alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Simon Hillgartner and Wife *v.*Barbara Gebhart.

In assigning dower, in a special manner, of a third part'of the rents and profits, deductions should be made from the gross rents of the estate for reasonable repairs and taxes, but no deduction should be made on account of water-rents or insurance.

Motion for leave to file a petition in error to the Superior Court of Cincinnati.

The original proceeding was a petition by the defendant in error for assignment of dower. The estate of which the demandant was dowable was entire, and could not be divided by metes and bounds. The commissioners and sheriff to whom the order to assign was directed, proceeded to assign dower, in a special manner, as of a third part of the rents, issues, and profits. In computing and ascertaining the dower interest, they awarded to-the dowress one-third part of the gross rents of the estate. The plaintiffs in error claim that the assignment should have been made of one'.hird of the rental value of the property after deductions for reasonable repairs, taxes, expenses for water-rent, insurance, etc.

*J.*<j- *B. A.*Johnson, for the motion :

The rule seems to be established not only that dower shall be estimated, where it can not be assigned by metes and bounds, according to the value of the land at the time of the assignment, but that necessary expenses for taxes, *558repairs, etc., sliall be deducted. 2 Scribner on Dower, 601 (5), 602 (6); *Dunseth*v. *TJ. S.*Bank, 6 Ohio, 34, 79; *Hale*v. *Jones,*6 Johns. 258; *Riley*v. *Clamorgen,*15 Mo. 331; *Beavis*v. *Smith,*11 Ala. 32.

*Jacob Wolf,*contra.

By the Court.

The statute provides (section 14 of the act of January 28, 1823, S. & C. 521) “that where estates of which a woman is dowable are entire, and where no division can be made by metes or bounds, dower thereof shall be assigned in a special manner as of a third part of the rents, issues, and profits.” One-third of the net rents, issues, and profits is the measure of the dower interest in such cases. By this measure the dowress is compensated for “ one full and equal third part of all the lands, tenements, and real estate,” which is her primary right. The net rents, issues, and profits are equivalent to the use of the estate. In ascertaining the net rents, the expenses of reasonable repairs and taxes should be deducted from the gross rents; but no deduction should be made for expenses of water-rents or insurance.

*Judgment reversed and cause remanded.*
#### § 236.761 Locking, electric.

The combination of one or more electric locks and controlling circuits by means of which levers of an interlocking machine, or switches or other units operated in connection with signaling and interlocking, are secured against operation under certain conditions.
oe..___ 6H 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

DA 22-0488

WAGNER & LYONS, PLLC, f/k/a

SULLIVAN, WAGNER & LYONS, 

PLLC;

 Appellant,

 v.

SUPERIOR HARDWOODS AND

MILLWORK, INC., d/b/a/ GRIZZLY

FLOORING INSTALLATION,

 Appellee.

ORDER OF MEDIATOR APPOINTMENT

This appeal being subject to M.R.App.P. 7, and the parties having failed to jointly 

and timely select a mediator under M.R.App.P., 7(4),(c),

IT IS ORDERED THAT Charles J Tornabene, whose name appears next on the 

list of attorneys desiring appointment as mediators for Money Judgments appeals which 

is maintained pursuant to M.R.App.P., 7(4)(e), is hereby appointed to conduct the 

mediation process required by M.R.App.P., 7(5), and 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the time periods set forth in M.R.App.P., 

7(5)(d) shall run from the date of this order of appointment.

A true copy of this order is being mailed to counsel of record for the parties, or to 

the parties individually if not represented by counsel, on the date hereof.

DATED this September 19, 2022.

Bowen Greenwood, Clerk of the Supreme Court

c: Jon G Beal, Jesse Beaudette, Charles J Tornabene

09/19/2022

Case Number: DA 22-0488
```

[Journal of the House of Representatives, 1995]
[Monday, September 18, 1995 (116), Para 116.4 Approval of the Journal]
[Page 1364]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

para.116.4  approval of the journal

  The SPEAKER pro tempore, Mr. MILLER of Florida, announced he had 
examined and approved the Journal of the proceedings of Thursday, 
September 14, 1995.
  Pursuant to clause 1, rule I, the Journal was approved.
```
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 12**  **- 6836** 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,
v. BRUCE LAMONT GOODWIN , Defendant

- Appellant
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina , at Orangeburg
. Margaret B. Seymour , Chief District Judge. ( 5:10

