alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

November 29, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice
134684 Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, Justices

v SC: 134684 COA: 268463 Macomb CC: 05-002715-FC RONNIE LEE ANDERSON, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the June 21, 2007 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.

l1119 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

November 29, 2007

Clerk
§ 219.213 Unlawful refusals; consequences. ( a ) *Disqualification.* An employee who refuses to cooperate in providing breath, blood or urine specimens following an accident or incident specified in this subpart must be withdrawn from regulated service, and must be deemed disqualified for regulated service, for a period of nine (9) months in accordance with the conditions specified in § 219.107.
( b ) *Procedures.* Prior to or upon withdrawing the employee from regulated service, under this section, the railroad must provide written notice of the reason for this action and an opportunity for hearing before a presiding officer other than the charging official. The employee is entitled to the procedural protection set out in § 219.104(d).
( c ) *Subject of hearing.* The hearing required by this section must determine whether the employee refused to submit to testing, having been requested to submit, under authority of this subpart, by a representative of the railroad. In determining whether a disqualification is required, the hearing official shall, as appropriate, also consider the following: ( 1 ) Whether the railroad made a good faith determination, based on reasonable inquiry, that the accident or incident was within the mandatory testing requirements of this subpart; and
( 2 ) In a case where a blood test was refused on the ground it would be inconsistent with the employee's health, whether such refusal was made in good faith and based on medical advice.
§ 24.304 Reestablishment expenses—nonresidential moves. In addition to the payments available under §§ 24.301 and 24.303, a small business, farm, or nonprofit organization is entitled to receive a payment, not to exceed $33,200, for expenses actually incurred in relocating and reestablishing such small business, farm, or nonprofit organization at a replacement site. ( a ) *Eligible expenses.* Reestablishment expenses must be reasonable and necessary, as determined by the agency. They include, but are not limited to, the following: ( 1 ) Repairs or improvements to the replacement real property as required by Federal, State, or local law, code, or ordinance.
( 2 ) Modifications to the replacement property to accommodate the business operation or make replacement structures suitable for conducting the business.
( 3 ) Construction and installation costs for exterior signing to advertise the business.
( 4 ) Redecoration or replacement of soiled or worn surfaces at the replacement site, such as paint, paneling, or carpeting.
( 5 ) Advertisement of replacement location.
( 6 ) Estimated increased costs of operation during the first 2 years at the replacement site for such items as: ( i ) Lease or rental charges;
( ii ) Personal or real property taxes;
( iii ) Insurance premiums; and
( iv ) Utility charges, excluding impact fees.
( 7 ) Other items that the agency considers essential to the reestablishment of the business.
( b ) *Ineligible expenses.* The following is a nonexclusive listing of reestablishment expenditures not considered to be reasonable, necessary, or otherwise eligible: ( 1 ) Purchase of capital assets, such as office furniture, filing cabinets, machinery, or trade fixtures.
( 2 ) Purchase of manufacturing materials, production supplies, product inventory, or other items used in the normal course of the business operation.
( 3 ) Interest on money borrowed to make the move or purchase the replacement property.
( 4 ) Payment to a part-time business in the home which does not contribute materially, defined at § 24.2(a), to the household income.
( 5 ) Construction costs for a new building at the business replacement site, or costs to construct, reconstruct or rehabilitate an existing building. (*See* appendix A to this part, section 24.304(b)(5).)
MEMORANDUM

DATE: 07/25/2014

FROM: Laura Farris/EPA Region 8

TO: Clean Power Plan for Existing Power Plants; Docket Id: OAR–2013-0602

SUBJECT: Jefferson County Community Solar Garden Grand Opening Event

SUMMARY: 

Tim Rehder from EPA Region 8 spoke about the proposed rule for Existing Power Plants under Section 

111(d) of the Clean Air Act on July 24, 2014, at the Jefferson County Community Garden Grand Opening 

Ceremony. The meeting was hosted by the Clean Energy Collective.

