persons. Records of the results of the latest annual elevator inspections shall be posted in elevators. Records of annual escalator inspections shall be posted in the vicinity of the escalator or be available at the terminal.
( f ) Elevator landing openings shall be provided with doors, gates or equivalent protection which shall be in place when the elevator is not at that landing, to prevent employees from falling into the shaft.
( g ) The elevator's or escalator's maximum load limits shall be posted and not exceeded. Elevator load limits shall be posted conspicuously both inside and outside of the car.
( h ) Elevators shall be operated only by designated persons except for automatic or door interlocking elevators which provide full shaft door closing and automatic car leveling.
[48 FR 30909, July 5, 1983, as amended at 49 FR 28551, July 13, 1984; 61 FR 5509, Feb. 13, 1996]
Exhibit 23.2


Consent of Independent Accountants

We  hereby  consent  to the  incorporation  by  reference  in  the  Registration
Statements  on Form S-3  (Nos.  33-66112  and  333-94091)  and  Form  S-8  (Nos.
33-24274;  33-50949,  333-05999,  333-28235,  333-39222,  333-41000,  333-41006,
333-41008 and 333-92865) of Kerr-McGee  Corporation of our report dated February
26,  1999   appearing  in  Kerr-McGee   Corporation's   2000  Annual  Report  to
Stockholders and incorporated herein by reference in this Form 10-K, relating to
the  consolidated  financial  statements  of Oryx  Energy  Company,  which  such
financial statements are not separately presented therein.



(PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS LLP)
 PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP



Dallas, Texas
March 28, 2001
#### § 401.9 Labor organization.

*Labor organization* means a labor organization engaged in an industry affecting commerce and includes any organization of any kind, any agency, or employee representation committee, group, association, or plan so engaged in which employees participate and which exists for the purpose, in whole or in part, of dealing with employers concerning grievances, labor disputes, wages, rates of pay, hours, or other terms or conditions of employment, and any conference, general committee, joint or system board, or joint council so engaged which is subordinate to a national or international labor organization, other than a State or local central body.
#### The People of the State of New York ex rel. Abdullah Fahim, Appellant, v Peter J. Lacy, as Superintendent of Bare Hill Correctional Facility, Respondent.

[697 NYS2d 737]

—Mikoll, J.

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Lahtinen, J.), entered January 4, 1999 in Franklin County, which denied petitioner’s application for a writ of habeas corpus, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 70, without a hearing.

Following a final parole revocation hearing at which petitioner was found guilty of violating a condition of his parole by engaging in unlawful activity, petitioner’s parole was revoked and a hold period of 24 months was imposed. Petitioner thereafter commenced this proceeding for a writ of habeas corpus primarily contending that the determination to revoke his parole was not supported by substantial evidence. Supreme Court dismissed the petition, prompting this appeal by petitioner.

In our view, substantial evidence supports the determination revoking petitioner’s parole based upon his violation of the parole condition *(see, Matter of Hicks v New York State Div. of Parole,*255 AD2d 842, *appeal dismissed, lv denied*93 NY2d 846; *People ex rel. Brazeau v McLaughlin,*233 AD2d 724, *lvs denied*89 NY2d 810). According to two police reports and the testimony of the detective who prepared them, the victim appeared at the police station with facial injuries and reported that petitioner struck her repeatedly during a domestic dispute. Following his arrest on assault charges, petitioner admitted to his parole officer that he struck the victim during an altercation. Contrary to petitioner’s contention, the admission was properly received into evidence at the revocation hearing *(see, People ex rel. Maiello v New York State Bd. of Parole,*65 NY2d 145) and the victim’s testimony recanting her prior accusation merely created a credibility issue for the Administrative Law Judge to resolve *(see, Matter of Alexander v New York State Div. of Parole,*236 AD2d 761).

Petitioner’s remaining contentions, including his claim of prejudice resulting from the Administrative Law Judge’s decision to permit respondent to reopen and proceed on a previously withdrawn charge, have been reviewed and rejected as lacking in merit.

