alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Arcadia Citrus Growers Association, a corporation, as Receiver, *Plaintiff in Error,*vs. Supervisors, Inc., a Florida corporation, *Defendant in Error.*

143 So. 603.

Division A.

Opinion filed August 24, 1932.

Petition for rehearing denied October 20, 1932.

*Treadwell & Treadiuell,*for Plaintiff in Error;

*F. C. Morgcm*and *Leitner Leitner,*for Defendant in Error.

Per Curiam.

This is the second appearance of this suit in this Court. See Supervisors, Inc. et al., vs. Arcadia Citrus Growers Association, 101 Fla. 804, 135 Sou. 296. The Record is somewhat confusing. The suit was brought by the plaintiff against Arcadia Citrus Growers Association, the defendant, which defendant was at the time in possession of the property involved by reason of having been appointed Receiver in a suit instituted by one Duke to foreclose a mortgage against one R. E. Whidden.

After the replevin suit was instituted the Court made an-order in the foreclosure ease requiring the Receiver to deliver the fruit to Whidden, the defendant in the foreclosure.

Regardless of this order, the litigation of the replevin suit continued. There was a trial of the replevin suit resulting in favor of the defendant. Writ of error was taken to that judgment and the same was reversed in the opinion and judgment above referred to.

After the mandate went down another trial was had which resulted in a verdict in favor of the defendant. The court set aside the verdict and granted a new trial. The *519writ of error which brings the canse before us now is to review the order granting a new trial.

The evidence disclosed by the record is conflicting and the charges of the court as given to the jury were, to say the least, confusing. The language used in the charges shows that the trial court was somewhat confused and did not state the proposition of law attempted to be stated so clearly that he, in considering the same later, could not say that a jury might not have been confused and mislead thereby.

In Miami Transit Co. vs. Mowrey, 138 Sou. 481, this Court said:

> “An appellate court will not reverse an order of the court below granting a new trial, unless it clearly appears that judicial discretion has been abused, resulting in injustice, or that the law has been violated. ’ ’

Following the rule above stated, we should affirm the ■ order granting a new trial and it is so ordered.

Affirmed.

Buford, C.J., and Ellis and Brown, J.J., concur.

Whitfield, P.J., and Terrell and Davis, J.J., concur in the opinion and judgment.
11 TH COURT OF APPEALS

EASTLAND

, TEXAS

JUDGMENT

Robert Thornburgh, Jr.

, * From the 35th District

Court of Brown County,

Trial Court No. 21718

.

Vs. No. 11

- 12

- 00328

- CR * February 5, 2015

The State of Texas, * Memorandum Opinion by Bailey, J.

(Panel consists of: Wright, C.J.,

Willson , J. , and Bailey, J. )

This court has inspected the record in this cause and concludes that there is

no error in the judgment below. Therefore, in accordance with this court ’ s

opinion, the judgment of the trial court is in all things affirmed.
118P16

#### DWC3, Inc., RYFO, LLC, Paul Miller, and Kathleen Miller v. William G. Kissel and Diane L. Kissel

Defs’ PDR Under N.C.G.S. § 7A-31 (COA15-252)

Denied
#### § 73.3587 Procedure for filing informal objections.

Before FCC action on any application for an instrument of authorization, any person may file informal objections to the grant in LMS. Such objections may be submitted in letter form (without extra copies) and shall be signed. The limitation on pleadings and time for filing pleadings provided for in § 1.45 of this chapter shall not be applicable to any objections duly filed under this section.

[89 FR 7261, Feb. 1, 2024]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AND CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS FOUND ON
PAGES 3 AND 4 OF THE COMPANY'S FORM 10-QSB FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31,
2000, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                         571,863
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               666,097
<PP&E>                                         183,912
<DEPRECIATION>                                (38,539)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 811,470
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          107,978
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        13,456
<OTHER-SE>                                     690,036
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   811,470
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,261,058
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               149,032
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,382,332)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (1,382,332)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,382,332)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.10)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.10)


</TABLE>
exv10w33



 










EXHIBIT 10.33




DIRECTOR FEE SUMMARY




Set forth below is a summary of the current director fee arrangements for non-employee
directors serving on the Boards of Directors of Mercantile Bank Corporation (“Mercantile”) and its
wholly owned subsidiary, Mercantile Bank of Michigan (“Bank”).