ATTENDEES:

EPA

Tim Rehder

External Stakeholders

Todd Davidson, Clean Energy Collective

Members of the Public
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM CHIRON
CORPORATION'S UNAUDITED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET DATED JUNE 30, 2000 AND
UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS FOR THE SIX MONTHS
ENDED JUNE 30, 2000 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                         474,450
<SECURITIES>                                   952,213<F1>
<RECEIVABLES>                                  213,456<F2>
<ALLOWANCES>                                    10,537
<INVENTORY>                                    102,894
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,513,109
<PP&E>                                         538,740
<DEPRECIATION>                                 242,646
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,428,434
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          537,430
<BONDS>                                            695<F3>
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         1,828
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,837,472<F4>
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,428,434
<SALES>                                        318,627
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               457,600
<CGS>                                           99,530
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   99,530
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               152,719<F5>
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 4,183
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               9,359
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                141,250
<INCOME-TAX>                                    43,754
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             97,496
<DISCONTINUED>                                   2,342
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    99,838
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.55
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.52
<FN>
<F1>CONSISTS OF SHORT-TERM AND NONCURRENT INVESTMENTS IN MARKETABLE DEBT AND EQUITY
SECURITIES.
<F2>CONSISTS OF ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE AND CURRENT AND NONCURRENT PORTIONS OF NOTES
RECEIVABLE.
<F3>CONSISTS OF CONVERTIBLE SUBORDINATED DEBENTURES AND NOTES PAYABLE, NET OF
CURRENT MATURITIES.
<F4>CONSISTS OF ADDITIONAL PAID-IN CAPITAL, ACCUMULATED DEFICIT, COST OF TREASURY
STOCK, AND ACCUMULATED OTHER COMPREHENSIVE INCOME.
<F5>CONSISTS OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, RESTRUCTURING AND REORGANIZATION CHARGES
AND OTHER OPERATING EXPENSES.
</FN>


</TABLE>
EBSA-2010-0050-DRAFT-0808.html[7/21/2015 2:45:00 PM]

PUBLIC SUBMISSION

As of: July 16, 2015

Received: July 08, 2015

Status: Pending_Post

Tracking No. 1jz-8jvb-5rzq

Comments Due: July 21, 2015

Submission Type: Web

Docket: EBSA-2010-0050

Definition of the Term ‘‘Fiduciary’’; Conflict of Interest Rule—Retirement Investment Advice; Notice of

 proposed rulemaking and withdrawal of previous proposed rule.

Comment On: EBSA-2010-0050-0205

Definition of Fiduciary; Conflict of Interest Rule-Retirement Investment Advice and Related Proposed

 Prohibited Transaction Exemptions; Hearing and Comment Period Extension

Document: EBSA-2010-0050-DRAFT-0808

Comment on FR Doc # 2015-14921

Submitter Information

Name: Gina L

General Comment

Please stay out of our finances. We are perfectly capable

Of handling our money. Mr. President you are starting to scare

Lots of people. Would you like anyone messing with your money?

Let me guess your excluded

Regards

Gina L
Tim Robertson

Sur-Com Technologies, LLC

6047 Childrens Home Bradford Road

Greenville, OH 45331

I formally petition the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for exemption from the following specific sections for which SurCom Technologies, LLC is seeking an exemption:

IN THE MATTER OF PETITION, SUR-COM TECHNOLOGIES, LLC IS SEEKING EXEMPTION RELIEF FROM THE REQUIREMENTS 

OF TITLE 14 OF THE CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS SECTIONS 61.113(a) AND (b), AND 91.7(a), 91.121, 91.151(b), 

91.405(a), 91.409(a)(1) AND (a)(2)M AND 91.417(a) AND (b) CONCERNING COMMERCIAL OPERATION OF DJI PAHNTOM 

3 AND DJI INSPIRE 1 UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS PURSUANT TO SECTION 333 OF THE FAA MODERNIZATION AND 

REFORM ACT OF 2012 (PUBLIC LAW 112-95).

Extent of relief and our reason for seeking relief:

In order to use an Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) for commercial use. We are seeking this exemption in order to 

legally and safely conduct business and comply with all federal regulations and standards put forth by the FAA while 

operating unmanned aircraft systems. 