Cardona, P. J., Crew III, Yesawich Jr. and Mugglin, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.
#### ROBERT M. BOULWARE, Respondent, v. VICTOR AUTOMOBILE MANUFACTURING COMPANY, Appellant.

St. Louis Court of Appeals,

February 6, 1912.

The opinion of the Springfield Court of Appeals in this case (152 Mo. App. 567) is adopted as the opinion of the court.

Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit *Court.*— Hon. *Charles Claflin Allen,*Judge.

Affirmed.

*Albert B. Chandler*for appellant.

*Chilton Atkinson*and *John M. Wood*for respondent.

*525PER CURIAM.

The appeal in • this case was prosecuted to this court, but was thereafter transferred by it to the Springfield Court of Appeals under the provisions of an act of the Legislature, approved June 12, 1909. [See Laws of Missouri, 1909, p. 396; see, also, sec. 3939, R. S. 1909.] In due time the cause was disposed of by the Springfield Court of Appeals through an opinion prepared by Judge Cox of that court, as will appear by reference to Boulware v. Victor Automobile Mfg. Co., 152 Mo. App. 567, 134 S. W. 7. Subsequently the Supreme Court declared the said legislative act, which purported to authorize the transfer of cases from this court to the Springfield Court, to be unconstitutional. The cause was thereafter transferred by the Springfield Court of Appeals to this court on the theory that the jurisdiction of the appeal continued to reside here and the proceedings had in the Springfield Court with reference thereto were *coram non judice.*

The case has been argued and submitted here and duly considered. Upon reading the record and considering the arguments, we are persuaded that the opinion of the Springfield Court, above referred to, properly disposes of the controversy, and it is adopted as the opinion of this court. For the reason given in that opinion the judgment should be affirmed. It is so or dered.

All concur.
§ 1917.22 Hazardous cargo[2]
(See § 1917.2(p)). ( a ) Before cargo handling operations begin, the employer shall ascertain whether any hazardous cargo is to be handled and shall determine the nature of the hazard. The employer shall inform employees of the nature of any hazard and any special precautions to be taken to prevent employee exposure, and shall instruct employees to notify him of any leaks or spills.
( b ) All hazardous cargo shall be slung and secured so that neither the draft nor individual packages can fall as a result of tipping the draft or slacking of the supporting gear.
( c ) If hazardous cargo is spilled or if its packaging leaks, employees shall be removed from the affected area until the employer has ascertained the specific hazards, provided any equipment, clothing and ventilation and fire protection equipment necessary to eliminate or protect against the hazard, and has instructed cleanup employees in a safe method of cleaning up and disposing of a spill and handling and disposing of leaking containers. Actual cleanup or disposal work shall be conducted under the supervision of a designated person.
Footnotes -
1917.22
[2] The Department of Transportation and the United States Coast Guard apply requirements related to handling, storing and transportation of hazardous cargo (see 33 CFR part 126, 46 CFR, 49 CFR).
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Con. Res. 62 Engrossed in Senate (ES)]

  1st Session
S. CON. RES. 62

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

    Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), 
That in the enrollment of H.R. 660, an Act to amend title 18, United 
States Code, to protect judges, prosecutors, witnesses, victims, and 
their family members, and for other purposes, the Clerk of the House of 
Representatives shall strike section 502 of the Act and insert the 
following:

``SEC. 502. MAGISTRATE JUDGES LIFE INSURANCE.

    ``(a) In General.--Section 604(a)(5) of title 28, United States 
Code, is amended by inserting after `hold office during good behavior', 
the following: `magistrate judges appointed under section 631 of this 
title,'.
    ``(b) Construction.--For purposes of construing and applying 
chapter 87 of title 5, United States Code, including any adjustment of 
insurance rates by regulation or otherwise, the following categories of 
judicial officers shall be deemed to be judges of the United States as 
described under section 8701 of title 5, United States Code:
            ``(1) Magistrate judges appointed under section 631 of 
        title 28, United States Code.
            ``(2) Magistrate judges retired under section 377 of title 
        28, United States Code.
    ``(c) Effective Date.--Subsection (b) and the amendment made by 
subsection (a) shall apply with respect to any payment made on or after 
the first day of the first applicable pay period beginning on or after 
the date of enactment of this Act.''.