For 2007, non-employee directors of the Bank are paid an annual retainer of $12,000, and a fee
of $700 for each meeting of the Board of Directors of the Bank that they attend. In addition,
non-employee directors are paid a meeting fee of $700 for each meeting of the Audit Committee, $600
for each meeting of the Compensation Committee and Nominating Committee, and $400 for each meeting
of other committees of the Board of Directors of the Bank that they attend. Non-employee directors
are also paid fees of the same amount for meetings of Mercantile’s Board of Directors and its
committees, when for Board meetings there is not also a meeting of the Board of Directors of the
Bank on the same day, and for committee meetings when there is not also a meeting of a committee of
the Board of Directors of the Bank having the same name or function on the same day. For meetings
that are held by telephone or other remote communications equipment, the meeting fees are half the
amount described above. Annual retainer fees are also paid to the Chairmen of three of the
committees of Mercantile’s Board of Directors. The annual retainer is, for the Chairman of the
Audit Committee — $6,000, for the Chairman of the Compensation Committee — $4,000, and for the
Chairman of the Nominating Committee — $4,000.



The same persons currently serve on the Boards of Directors of Mercantile and the Bank. Under
the Bank’s deferred compensation plan for non-employee directors, directors may elect to defer the
receipt of the annual retainer and meeting fees until they are no longer serving on the Board.
Directors are eligible to receive stock-based awards under the Stock Incentive Plan of 2006.
Editorial Note on Part 36
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 36 appear at 74 FR 23956, May 22, 2009, 77 FR 30411, May 23, 2012, 82 FR 25538, June 2, 2017, and corrected at 83 FR 4153, Jan. 30, 2018. Nomenclature changes to part 36 also appear at 83 FR 63587, Dec. 11, 2018, and 84 FR 4360, Feb. 15, 2019.

§ 36.156 Interexchange Cable and Wire Facilities (C&WF)—Category 3—apportionment procedures. ( a ) An average interexchange cable and wire facilities cost per equivalent interexchange telephone circuit kilometer for all circuits in Category 3 is determined and applied to the equivalent interexchange telephone circuit kilometer counts of each of the classes of circuits.
( b ) The cost of C&WF applicable to this category shall be directly assigned where feasible. If direct assignment is not feasible, cost shall be apportioned between the state and interstate jurisdiction on the basis of conversation-minute kilometers as applied to toll message circuits, etc.
( c ) Effective July 1, 2001, through December 31, 2024, all study areas shall directly assign Category 3 Interexchange Cable and Wire Facilities C&WF where feasible. All study areas shall apportion the non-directly assigned costs in Category 3 equipment to the jurisdictions using the relative use measurements, as specified in paragraph (b) of this section, during the twelve-month period ending December 31, 2000.
[58 FR 44905, Aug. 25, 1993, as amended at 66 FR 33206, June 21, 2001; 71 FR 65746, Nov. 9, 2006; 75 FR 30301, June 1, 2010; 76 FR 30841, May 27, 2011; 79 FR 36237, June 26, 2014]
Hogan Lovells US LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in the District of Columbia. “Hogan Lovells” is an international legal practice that includes Hogan Lovells US LLP and Hogan Lovells International LLP, with offices in: Abu Dhabi Alicante Amsterdam Baltimore Beijing Berlin Brussels Caracas Colorado Springs Denver Dubai Dusseldorf Frankfurt Hamburg Hanoi Ho Chi Minh City Hong Kong Houston London Los Angeles Madrid Miami Milan Moscow Munich New York Northern Virginia Paris Philadelphia Prague Rome San Francisco Shanghai Silicon Valley Singapore Tokyo Ulaanbaatar Warsaw Washington DC Associated offices: Budapest Jakarta Jeddah Riyadh Zagreb. For more information see www.hoganlovells.com \\DC - 039578/000001 - 3406479 v1 Hogan Lovells US LLP Columbia Square 555 Thirteenth Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20004 +1.202.637.5600 Tel +1.202.637.5910 Fax Robert E. Cohn Partner +1.202.637.4999 Direct Line robert.cohn@hoganlovells.com May 10, 2012

BY ELECTRONIC MAIL AND ELECTRONIC SUBMISSION Ms. Catherine O'Toole Air Carrier Fitness Division Office of Aviation Analysis U.S. Department of Transportation 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE Washington, DC 20590 Re: Application of People Express Airlines, Inc. for a Certificate , Docket DOT-OST-2012-0042 - Accident Plan Compliance Notice

Dear Ms. O'Toole: In further response to the Department’s Information Request dated April 19, 2012, this letter serves as Notice that People Express Airlines, Inc. has filed an accident plan that meets the requirements of 49 U.S.C. § 41113(b) in Docket DOT-OST-1996-1960 and has sent a copy of that plan to the National Transportation Safety Board. Please contact me if the Department requires additional information to advance the processing of People Express’s application. Respectfully submitted,