- cr - 00835

- MBS

- 6 )

Submitted : September 27, 2012 Decided: October 2 , 2012

Before MOTZ, DAVIS, and WYNN , Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion
. Bruce Lamont Goodwin, Appellant Pro Se. Winston David Holliday, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Bruce Lamont Goodwin appeals the district court ’ s text order denying his post

- judgment motion to reduce his sentence. We have reviewed the record and discern no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court ’s order
. See United States v. Goodwin , No. 5:10

- cr - 00 835

- MBS

- 6 (D.S.C. Apr. 23, 2012) . We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional
process.
AFFIRMED
###### Editorial Note on Part 105

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 105 appear at 70 FR 56087, Sept. 23, 2005.

#### § 105.26 Obtaining records on file with PHMSA.

To obtain records on file with PHMSA, other than those described in § 105.25, you must file a request with PHMSA under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552). The procedures for filing a FOIA request are contained in 49 CFR part 7.
§ 229.307 Safety analysis. ( a ) A railroad shall develop a Safety Analysis (SA) for each product subject to this subpart prior to the initial use of such product on their railroad.
( b ) The SA shall: ( 1 ) establish and document the minimum requirements that will govern the development and implementation of all products subject to this subpart, and be based on good engineering practice and should be consistent with the guidance contained in appendix F of this part in order to establish that a product's safety-critical functions will operate with a high degree of confidence in a fail-safe manner;
( 2 ) Include procedures for immediate repair of safety-critical functions; and
( 3 ) Be made available to FRA upon request.
( c ) Each railroad shall comply with the SA requirements and procedures related to the development, implementation, and repair of a product subject to this subpart.
Docket: EBSA-2009-0010 

The Paul Wellstone and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008 

Comment On: EBSA-2009-0010-0409 

Interim Final Rules Under the Paul Wellstone and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and 

Addiction Equity Act of 2008 

Document: EBSA-2009-0010-DRAFT-0645 

Comment on FR Doc # 2010-2167 

Submitter Information 

Name: Dorothy L. Bartolotta 

Address: 

1603 Katheryne Village Sq. 

Annapolis, MD, 21409 

Email: bart0902@yahoo.com 

Phone: 410-349-9422 

General Comment 

On behalf of NAMI of Anne Arundel County, I am writing to submit comments on the Interim Final 

Rules under the Paul Wellstone and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act 

of 2008 and in doing so NAMI of Anne Arundel County endorses the separate comments 

submitted by the Party Implementation Coalition and the National Alliance on Mental Illness, 

PUBLIC SUBMISSION

As of: April 30, 2010 

Received: April 30, 2010 

Status: Pending_Post 

Tracking No. 80ae385d 

Comments Due: May 03, 2010

Submission Type: Web

Page 1 of 1

https://fdms.erulemaking.net/fdms-web-agency/component/submitterInfoCoverPage?Call=... 4/30/2010
```

[Journal of the House of Representatives, 1995]
[Friday, September 29, 1995 (123), Para 123.26 Extension of Remarks]
[Pages 1491-1492]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

para.123.26  extension of remarks

  On motion of Mr. SHAYS, by unanimous consent,
  Ordered, That for the legislative day of Friday, September 29, 1995, 
all Members be permitted to extend their remarks and to include 
extraneous mate

[[Page 1492]]

rial in that section of the Record entitled ``Extension of Remarks''.
```
§ 228.409 Requirements for railroad-provided employee sleeping quarters during interim releases and other periods available for rest within a duty tour. ( a ) If a railroad subject to this subpart provides sleeping quarters for the use of a train employee subject to this subpart during interim periods of release as a method of mitigating fatigue identified by the analysis of work schedules required by § 228.407(a) and (d), such sleeping quarters must be “clean, safe, and sanitary,” and give the employee “an opportunity for rest free from the interruptions caused by noise under the control of the” railroad within the meaning of section 21106(a)(1) of title 49 of the United States Code.
( b ) Any sleeping quarters provided by a railroad that are proposed as a fatigue mitigation tool pursuant to § 228.407(b)(1)(i), are subject to the requirements of § 228.407(f), Consultation.
###### Editorial Note on Part 91

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 91 appear by USCG-2012-0832, 77 FR 59779, Oct. 1, 2012.