            Passed the Senate December 19 (legislative day, December 
      18), 2007.

            Attest:

                                                             Secretary.
110th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                            S. CON. RES. 62

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

                 To correct the enrollment of H.R. 660.
```
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 01-11119

Summary Calendar

 

AHMAD CARDELL HOUSTON,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

MOLLEE WESTFALL, Prosecutor;

SCOTT WISCH, Judge,

Defendant’s-Appellees.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:01-CV-466-A

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

December 12, 2001

Before DAVIS, BENAVIDES and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Ahmad Cardell Houston appeals the district court’s dismissal

without prejudice of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint, which the

district court construed as an application for habeas relief

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Houston filed his complaint

against a state prosecutor and judge, alleging that they violated

his constitutional right to a speedy trial.

Although at the time he filed his complaint Houston was a

pretrial detainee in the Tarrant County Jail, the record
No. 01-11119

-2-

indicates that he was released from custody at the time he filed

his notice of appeal. Accordingly, Houston is not entitled to

habeas relief. See Dickerson v. Louisiana, 816 F.2d 220, 224

(5th Cir. 1987)("to be eligible for habeas relief, a petitioner

must be ‘in custody’”).

Because the state record has not been included in the record

on appeal, this court cannot evaluate the current status of

Houston’s case or determine whether a speedy trial violation has

occurred. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s dismissal

on the alternate ground that Houston has failed to establish a

claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. See Sojourner T v. Edwards, 974

F.2d 27, 30 (5th Cir. 1992). 

AFFIRMED.
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NO. PD-0332-08

HARDY DON CAPPS, Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS

ON REHEARING OF APPELLANT’S 

PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW

FROM THE SECOND COURT OF APPEALS

JACK COUNTY

Per curiam.

O P I N I O N

Appellant was convicted of murder. The jury assessed his punishment at

confinement for life, and a fine of $10,000. The Court of Appeals affirmed the

conviction. Capps v. State, ___S.W.3d___ (Tex. App. — Fort Worth, No. 02-05-00175-

CR, delivered December 6, 2007). Appellant’s petition for discretionary review was

dismissed as untimely filed on March 12, 2008. Appellant has filed a motion for
Capps - 2

rehearing requesting reinstatement of his petition so that it will be considered by this

Court. Appellant’s motion for rehearing is granted. His petition filed on March 7, 2008,

is reinstated as of April 30, 2008, and will be considered in accord with Tex.R.App.P. 68.

Delivered April 30, 2008

Do not publish
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.                  

###### Railroad Retirement Board

                    Notice is hereby given in accordance with Public Law 92-463 that the Actuarial Advisory Committee will hold                           ( print page 33380)                        a meeting on May 25, 2000, at 10:30 a.m. at the office of the Chief Actuary of the U.S. Railroad Retirement Board, 844 North Rush Street, Chicago, Illinois, on the conduct of the 21st Actuarial Valuation of the Railroad Retirement System. The agenda for this meeting will include a discussion of the results and presentation of the 21st Actuarial Valuation. The text and tables which constitute the Valuation will have been prepared in draft form for review by the Committee. It is expected that this will be the last meeting of the Committee before publication of the Valuation.                

The meeting will be open to the public. Persons wishing to submit written statements or make oral presentations should address their communications or notices to the RRB Actuarial Advisory Committee, c/o Chief Actuary, U.S. Railroad Retirement Board, 844 North Rush Street, Chicago, Illinois 60611-2092.

Dated: May 11, 2000.

Beatrice Ezerski,

Secretary to the Board.

[FR Doc. 00-12866  Filed 5-22-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7905-01-M