Benefits to the public from exemption:

Granting the exemption for Sur-Com Technologies would allow for efficient, legal, economical, and safe operation of the 

unmanned aircraft for AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY, AERIAL VIDEO, SPECIAL COORDINATED EVENTS, LAND SURVEILLANCE, 

REAL ESTATE, COMMERCIAL INSPECTIONS, LAND MANAGEMENT, WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT, AGRICULTURAL, 

SEARCH AND RESCUE, TELEVISION AND VIDEO BROADCASTS.

Reason Exemption would not adversely affect safety, or how the exemption would provide a level of safety at least equal to 

the existing rule:

Enhanced safety will be achieved by using an unmanned aircraft (UA) with and will carrying no passengers or crew, 

rather than a manned aircraft of significantly greater proportions, carrying crew in addition to flammable fuel, gives 

good cause to find that the UAS operation enabled by this exemption is safer and in the public interest.

During operation of the unmanned aircraft the operator(s) will adhere to all guidelines set forth by the FAA 

including keeping the ceiling of operation at or under 400 feet, proper UAV training, proper preflight inspections, 

avoidance of manned aircraft, recognizing no fly zones, and preplanning all commercial uses to ensure efficient and safe 

use.

Summary for publish in the Federal Registry:

1. SEEKING RELIEF FROM THE REQUIREMENTS OF TITLE 14 OF THE CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS SECTIONS 

61.113(a) AND (b), AND 91.7(a), 91.121, 91.151(b), 91.405(a), 91.409(a)(1) AND (a)(2)M AND 91.417(a) AND (b) 

CONCERNING COMMERCIAL OPERATION OF DJI PAHNTOM 3 AND DJI INSPIRE 1 UNMANNED AIRCRAFT 

SYSTEMS PURSUANT TO SECTION 333 OF THE FAA MODERNIZATION AND REFORM ACT OF 2012 

(PUBLIC LAW 112-95).

2. SUR-COM TECHNOLOGIES, LLC IS SEEKING EXEMPTION IN ORDER TO USE UNMANNED AIRCRAFT FOR 

COMMERCIAL USE.

Submitted on July 14, 2015 by:

Tim Robertson

Sur-Com Technologies, LLC

6047 Childrens Home Bradford Road

Greenville, OH 45331

tim@surcomtech.com

www.surcomtech.com
October 20, 2010 page of 

INITIAL REVIEW EXPOSURE REPORT (IRExR) 

 Chemical ID: P-09-0480 Reviewer: Sherer/BC 

 

 

Results Table: Dose, Concentration, and Days Exceeded Results Summary 

Exposure Scenario1 Water Landfill Stack Air Fugitive Air 

Drinking Water Fish Ingestion 

ADR LADD ADR LADD 7Q104 

CC = 100 

PDM 

Days 

Exceede

d 

LADD ADR LADD ADR LADD 

Release 

activity(ies)2; 

exposure 

calculation(s)3 

mg/kg/day mg/kg/day mg/kg/day mg/kg/day μg/l # Days mg/kg/day mg/kg/day mg/kg/day mg/kg/day mg/kg/day 

Use 2: Max ADR 

Use 2: Max LADD 

1 Exposure scenario titles consist of release activity followed by exposure calculation abbreviation. 

2 Release activities are from engineering report's Manufacturing (Mfg), Processing (Proc) and Use release 

activity labels. 

 Multiple release activities are combined in one exposure scenario if their releases occur at same location. 

3 Exposure calculations are Acute Dose Rate (ADR), Lifetime Average Daily Dose (LADD), and 

Probabilistic Dilution 

 Model (PDM). There may be one, two, or all three exposure calculations per exposure scenario. 

 CC is the aquatic concentration of concern. 

4 This column displays concentration values for the 7Q10 streamflow, which is defined as the average daily 

streamflow 

 of the seven consecutive days of lowest flow within a ten year period. 