#### § 91.60-15 Cargo Ship Safety Radio Certificate.

Every vessel equipped with a radio installation on an international voyage must have a Cargo Ship Safety Radio Certificate. Each radio installation must meet the requirements of the Federal Communication Commission and the International Convention for Safety of Life at Sea.

[USCG-1999-4976, 65 FR 6503, Feb. 9, 2000]
# ):)or-o^-r-iii7'u^i ^ ^^RTMEN T O F ANSPORWIO N KE T OPERATION S

Novembe r

7 , 201 0 Ne w Smyrn aBeach , FL . 3216 9

T o who mi

t ma y concern : I d o hop e Cap e Ai r

wil l stay a s a

n airlin e t o Massena . Gettin g t o th e north-easter n are ao f Ne w York

stat e i s very hard , especiall y Potsda mare a wher e ther e ar e four

colleges/universities . Th e familie s an dth e student s woul dus e a n airlin e i f the y wer e mor e awar e o f it . Otherwis e the y hav e t o fly t o Schenectad y an d driv e for 2 1/ 2 hour s t o ge t

t o school . Massen ai s onl y a3/ 4 hou r drive . Jus t imagin e Massen awith afew goo drestaurants , ahotel an dca r rental . Massen acoul d gro w a s th e hu b o f

th e northeast . Jus t

don't chang e th e characte r

o f that lovel y tow n to o much ! Cap e Ai r jus t need s advertising . Ho w d o folk s kno w abou t it ? I hav e travele dfro m Florid aupstat e for

si x year s goin g throug h Schenectady . S o muc h fus s t o ge t m e t o Potsdam ! No w I fly t o Alban y an dpic k u p Cap e Ai r

t o Massena . Wh y di dI no t kno w abou t i t before ? Becaus e th e trave l agents d o no t us e it . Fo r th e benefi t

o f both Massen aan dCap e Ai r I d o hop e yo u wil l kee p prospering . Your s truly , Walm aTaylo r Ne w Smyrn aBeach , Fl .
BEFORE THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

WASHINGTON, D.C.

In the matter of

2010 U.S.-Haneda Combination Services Allocation Proceeding ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Docket DOT-OST-2010-0018

ANSWER OF DELTA AIR LINES, INC. TO HAWAIIAN AIRLINES, INC.
Communications with respect to this document should be addressed to:

Andrea Fischer Newman Senior Vice President – Government Affairs DELTA AIR LINES, INC. 1212 New York Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20005

Alexander Van der Bellen Managing Director – Government Affairs & Associate General Counsel Jeff Morgan Regional Director – Government Affairs DELTA AIR LINES, INC. 1212 New York Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-4184 sascha.vanderbellen@delta.com

April 11, 2011BEFORE THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

WASHINGTON, D.C.

In the matter of

2010 U.S.-Haneda Combination Services Allocation Proceeding ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Docket DOT-OST-2010-0018

ANSWER OF DELTA AIR LINES, INC. TO HAWAIIAN AIRLINES, INC.
Hawaiian’s application for a Haneda backup award in the wake of the
Japanese tragedy, like United’s, is without merit. Delta’s Los Angeles-Haneda flight
resumes on June 2, and Delta’s Detroit-Haneda fligh t resumes on June 16 in full
compliance with the Department’s 90 day dormancy co ndition.
Hawaiian admits that its loads on the Tokyo-Honolul u route have declined
since the disaster, and every U.S. carrier serving Tokyo from the U.S. mainland has
dramatically reduced capacity. Delta’s decision to temporarily suspend Haneda

service until the immediate effects of the disaster have abated, and resume service
in June for the summer peak is appropriate, and all owed by the Department’s Order.
The Department did not award backup authority in th is case, because “the
public interest would be best served by allowing us to award any unused rights on

the basis of a fresh record.” Order 2010-7-2. Ha waiian’s efforts to secure a backup
award under the current and highly unusual conditio ns in the U.S.-Japan market are
inconsistent with the Department’s Order.Delta Answer Page 2

Respectfully submitted,

_________________________________ Alexander Van der Bellen Managing Director, Government Affairs & Associate General Counsel DELTA AIR LINES, INC.CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

A copy of the foregoing document has been served th is 11th day of April, 2011, upon the following persons via email:

carl.nelson@aa.com dan.weiss@coair.com thomas.bolling@coair.com jeffrey.manley@united.com Annalei.Avancena@united.com bruce.rabinovitz@wilmerhale.com howard.kass@usairways.com benjamin.slocum@usairways.com jhill@dowlohnes.com LDeavers@dowlohnes.com paul.gretch@dot.gov keith.glatz@dot.gov esta.rosenberg@dot.gov todd.homan@dot.gov urskr@state.gov eugene_alford@ita.doc.gov mike.orr@airlineinfo.com
#### John Montgomery and others, *Executors, Respondents, v.*Margaret L. Kerwin, *Appellant.*

— Judgment affirmed, with costs.
126 STAT. 1602 PUBLIC LAW 112–222—DEC. 28, 2012 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.R. 3912: 

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 158 (2012): 

Nov. 28, considered and passed House. 

