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

Supreme Court Case No. DA 23-0057

JAY WATSON, 

Petitioner and Appellee,

v.

MONTANA DEPARTMENT OF 

FISH, WILDLIFE AND PARKS,

Respondent and Appellant.

ORDER

UPON REVIEW of Appellant’s Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time

pursuant to Mont. R. App. P. 26, and good cause appearing;

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to

and including June 30, 2023, within which to serve its reply brief on

appeal.

No further extensions will be granted.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

June 1 2023

06/01/2023

Case Number: DA 23-0057
P150295.CEB

 

SAT (concerns) (03/03/2015):

Related Cases and Misc SAT Info: 

Analogs: 

Migration to groundwater: negl to rapid 

PBT rating: P3B?T1 

Health: 1-2 Inhalation 

Eco: 1 No releases to water 

OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE RATING: 1A

NOTES & KEY ASSUMPTIONS: 

Generated by the 09/30/2013 version of ChemSTEER. 

 

INITIAL REVIEW ENGINEERING REPORT 

PMN: 15-0295 

 

 

Page 2
P150295.CEB

 

 

Page 3

P150295.CEB

INITIAL REVIEW ENGINEERING REPORT 

PMN: 15-0295 

 

 

Page 5
P150295.CEB

 

 

Page 6
P150295.CEB

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Page 7
P150295.CEB

Page 8
M OMBASA DOUGLAS

,

Petitioner,

v.

S TATE OF FLORIDA

,
Respondent. ___________________________/ IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D 14

- 3862

Opinion filed January 7, 2015.

Petition for Writ of Mandamus

-- Original Jurisdiction

.
Mombasa Douglas , pro se , Petitioner.

Pamela Jo Bondi, A ttorney General , and Trisha Meggs Pate, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee , for Respondent.

PER CURIAM.

DENIED. See Munn v. Fla. Parole Comm ’ n , 807 So. 2d 733 (Fla. 1st DCA

2002) (holding that where the trial court has issued a recent order to show cause on

a pending pleading , mandamus relief i s not warranted)

.

BENTON, CLARK, and SWANSON, JJ., CONCUR.
#### § 109-1.102-50 DOE-PMRs.

The DOE-PMRs (41 CFR Ch. 109) implements and supplements the FPMR/FMR (41 CFR Ch. 101) issued by the General Services Administration (GSA), Public Laws, Executive Orders, Office of Management and Budget directives, and other agency issuances affecting the Department's personal property management program.
#### § 302-5.18 May I retain any balance left over from my househunting reimbursement if my lump sum is more than adequate to cover my househunting trip?

Yes, if your lump sum househunting amount is more than adequate to cover your househunting expenses any balance belongs to you.

[FTR Amdt. 98, 66 FR 58196, Nov. 20, 2001, as amended by FTR Amdt. 2011-01, 76 FR 18337, Apr. 1, 2011]
402P11-6

#### State v. Sylvester Eugene Harding

1. Def’s *Pro Se*Notice of Appeal Based upon a Constitutional Question (COA15-148)

1. Dismissed *ex mero motu*

2. Def’s *Pro Se*PDR Under N.C.G.S. § 7A-31

2. Denied

3. Def’s *Pro Se*Motion to Amend Notice of Appeal and PDR

3. Allowed
Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Stephen J. Markman, Chief Justice

Brian K. Zahr a Bridget M. McCormac k David F. Viviano Richard H. Bernstei n Kurtis T. Wilde r Elizabeth T. Clement, J ustices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at t he direction of the Court.

May 29, 2018

s0521 

# Order

Clerk May 29, 2018

156046 & (14)

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 15 6046 COA: 336730 Clinton CC: 12-008989-FC RHYON DRAMON WALKER, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the app lication for leave to appeal the May 12, 2017 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, becaus e the defendant has failed to meet the burden of est ablishing entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D). The motion to remand is DENIED.

W ILDER , J., did not participate becaus e he was on the Court of Appeal s panel.
#### § 301-11.602 What factors should my agency consider in determining whether to authorize extended TDY?

