alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Argued and submitted February 2,

reversed and remanded for reconsideration November 29, 1995

#### In the Matter of the Compensation of Henry A. Terry, Claimant. SAIF CORPORATION and Ochoco Lumber Company, *Petitioners, v.*Henry A. TERRY, *Respondent.*

(WCB 93-03582, 92-15766; CA A85179)

905 P2d 1187

Michael O. Whitty, Special Assistant Attorney General, argued the cause for petitioners. With him on the brief were Theodore R. Kulongoski, Attorney General, and Virginia L. Linder, Solicitor General.

James L. Edmunson argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief was Malagon, Moore, Johnson & Jensen.

Before Deits, Presiding Judge, and De Muniz and Hasel-ton, Judges.

PER CURIAM

*180PER CURIAM

SAIF and employer seek review of an order of the Workers’ Compensation Board concluding that claimant suffered a compensable injury to his neck. The statute pertinent to this petition, ORS 656.005(7)(a)(B), has been amended by Oregon Laws 1995, chapter 332. Because the amended version of the statute is applicable, we remand for reconsideration in the light of the new law. *Volk v. America West Airlines,*135 Or App 565, 899 P2d 746 (1995).

Reversed and remanded for reconsideration.
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of MYR Group Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended
September 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, William A. Koertner, Chief Executive Officer and President of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

November 13,
2008

/s/ WILLIAM A. KOERTNER Chief Executive Officer
President


---



QuickLinks
Release dates | Full version (300 KB PDF)  Board Actions | Actions   under delegated authority  Applications and reports received:Boston | New York | Philadelphia   | Cleveland | Richmond   | AtlantaChicago | St. Louis | Minneapolis   | Kansas City | Dallas   | San Francisco

#   Board Actions 

## Actions taken during the week ending December 10, 2005

----

Bank Holding CompaniesHudson Valley Holding Corp., Yonkers, New York  -- to acquire New York National Bank, Bronx.					-Approved, December 5, 2005 					

FormsForms  -- final Board review to implement the Supplement to the Report of Changes in Organizational Structure (FR Y-10S).					-Approved, December 5, 2005 					

Regulations And PoliciesInformation Security Standards  -- publication of a Small-Entity Compliance Guide for the Interagency Guidelines Establishing Information Security Standards.					-Approved, November 29, 2005 					(AC)

Release dates | Full version (300 KB PDF)  Board Actions | Actions   under delegated authority  Applications and reports received:Boston | New York | Philadelphia   | Cleveland | Richmond   | AtlantaChicago | St. Louis | Minneapolis   | Kansas City | Dallas   | San Francisco
Home | Banking information and regulationAccessibility | Contact   usLast update: December 15, 2005
#### § 28.905 Repairs and alterations.

No repairs or alterations affecting the safety of the vessel with regard to the hull, machinery, or equipment, shall be made without the notification of a Coast Guard Representative.
EX-10.2






EXHIBIT 10.2




DESCRIPTION OF MICHAEL MCNEIL 2005 BONUS PLAN




The Michael McNeil 2005 Bonus Plan is designed to link Mr. McNeil’s compensation more directly
to the Company’s corporate goals and performance. Under the 2005 Bonus Plan, the compensation
committee sets (a) goals for the Company’s earnings, known as the financial goals, and (b) certain
non-quantitative strategic goals. At the end of the year, the compensation committee determines
the bonus amount for Mr. McNeil based on the Company’s attainment of the goals. Mr. McNeil is
eligible to receive up to $150,000 based on the Company’s actual earnings relative to the financial
goals and up to $25,000 for the satisfaction of the non-quantitative strategic goals. The
compensation committee may adjust the earnings goals at the end of the year to address the
“quality” of the earnings and other environmental factors that may have contributed positively or
negatively to the Company’s actual earnings.
#### § 169.664 Applicability.

The requirements in this subpart apply to electrical installations operating at potentials of less than 50 volts on vessels of less than 100 gross tons.
N. Y. COMMON PLEAS.

#### Wm. N. Fitzgerald agt. E. P. Belden.

*Special*Term,

*July,*1875.

*Insufficient affidavit to sustain an attachment.*

An attachment cannot he sustained where it is issued on the ground that the defendant intends to defraud his creditors, as his books of accounts have been secreted, and are not accessible to his creditors, where it does not appear that the alleged secreting of the same by the defendant’s employe was with the authority or with the knowledge and approbation of the defendant.