Dec. 19, considered and passed Senate. 

Æ 

Public Law 112–222 

112th Congress 

An Act 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 110 Mastic 

Road in Mastic Beach, New York, as the ‘‘Brigadier General Nathaniel Woodhull 

Post Office Building’’. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. BRIGADIER GENERAL NATHANIEL WOODHULL POST 

OFFICE BUILDING. 

(a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States Postal 

Service located at 110 Mastic Road in Mastic Beach, New York, 

shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Brigadier General Nathaniel 

Woodhull Post Office Building’’. 

(b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, regulation, 

document, paper, or other record of the United States to the facility 

referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference 

to the ‘‘Brigadier General Nathaniel Woodhull Post Office Building’’. 

Approved December 28, 2012. 

Dec. 28, 2012 

[H.R. 3912] 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with PUBLIC LAWS
§ 214.533 Schedule of repairs subject to availability of parts. ( a ) The employer shall order a part necessary to repair a non-complying condition on an on-track roadway maintenance machine or a hi-rail vehicle by the end of the next business day following the report of the defect.
( b ) When the employer cannot repair a non-complying condition as required by § 214.531 because of the temporary unavailability of a necessary part, the employer shall repair the on-track roadway maintenance machine or hi-rail vehicle within seven calendar days after receiving the necessary part. The employer may continue to use the on-track roadway maintenance machine or hi-rail vehicle with a non-complying condition until receiving the necessary part(s) for repair, subject to the requirements of § 214.503. However, if a non-complying condition is not repaired within 30 days following the report of the defect, the employer shall remove the on-track roadway maintenance machine or hi-rail vehicle from on-track service until it is brought into compliance with this subpart.
( c ) If the employer fails to order a part necessary to repair the reported non-complying condition, or if it fails to install an available part within the required seven calendar days, the on-track roadway maintenance machine or hi-rail vehicle shall be removed from on-track service until brought into compliance with this subpart.
( d ) Each employer shall maintain records pertaining to compliance with this section. Records may be kept on forms provided by the employer or by electronic means. The employer shall retain each record for at least one year, and the records shall be made available for inspection and copying during normal business hours by representatives of FRA and States participating under part 212 of this chapter. The records may be kept on the on-track roadway maintenance machine or hi-rail vehicle or at a location designated by the employer.
Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed October 1, 2013.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14-13-00791-CR

TERRY MICHAEL NATIONS, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 338th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 1380801

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

After a plea of guilty, appellant was convicted of the offense of burglary of a 

building with the intent to commit theft and sentenced on July 11, 2013, to three 

years in State Jail. No motion for new trial was filed. Appellant’s notice of appeal 

was not filed until August 27, 2013.

A defendant’s notice of appeal must be filed within thirty days after sentence 

is imposed when the defendant has not filed a motion for new trial. See Tex. R. 
2

App. P. 26.2(a)(1). A notice of appeal that complies with the requirements of Rule 

26 is essential to vest the court of appeals with jurisdiction. Slaton v. State, 981 

S.W.2d 208, 210 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998). If an appeal is not timely perfected, a 

court of appeals does not obtain jurisdiction to address the merits of the appeal. 

Under those circumstances it can take no action other than to dismiss the appeal. 

Id.

Accordingly, the appeal is ordered dismissed.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Chief Justice Frost and Justices Boyce and Jamison.