Your agency should consider the factors discussed in § 302-3.502 of this subtitle in determining whether to authorize extended TDY.

[FTR Amdt. 2014-01, 79 FR 49643, Aug. 21, 2014]
//Scroll window
//to alert message if available
//if no alert, scroll to title 
if (jQuery(".alert")[0]){
  var elmnt = document.getElementsByClassName("alert")[0];
  elmnt.scrollIntoView({behavior: "smooth", block: "start", inline: "nearest"});
    
} else {
  var elmnt = document.getElementById("scaler-page-title");
  elmnt.scrollIntoView({behavior: "smooth", block: "start", inline: "nearest"});
}
No. 10-11176.

#### Aguilar *v.*Thaler, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division.

C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>


EXHIBIT NO. 27:  FINANCIAL DATA SCHEDULE

Article 5

This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the Form
10-Q of Alcan Aluminium Limited for the quarter ended 31 March 1999 and is
qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.

Multiplier 1,000,000

       
<S>                                            <C>
Period-Type                                 3-Mos.
Fiscal-Year-End                        Dec-31-1999
Period-Start                           Jan-01-1999
Period-End                           March-31-1999
Cash                                           623
Securities                                       0
Receivables                                  1,431
Allowances                                       0
Inventory                                    1,275
Current-Assets                               3,329
PP&E                                        12,127
Depreciation                                 6,391
Total-Assets                                 9,601
Current-Liabilities                          1,446
Bonds                                        1,499
Preferred-Mandatory                              0
Preferred                                      160
Common                                       1,207
Other-SE                                     3,869
Total-Liability-and-Equity                   9,601
Sales                                        1,822
Total-Revenues                               1,841
CGS                                          1,468
Total-Costs                                  1,468
Other-Expenses                                 118
Loss-Provision                                   0
Interest-Expense                                22
Income-Pretax                                   76
Income-Tax                                      34
Income-Continuing                               38
Discontinued                                     0
Extraordinary                                    0
Changes                                          0
Net-Income                                      38
EPS-Primary                                   0.16
EPS-Diluted                                   0.16
        

                                       18

</TABLE>
# Comments on: 22-2144: SCHAEFFER v. US [ORDER], Nonprecedential
No. 10-11141.

#### James *v.*California.

Ct. App. Cal., 5th App. Dist. Certiorari denied.
#### § 109-50.001 Applicability.

The provisions of this part apply to direct DOE operations and to designated contractors only when specifically provided for in the appropriate subpart.
331P15

#### State v. Harley Ray Alligood, Jr.

1. Def’s *Pro Se*Petition for *Writ of Certiorari*to Review Order of Superior Court of Beaufort County (COAP15-103)

1. Dismissed

2. Def’s *Pro Se*Motion to Appoint Counsel

2. Dismissed as moot
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<RESTATED>
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1
<CURRENCY>                                     US

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                            1
<CASH>                                        35,263
<SECURITIES>                                 782,030
<RECEIVABLES>                                 52,187
<ALLOWANCES>                                       0
<INVENTORY>                                        0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             892,702
<PP&E>                                     1,196,696
<DEPRECIATION>                              (521,188)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             1,568,210
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                      4,670,442
<BONDS>                                            0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                              0
<PREFERRED>                                        0
<COMMON>                                     292,595
<OTHER-SE>                                (4,121,923)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               1,568,210
<SALES>                                            0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             512,425
<CGS>                                              0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             402,590
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           189,662
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (79,827)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (79,827)
<DISCONTINUED>                                     0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                    0
<CHANGES>                                          0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (79,827)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (.00)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (.00)


</TABLE>
# Comments on: 23-2353: BORKOWSKI v. MSPB [ORDER], Nonprecedential
#### § 302-9.104 What may I do if there is no port or terminal at the point of origin and/or destination?