Robert E. Cohn Counsel for People Express Airlines, Inc.
cc: Michael Morisi, President, People Express Airlines, Inc.
V

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 4717

To authorize the Secretary of Transportation to issue a certificate of documentation with appropriate endorsement for employment in the coastwise

trade and on the Great Lakes and their tributary and connecting waters

in trade with Canada for the vessel SEA HAWK III.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JUNE 30, 1994

Mr. LEVIN introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee

on Merchant Marine and Fisheries

A BILL

To authorize the Secretary of Transportation to issue a

certificate of documentation with appropriate endorsement for employment in the coastwise trade and on

the Great Lakes and their tributary and connecting waters in trade with Canada for the vessel SEA HAWK

III.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 That notwithstanding section 27 of the Merchant Marine

4 Act, 1920 (46 App. U.S.C. 883), the Act of June 19, 1886

5 (46 App. U.S.C. 289), and sections 12106 and 12107 of

6 title 46, United States Code, the Secretary of Transpor-
2

•HR 4717 IH

1 tation may issue a certificate of documentation with ap2 propriate endorsement for employment in the coastwise

3 trade and on the Great Lakes and their tributary and con4 necting waters in trade with Canada for the vessel SEA

5 HAWK III (United States official number 996375).

Æ
#### § 73.755 Modulation monitors.

The licensee of each international broadcast station shall have a modulation monitor in operation at the transmitter.

[37 FR 25842, Dec. 5, 1972]
§ 73.3511 Applications required. ( a ) *Formal application* means any request for authorization where an FCC form for such request is prescribed. The prescription of an FCC form includes the requirement that the proper edition of the form is used. Formal applications on obsolete forms are subject to the provisions of § 73.3564 concerning acceptance of applications and § 73.3566 concerning defective applications.
( b ) *Informal application* 1 means all other written requests for authorization. All such applications should contain a caption clearly indicating the nature of the request submitted therein.
( c ) Formal and informal applications must comply with the requirements as to signing specified herein and in § 73.3513.
[44 FR 38486, July 2, 1979, as amended at 47 FR 40172, Sept. 13, 1982]
EXHIBIT 10(nnn)

                              GABRIELSEN & COMPANY
                          711 GRAND AVENUE, SUITE 100
                              SAN RAFAEL, CA 94901
                                 (415) 454-1600
                              FAX: (415) 256-2888

July 26, 2005

Mr. Jack Richter
North Valley Bank
P.O. Box 994630
Redding, California 96099

         RE:   Determination of Pair Market Rental Value, Branch #17
               Lease of Premises at 9334 Deschutes Road, Palo Cedro, CA, by
               North Valley Bank, a California Banking Corporation

Dear Mr. Richter:

         The purpose of this letter is to confirm that the parties to the
above-referenced lease (the "Lease") have agreed that the Fair Market Rental
Value, as that term is defined in Paragraph 40. OPTION TO EXTEND the Lease,
shall be One Dollar ($1.00) per square foot per month for the first twelve (12)
months of the five-year option term commencing December 1, 2005. The rent shall
be adjusted at the commencement of the thirteenth (13th) and the thirty-seventh
(37th) month thereafter in proportion to the changes in the Consumer Price Index
as described in Paragraph 4 of the Lease.

         To signify your agreement with this determination of Fair Market Rental
Value and that the Lease has been extended pursuant to Paragraph 40 (Option to
Extend Term) for an additional five (5) year term, please sign below under
Agreed to and Accepted.


Sincerely,

Gabrielsen & Company

/s/ JIM OWEN
-----------------------
Jim Owen


Agreed to and Accepted;
-----------------------

North Valley Bank,
A California Banking Corporation

By: /s/ JACK RICHTER
    -------------------
Its:  EVP/CAO
    -------------------


              94-050 FARRINGTON HIGHWAY * WAIPAHU, HAWAII 96797 *
                         (808) 677-6700 * (808) 671-2427
Exhibit 32.2
 Certification Pursuant To 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 By The Chief Financial Officer,
As Adopted Pursuant To Section 906 Of The Sarbanes-Oxley Act Of 2002.
  1.
    
    The Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the annual period ended January
31, 2009 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) and 15(d)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (15 U.S.C. 78m); and2.
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 /s/ F. Clay Creasey, Jr.F. Clay Creasey, Jr.Executive Vice President  Chief Financial Officer(Principal Financial Officer)March 31, 2009
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-13-00451-CV

Andrea R. Biller, Appellant

v.