Do Not Publish — Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).
## Carbon Pollution Standards for the Power Sector 1. New power plants • ProposedJanuary 8, 2014 • Final Summer 2015 2. Modified and reconstructed power plants • ProposedJune 2014 • Final Summer 2015 3. Existing power plants • Proposed GuidelinesJune 2014 • Final Guidelines Summer 2015 • State Plans due Summer 2016 • Proposed Federal Plan summer 2015 (final ready summer 2016) 

# New Source Performance Standards

http://www.epa.gov/cleanpowerplan 15

# President Obama’s Proposed FY 2016 Budget The President’s FY16 budget prioritizes climate action by providing funding to 

### support efforts to address climate change • $25 million in grants to help states develop their Clean Power Plan strategies • Clean Power State Incentive Fund Proposal of $4 billion investment fund for states choosing to go beyond minimum requirements in the Clean Power Plan • The Fund will enable states that accelerate their reductions from the power sector to receive resources for their heightened efforts • States could use fundsfor a range of activities that advance or complement the Clean Power Plan 2

http://www2.epa.gov/planandbudget/fy2016
* Pursuant to Local Rule 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 Local Rule

47.5.4.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

____________________

No. 96-50381

Summary Calendar

__________________

KWP Financial I, Inc., A California Corporation,

 Plaintiff-Appellee.

versus

John C. Harlan,

 Defendant-Appellant.

__________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

(A-96-CV-42)

__________________________________________

October 9, 1996

Before SMITH, DUHÉ, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Harlan appeals summary judgment on a promissory note and

guaranty, contending that his set-off claim was not properly

addressed, and that appellee’s evidence was insufficient as a

matter of law. 

Claims of set-off are affirmative defenses which must be

raised in defendant’s first responsive pleading, or they are lost.
Davis v. Odeco, 18 F.3d 1237, 1245 (5th Cir.) cert. denied, 115

S.Ct. 78 (1994); Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(c). Harlan did not raise setoff in his answer; and, it appears, he never moved to amend to

include set-off. The district court understandably did not

consider defendant’s set-off claim; and, as defendant never sought

leave to amend in the district court, we refuse to consider that

new issue on appeal. Harlan’s waiver of the set-off claim obviates

analysis of whether he satisfied Section 51.003 of the Texas

Property Code, regarding determination of fair market value of

foreclosed property.

KWP Financial submitted proper summary judgment evidence which

satisfied the requirements of a prima facie case for collection on

a promissory note. Harlan’s evidentiary objections fail because

the promissory note itself is verbal conduct which falls outside

the prescription against hearsay. The other evidence submitted by

KWP financial is cognizable, and sufficient, under Texas law, for

proof of a claim on a promissory note. See, e.g., Zarges v. Bevan,

652 S.W.2d 368 (Tex. 1983).

AFFIRMED
exv10w18



 






Exhibit 10.18




JIM MARONEY COMPENSATION PACKAGE TERM SHEET




	 	 	 	 	 
	Base Salary — Annual
	 	$225,000	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 
	Incentive Bonus @ Plan
	 	$112,500(a)	 	E-25%, EV-50%, OA-75%
	 
	 	 	 	 
	Stock Options — Sign-On
	 	26,000 @ $23.31(b)	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 
	Stock Options — Annual
	 	#TBD(b)	 	multiple of 2 times base salary
	 
	 	 	 	 
	Restricted Stock — Sign On
	 	7,507 shares (c)	 	$175,000 / $23.31
	 
	 	 	 	 
	Employee Stock Purchase
	 	21,450 shares(d)	 	$500,000 / $23.31
	 
	 	 	 	 
	Car Allowance — Annual
	 	$9,600	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 
	Normal Severance
	 	12 months(e)	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 
	Vacation — Annual
	 	4 weeks(f)	 	 








 




			
	(a)	 	2005 bonus to be pro-rated based on days of service
	 
	(b)	 	stock options vest 33 1⁄3% year
	 
	(c)	 	restricted stock vests 25% per year
	 
	(d)	 	employee purchased stock must be held: (1) per SEC 16 regulations; and (2) prior to the company going “public”, per all in-place shareholder agreements
	 
	(e)	 	severance is for involuntary termination “not for cause” as defined in J. Winkler’s 2005 employment agreement; severance is 12 months base salary and
bonus at EV; bonus for year of termination is pro-rated at EV (or higher based on actual results); and all stock options and restricted stock vests
	 
	(f)	 	1 week for 2005; 4 weeks annually commencing 1.1.06





	 	 	 	 	 
	Effective Date

	 	10.3.05
	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 
	/s/ Joe Winkler

	 	/s/ Jim Maroney	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	 
	Approved:

	 	Accepted:	 	 
	Joe Winkler

	 	Jim Maroney	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 
	10/3/05

	 	10/3/05	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	 
	Date

	 	Date