The affidavit upon which such attachment is issued is defective where the facts are not directly sworn to, but are referred to as contained in another affidavit, without stating that that affidavit is anywhere on file, or without a copy of the affidavit being annexed to the affidavit on which the attachment is ordered.

Affidavit was made by the plaintiff herein that the defendant was indebted to him in the sum of $388, and this action is brought to recover same. An attachment was issued against the defendant on the ground that he intended to defraud his creditors. Several affidavits were read to the effect that defendant’s books of accounts had been secreted, and were inaccessible to his creditors. An order to show cause why the attachment should not be vacated was then granted upon application of defendant’s counsel, on the ground that the affidavits referred to were insufficient.

Daly, *C. J.*

The affidavit in this case was not sufficient to authorize ah attachment. The books secreted constituted that kind of property which is subject to levy, *226being property of that physical and tangible nature which could be seized by the sheriff, and sold and delivered by him to purchasers. If it had appeared that the secreting of the books by the defendant’s employe was by the authority or with the knowledge and approbation of the defendant, Belden, then it would show a case in which the defendant had or was about to secrete his property with an intent to defraud his creditors. Such an intent on the part. of the defendant cannot be assumed from the act of his employe without connecting the defendant by some evidence with the act, and there is nothing in the affidavit to show that he had any knowledge of it. There is not only this defect in the affidavit but it is not even directly sworn to, but is referred to as contained in another affidavit without stating that that affidavit is anywhere on file, or without a copy of the affidavit being annexed to the affidavit on which the attachment is ordered, which is a kind of evidence altogether too loose to be received as proof of the fact relied upon for the attachment, if the fact were otherwise sufficient. The attachment must, therefore, be discharged, on the ground that it was not warranted by the affidavit.
§ 52.20-25 Setting (modifies PFT-46). ( a ) The method of supporting firetube boilers must be as indicated in PFT-46 of Section I of the ASME BPVC (incorporated by reference; see § 52.01-1) except as noted otherwise in this section.
( b ) The foundations must meet the requirements of § 52.01-130.
[CGFR 68-82, 33 FR 18815, Dec. 18, 1968, as amended by USCG-2003-16630, 73 FR 65161, Oct. 31, 2008]
§ 32.60-30 Tank vessels with independent tanks—TB/ALL. ( a ) Independent cargo tanks may be located in hold spaces or in other cargo tanks; however, a working space of at least 15 inches shall be maintained around each independent tank, or else provisions shall be made for moving such tanks to furnish such working space, except that less than 15 inches around such tanks may be permitted if in the judgment of the Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection, having jurisdiction, a satisfactory inspection of the cargo tanks and hull structure can be made.
( b ) When an independent cargo tank is located in an enclosed space other than a cargo tank, such enclosed space shall be considered as equivalent to a pumproom and shall be safeguarded as such as required by this subpart.
( c ) Cargo tanks independent of the hull structure shall be supported in saddles or on foundations of steel or other suitable material and securely attached in place to preclude the cargo from being damaged or shifting as a result of collision. The arrangement shall be such as to permit longitudinal and circumferential, or athwartship and vertical, expansion of the cargo tanks. Each tank shall be supported so as to prevent the concentration of excessive loads on the supporting portion of the shell.
#### The Irving National Bank of New York, *Appellant, v.*Jay L. Adams, *Respondent*.

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. Opinion by

Daniels, J.
Faulk , Scot t (OST ) From : Sent : To : Subject : Cath yCrogha n <cat@mtaonline.net > Tuesday , Apri l 03 , 201 2 1:5 5 A M Faulk , Scott (OST