NNN 1 & 2 Met Center 1, LLC; NNN 1 & 2 Met Center 2, LLC; 

NNN 1 & 2 Met Center 3, LLC; NNN 1 & 2 Met Center 4, LLC; 

NNN 1 & 2 Met Center 5, LLC; NNN 1 & 2 Met Center 7, LLC; 

NNN 1 & 2 Met Center 10, LLC; NNN 1 & 2 Met Center 11, LLC; 

NNN 1 & 2 Met Center 12, LLC; NNN 1 & 2 Met Center 13, LLC; 

NNN 1 & 2 Met Center 17, LLC; NNN 1 & 2 Met Center 18, LLC; 

NNN 1 & 2 Met Center 19, LLC; NNN 1 & 2 Met Center 20, LLC; 

NNN 1 & 2 Met Center 21, LLC; NNN 1 & 2 Met Center 22, LLC; 

NNN 1 & 2 Met Center 23, LLC; and Lexington Insurance Company, Appellees

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 250TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. D-1-GN-12-002595, HONORABLE AMY CLARK MEACHUM, JUDGE PRESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

The parties have filed a joint status report in this abated appeal requesting that we

continue the abatement of this appeal for 21 days pending continuing settlement negotiations. We

grant the motion and abate the appeal until May 2, 2014. All appellate deadlines will be tolled

during the period of abatement. The parties shall submit either a motion to reinstate or a joint status

report concerning the status of settlement negotiations no later than May 2, 2014.
_____________________________________________

J. Woodfin Jones, Chief Justice

Before Chief Justice Jones, Justices Pemberton and Field

Abated

Filed: April 4, 2014

2
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 46 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 H. R. 46

    To amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to prohibit 
   contributions by multicandidate political committees and to limit 
contributions in House of Representatives elections from persons other 
                  than individual in-State residents.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 5, 1993

  Mr. Archer introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                   Committee on House Administration

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to prohibit 
   contributions by multicandidate political committees and to limit 
contributions in House of Representatives elections from persons other 
                  than individual in-State residents.

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

SECTION 1. PROHIBITION OF CONTRIBUTIONS BY MULTICANDIDATE POLITICAL 
              COMMITTEES.

    Section 315(a)(2) of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 
U.S.C. 441a(a)(2)) is amended to read as follows:
    ``(2) No multicandidate political committee may make contributions 
with respect to any election for Federal office.''.

SEC. 2. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ELECTION LIMITATION ON CONTRIBUTIONS 
              FROM PERSONS OTHER THAN INDIVIDUAL IN-STATE RESIDENTS.

    Section 315(a) of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 
U.S.C. 441a) is amended by adding at the end the following new 
subsection:

 ``house of representatives election limitation on contributions from 
            persons other than individual in-state residents

    ``(i)(1) A candidate for the office of Representative in, or 
Delegate or Resident Commissioner to, the Congress may not, with 
respect to an election for Federal office, accept contributions from 
persons other than individual in-State residents totaling more than 20 
percent of the total of contributions accepted from all sources.
    ``(2) As used in this subsection, the term `individual in-State 
resident' means an individual who resides in the State in which the 
congressional district involved is located.''.

                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADDED BY

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of First Community Bank
Corporation of America (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Kenneth P. Cherven, President and Chief Executive Officer of
the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.§ 1350, as added by § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



|1. | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
|-- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|2. | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of and for the
period covered by the Report.
|-- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                        |  |     |  |                                  
|----------------------- |  | --- |  | ---------------------------------
|Date: November 13, 2009 |  | By: |  | /s/ Kenneth P. Cherven           
|                        |  |     |  | Kenneth P. Cherven, President and
|                        |  |     |  | Chief Executive Officer
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4492 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4492

   To extend the authorization for appropriations for the Commodity 
           Futures Trading Commission for five fiscal years.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 25, 1994

Mr. de la Garza (for himself, Mr. Roberts, Mr. Johnson of South Dakota, 
and Mr. Combest) (all by request) introduced the following bill; which 
              was referred to the Committee on Agriculture

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To extend the authorization for appropriations for the Commodity 
           Futures Trading Commission for five fiscal years.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
That this Act may be cited as the ``CFTC Reauthorization Act of 1994''.

SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

    Effective October 1, 1994, section 12(d) of the Commodity Exchange 
Act (7 U.S.C. 16(d)) is amended to read as follows:
    ``(d) To carry out this Act, there are authorized to be 
appropriated such sums as are necessary for each of the 1995 through 
1999 fiscal years.''.

                                 <all>
```
No. 11-1206.

#### Doyle *v.*Roberts, Chief Justice of the United States, et al.

C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.