If there is no port or terminal at the point of origin and/or destination, your agency will pay the entire cost of transporting the POV from your point of origin to your destination. If you prefer, however, you may choose to drive your POV from your point of origin at time of assignment to the nearest embarkation port or terminal, and/or from the debarkation port or terminal nearest your destination to your post of duty at any time. If you choose to drive, you will be reimbursed your one-way mileage cost, at the rate specified in part 301-4 of this title, for driving the POV from your authorized origin to deliver it to the port of embarkation, or from the port of debarkation to the authorized destination. For the segment of travel from the port of embarkation back to your authorized origin after delivering the POV to the port or from your authorized destination to the port of debarkation to pick up the POV, you will be reimbursed your one-way transportation cost. The total cost of round-trip travel, to deliver the POV to the port at the origin or to pick up the POV at the port at your destination, may not exceed the cost of transporting the POV to or from the port involved. You may not be reimbursed a per diem allowance for round-trip travel to and from the port involved.
No. 11-1063.

#### Blye et al. *v.*Kozinski, Chief Judge, United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, et al.

C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.

JUSTICE Breyer took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.
No. 10-11158.

#### Jordan *v.*Brunsman, Warden.

C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>



<ARTICLE> 9
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL DATA FROM AMERICAN BANCSHARES' GENERAL
LEDGER AND BOARD OF DIRECTORS FINANCIAL REPORT PACKAGE AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                          20,215
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                             104
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     77,078
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                        339,321
<ALLOWANCE>                                     (2,355)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 455,164
<DEPOSITS>                                     344,845
<SHORT-TERM>                                     8,900
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                             47,922
<LONG-TERM>                                     26,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         5,870
<OTHER-SE>                                      21,557
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 455,164
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 26,250
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                4,670
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   265
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                31,185
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              13,142
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              16,172
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           15,013
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                    1,180
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                 410
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                 16,574
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  2,504
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       1,627
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,627
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.33
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.32
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    8.31
<LOANS-NON>                                        429
<LOANS-PAST>                                        33
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                  2,083
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 2,311
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                    1,258
<RECOVERIES>                                       122
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                2,355
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             2,355
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        

</TABLE>
Natoma

Manors

Bay

Heights

Golden Pines

North

Grove

Shorecrest

Bay Point

Miami International Airport

Morningside

Grapeland Heights

Little Havana Dodge Island

Shenandoah

Virginia Key

Auburndale

Liberty City

Silver Bluff

Wynwood

Little River

Downtown

The Roads

Allapattah

Little Haiti

Overtown

Flagami

Brickell

Omni

C

O

C

O

N

U

T

G

R

O

V

E

pU

ep Er sa St edi

r et a wegdE

D

5

Alt. M

a

p

Districts

12345

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 173-21 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/02/2024 Page 1 of 1
#### § 101-30.600 Scope of subpart.

This subpart describes that section of the Federal Supply Catalog issued by GSA and authorizes its issuance by the Commissioner, Federal Supply Service.

[35 FR 3071, Feb. 17, 1970]
#### § 301-70.808 Do the rules in this part apply to travel on Government aircraft by the President and Vice President or by individuals traveling in support of the President and Vice President?

Given the unique functions and needs of the presidency and the vice presidency, section 4 of Circular A-126, “Improving the Management and Use of Government Aircraft,” Revised May 1992, makes clear that Circular A-126 does not apply to aircraft while in use by or in support of the President or Vice President. Since the principal purpose of the rules in this part is to implement Circular A-126, the rules in this part also do not apply to such travel. If any questions arise regarding travel related to the President or Vice President, contact the Office of the Counsel to the President or the Office of the Counsel to the Vice President, respectively.
NO. SCPW-12-0000472

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I

 

CHRIS GRINDLING, Petitioner,

vs.

ATTORNEY GENERAL, STATE OF HAWAI#I, Respondent.

 

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

ORDER

(By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, Acoba, Duffy, and McKenna, JJ.)

Upon consideration of petitioner Chris Grindling's

petition for a writ of mandamus, it appears that HRS § 831-3.2(a)

does not permit expungement of petitioner's records of arrest

for: (1) HRS § 804-7.2 and HRS § 706-626, which are not crimes;

(2) HRS § 291C-85 and HRS § 291C-166, which are violations for

which petitioner was found guilty; and (3) HRS § 708-826 for

which "no disposition could be found." It further appears that

HRS § 831-3.2(a)(2) does not permit expungement of petitioner's

record of arrest for HRS § 329C-2 until after August 30, 2012. 