) Essentia l Ai rContract-Chisan a 

### ^ARTMEN TO F ;niAiiOp ; rnopp / ••H i - 3 lAli U 

### A 8 I a m writin g t o as k

fo rcontinuanc e ofth e Essentia l Ai rservic e fro m 40Mil e Ai ri n Tok , Alask a t o Chisana , Alaska
. Every smal l villag e shoul d hav e som e ai rservic e availabl e fo rthei rbasi can d emergenc yneed s a tth e least
. I hav e als o flow n wit h 40Mil e Ai rt o vacatio n wit h friend s t o Chisan a i n th e pas tan d woul d hop e t o stil l hav e tha tservic e availabl e t o me . Som e o fth e folk s liv e i n ther e yea rroun d o rnearl ys o an d thi s i s a much neede d servic e t o them
. Th e sout h en d ofth e stat e airstri p especiall yha s thi s nee d a s th e full-tim e folk s ther e d o no tow n a plan e a s thos e o n th e nort h en d d o an d als o hav e thei row n airstrip
. I understan d tha t mor e permanen tresident s ar e no wbuildin g o n th e sout h en d a s well
. Pleas e kee p th e contrac t wit h 40Mil e Air
. Sincerely , Cath yCroghan-Palmer , A k
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>           5
<LEGEND>
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL  INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROMSEC FORM 10-K
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>               0000826821
<NAME>              CERBCO, INC
<MULTIPLIER>        1,000

<S>                                                              <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                                    YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                                JUN-30-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                                     JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                                           17,050
<SECURITIES>                                                          0
<RECEIVABLES>                                                     6,593
<ALLOWANCES>                                                          0
<INVENTORY>                                                       1,273
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                                 25,807
<PP&E>                                                           26,945
<DEPRECIATION>                                                   15,433
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                                   41,119
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                             4,909
<BONDS>                                                               0
<COMMON>                                                            148
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                                 0
<PREFERRED>                                                           0
<OTHER-SE>                                                       24,904
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                     41,119
<SALES>                                                          23,315
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                                 23,315
<CGS>                                                            21,618
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                    21,618
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                      0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                      0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                                   42
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                                  (1,632)
<INCOME-TAX>                                                       (693)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                                (213)
<DISCONTINUED>                                                        0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                       0
<CHANGES>                                                             0
<NET-INCOME>                                                       (213)
<EPS-BASIC>                                                     (0.14)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                     (0.14)


</TABLE>
§ 52.05-30 Minimum requirements for attachment welds (modifies PW-16). ( a ) The location and minimum size of attachment welds for nozzles and other connections must be as required by PW-16 of Section I of the ASME BPVC (incorporated by reference; see § 52.01-1) except as noted otherwise in this section.
( b ) When nozzles or couplings are attached to boilers, as shown in Figure PW-16 (a) and (c) of Section I of the ASME BPVC, and are welded from one side only, backing strips must be used unless it can be determined visually or by nondestructive test methods that complete penetration has been obtained.
( c ) When attachments as shown in Figure PW-16 (y) and (z) of Section I of the ASME BPVC are employed they must be limited to 2-inch pipe size for pressure exceeding 150 psig.
[CGFR 68-82, 33 FR 18815, Dec. 18, 1968, as amended by USCG-2003-16630, 73 FR 65161, Oct. 31, 2008]
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2547 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2547

To amend title 38, United States Code, to clarify the conditions under 
     which certain persons may be treated as adjudicated mentally 
                   incompetent for certain purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 21, 2009

  Mr. Moran of Kansas (for himself and Mr. Rodriguez) introduced the 
   following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Veterans' 
                                Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend title 38, United States Code, to clarify the conditions under 
     which certain persons may be treated as adjudicated mentally 
                   incompetent for certain purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Veterans 2nd Amendment Protection 
Act''.

SEC. 2. CONDITIONS FOR TREATMENT OF CERTAIN PERSONS AS ADJUDICATED 
              MENTALLY INCOMPETENT FOR CERTAIN PURPOSES.

    (a) In General.--Chapter 55 of title 38, United States Code, is 
amended by adding at the end the following new section:
``Sec. 5511. Conditions for treatment of certain persons as adjudicated 
              mentally incompetent for certain purposes
    ``In any case arising out of the administration by the Secretary of 
laws and benefits under this title, a person who is mentally 
incapacitated, deemed mentally incompetent, or experiencing an extended 
loss of consciousness shall not be considered adjudicated as a mental 
defective under subsection (d)(4) or (g)(4) of section 922 of title 18 
without the order or finding of a judge, magistrate, or other judicial 
authority of competent jurisdiction that such person is a danger to 
himself or herself or others.''.
    (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the beginning of 
chapter 55 of such title is amended by adding at the end the following 
new item:

``5511. Conditions for treatment of certain persons as adjudicated 
                            mentally incompetent for certain 
                            purposes.''.
                                 <all>
```
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

WASSIM M. YOUNES, M.D., R.Ph., and

WASSIM M. YOUNES, M.D., P.L.C.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

SYLVIA M. BURWELL, et. al.,

Defendants.

 /

Case No. 15-11225

Honorable John Corbett O’Meara

ORDER DENYING

PLAINTIFFS' APRIL 3 2015 EMERGENCY MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

This matter came before the court on Plaintiffs’ April 3, 2015 Emergency Motion for

Reconsideration. No response was filed, and no oral argument was heard. Local Rule 7.1(h)(2). 

Plaintiffs seek seek reconsideration of the court's April 2, 2015 Opinion and Order Denying

Plaintiffs' Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Dismissing Case.

Generally, and without restricting the court's discretion, the court will not grant

motions for rehearing or reconsideration that merely present the same issues ruled

upon by the court, either expressly or by reasonable implication. The movant must

not only demonstrate a palpable defect by which the court and the parties and other

persons entitled to be heard on the motion have been misled but also show that

correcting the defect will result in a different disposition of the case.

LR 7.1(h)(3).

In this case Plaintiffs' emergency motion for reconsideration "merely present[s] the same

issues ruled upon by the court, either expressly or by reasonable implication." Plaintiffs have failed

to “demonstrate a palpable defect by which the court and the parties . . . have been misled.” 

Accordingly, the court must deny the motion.

5:15-cv-11225-JCO-MJH Doc # 12 Filed 04/13/15 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 205
ORDER

It is hereby ORDERED that Plaintiffs' April 3, 2015 Emergency Motion for Reconsideration

is DENIED.

Date: April 13, 2015 s/John Corbett O'Meara

United States District Judge

I hereby certify that on April 13, 2015 a copy of this order was served upon counsel of record

using the Court's ECF system.

s/William Barkholz

Case Manager

2

5:15-cv-11225-JCO-MJH Doc # 12 Filed 04/13/15 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 206
§ 34.05-1 Fire main system—T/ALL. ( a ) Fire pumps, piping, hydrants, hose and nozzles shall be installed on all tankships.
( b ) The arrangements and details of the fire main system shall be as set forth in subpart 34.10.
[CGFR 65-50, 30 FR 16694, Dec. 30, 1965, as amended by CGD 77-057a, 44 FR 66502, Nov. 19, 1979]
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHWEST METALS, INC., ET AL., Civil Action No. 15-11080

Plaintiff(s),

-vs- Hon. Marianne O. Battani

CITY OF DETROIT, ET AL.

Defendant(s).

 /

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Pursuant to the Stipulation of Voluntary Dismissal with Prejudice [Doc #64] filed on

January 25, 2017, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the above mentioned case is dismissed with

prejudice.

Date: February 14, 2017 s/Marianne O. Battani 

MARIANNE O. BATTANI

United States District Judge

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

The undersigned certifies that the foregoing Order was served upon counsel of record via the Court's ECF System to their

respective email addresses or First Class U.S. mail to the non-ECF participants on February 14, 2017..

s/ Kay Doaks 

Case Manager

Case 2:15-cv-11080-MOB-APP ECF No. 65, PageID.1106 Filed 02/14/17 Page 1 of 1
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCING INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS CONTAINED IN ARNOLD INDUSTRIES, INC.'S FORM 10-Q
FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1996, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                      15,206,812
<SECURITIES>                                18,818,393
<RECEIVABLES>                               36,296,770
<ALLOWANCES>                                 2,201,708
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            79,266,614
<PP&E>                                     316,981,585
<DEPRECIATION>                             118,129,341
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             298,171,639
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       53,850,770
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                    29,942,628
<OTHER-SE>                                 176,016,786
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               298,171,639
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           263,945,347
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              233,306,958
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                             1,038,810
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             931,207
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             29,962,147
<INCOME-TAX>                                10,636,746
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         19,325,401
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                19,325,401
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .73
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .73
        

</TABLE>
#### § 35.40-20 Emergency equipment—TB/ALL.

Each locker and space where emergency equipment is stowed must be marked “EMERGENCY EQUIPMENT” or “SELF-CONTAINED BREATHING APPARATUS”, as appropriate.

[CGD 86-036, 57 FR 43824, Oct. 23, 1992]