It finally appears that petitioner provides no proof of a written

application to the Attorney General for expungement of the record

of arrest for HRS § 710-1077. Therefore, petitioner is not

entitled to mandamus relief. See HRS § 831-3.2(a); Kema v.

Electronically Filed

Supreme Court

SCPW-12-0000472

17-MAY-2012

02:42 PM
2

Gaddis, 91 Hawai#i 200, 204, 982 P.2d 334, 338 (1999) (A writ of

mandamus is an extraordinary remedy that will not issue unless

the petitioner demonstrates a clear and indisputable right to

relief and a lack of alternative means to redress adequately the

alleged wrong or obtain the requested action.); In re

Disciplinary Bd. of Hawaii Supreme Court, 91 Hawai#i 363, 368,

984 P.2d 688, 693 (1999) (Mandamus relief is available to compel

an official to perform a duty allegedly owed to an individual

only if the individual’s claim is clear and certain, the

official’s duty is ministerial and so plainly prescribed as to be

free from doubt, and no other remedy is available.). 

Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the clerk of the appellate

court shall process the petition for a writ of mandamus without

payment of the filing fee.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the petition for a writ of

mandamus is denied.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, May 17, 2012.

 /s/ Mark E. Recktenwald

 /s/ Paula A. Nakayama

 /s/ Simeon R. Acoba, Jr.

 /s/ James E. Duffy, Jr.

 /s/ Sabrina S. McKenna
EX-10.15



 Exhibit 10.15 
  





 
 October 27, 2016 

Andrew Vollero 
 Dear Andrew,

 Snap Inc. (the “Company”) is pleased to confirm the terms of your full-time exempt employment as Chief Financial Officer on the
following terms: 
 You will receive an annual salary of $300,000, which will be paid bi-weekly, less applicable payroll deductions and tax
withholdings. So long as you remain employed by the Company, you will receive an annual supplemental payment of $200,000 during the first two years of your employment, less applicable payroll deductions and withholdings, paid out on a quarterly
basis following your employment start date. 
 In addition, employees qualify for a range of benefits. The Company may change compensation
and benefits at its discretion. 
 The Company acknowledges that it has previously issued equity awards to you under the Amended and
Restated 2014 Equity Incentive Plan. Nothing in this letter will amend or affect the terms of those previously granted awards. 
 In your
work for the Company, we do not want you to use or disclose any confidential, proprietary, or trade-secret information of any former employer or other person to whom you owe an obligation of confidentiality. Likewise, as an employee of the Company,
you may learn about confidential, proprietary, or trade-secret information related to the Company and its clients that you must not share with anyone outside the Company. 

As a Snap Inc. employee, you will be expected to follow Company policies and acknowledge in writing that you have read our Employee Handbook.
With the exception of the “employment at-will” policy discussed below, the Company may modify or eliminate its policies at its discretion. 

Your employment with the Company is at-will. This means that you may terminate your employment with the Company at any time and for any reason
simply by notifying us. Likewise, the Company may terminate your employment at any time and for any reason with no advance notice. Your employment at-will status can be modified only in a written agreement signed by you and the Chief Executive
Officer. 
 By signing this letter, you reaffirm the terms and conditions of the Confidential Information and Inventions Assignment
Agreement, which you signed when you joined the Company. 
 This letter (together with the agreements referenced) is the complete and
exclusive statement of all the terms and conditions of your employment with the Company, and supersedes any prior agreements or representations with regard to your employment. It is entered into without reliance on any promise or representation
other than those expressly contained in this letter, and (except for changes reserved to the Company’s discretion) cannot be modified or amended except in a writing signed by you and a duly authorized member of the Board. This letter is
governed by the laws of California without regard to its conflict-of-laws provisions. 
 Sincerely, 

	
	
	/s/ Evan Spiegel
	Evan Spiegel, Chief Executive Officer








 Accepted and agreed: 

	
	
	/s/ Andrew Vollero
	Andrew Vollero
	October 27, 2016
	Date