Remarks: 

7

EPA SANITIZED Page 1 of 7
October 20, 2010 page of 

 INITIAL REVIEW EXPOSURE REPORT 

Chemical ID: P-09-0480 Assessor: Sherer/BC 

ENVIRONMENTAL RELEASES 

 Scenario#:1 Number of Release Sites: 

 Release Activity: Use 2: Max ADR 

 Release Description: WATER LANDFILL 

Non-sludge/Sludge 

STACK FUGITIVE 

Total Releases: 

 (kg/yr) (kg/yr) (kg/yr) (kg/yr) 

 

 Non-sludge/Sludge 

Release Days/yr: 

Per Site Release: 

 (kg/site/day) (kg/site/day) (kg/site/day) (kg/site/day) 

Remarks: 

EPA SANITIZED Page 2 of 7
October 20, 2010 page of 

INITIAL REVIEW EXPOSURE REPORT 

Chemical ID: P-09-0480 

EPA SANITIZED Page 3 of 7
October 20, 2010 page of 

EPA SANITIZED Page 4 of 7
October 20, 2010 page of 

 INITIAL REVIEW EXPOSURE REPORT 

Chemical ID: P-09-0480 Assessor: Sherer/BC 

ENVIRONMENTAL RELEASES 

 Scenario#:2 Number of Release Sites 

 Release Activity: Use 2: Max LADD 

 Release Description: WATER LANDFILL 

Non-sludge/Sludge 

STACK FUGITIVE 

Total Releases: 

 (kg/yr) (kg/yr) (kg/yr) (kg/yr) 

 

 Non-sludge/Sludge 

Release Days/yr: 

Per Site Release: 

 (kg/site/day) (kg/site/day) (kg/site/day) (kg/site/day) 

Remarks: 

EPA SANITIZED Page 5 of 7
October 20, 2010 page of 

INITIAL REVIEW EXPOSURE REPORT 

Chemical ID: P-09-0480 

EPA SANITIZED Page 6 of 7
October 20, 2010 page of 

EPA SANITIZED Page 7 of 7
EBSA-2010-0050-DRAFT-1284.html[7/22/2015 9:54:17 PM]

PUBLIC SUBMISSION

As of: July 16, 2015

Received: July 08, 2015

Status: Pending_Post

Tracking No. 1jz-8jve-txsm

Comments Due: July 21, 2015

Submission Type: Web

Docket: EBSA-2010-0050

Definition of the Term ‘‘Fiduciary’’; Conflict of Interest Rule—Retirement Investment Advice; Notice of

 proposed rulemaking and withdrawal of previous proposed rule.

Comment On: EBSA-2010-0050-0205

Definition of Fiduciary; Conflict of Interest Rule-Retirement Investment Advice and Related Proposed

 Prohibited Transaction Exemptions; Hearing and Comment Period Extension

Document: EBSA-2010-0050-DRAFT-1284

Comment on FR Doc # 2015-14921

Submitter Information

Name: anonymous anonymous

General Comment

I can plan for my own retirement!!
§ 23.1 What are the objectives of this part? This part seeks to achieve several objectives: ( a ) To ensure nondiscrimination in the award and administration of opportunities for concessions by airports receiving DOT financial assistance;
( b ) To create a level playing field on which ACDBEs can compete fairly for opportunities for concessions;
( c ) To ensure that the Department's ACDBE program is narrowly tailored in accordance with applicable law;
( d ) To ensure that only firms that fully meet this part's eligibility standards are permitted to participate as ACDBEs;
( e ) To help remove barriers to the participation of ACDBEs in opportunities for concessions at airports receiving DOT financial assistance;
( f ) To promote the use of ACDBEs in all types of concessions activities at airports receiving DOT financial assistance;
( g ) To assist the development of firms that can compete successfully in the marketplace outside the ACDBE program; and
( h ) To provide appropriate flexibility to airports receiving DOT financial assistance in establishing and providing opportunities for ACDBEs.
[70 FR 14508, Mar. 22, 2005, as amended at 89 FR 24956, Apr. 9, 2024]
EXHIBIT 99.1


Office of the Chief Accountant
Securities and Exchange Commission
450 Fifth Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20549

April 15, 2002

Dear Sir or Madam:

Arthur Andersen LLP has represented to Chief Consolidated Mining Company that
the audit completed as of December 31, 2001 and for the fiscal year then ended
was subject to its quality control system for the United States accounting and
audit practice. Arthur Andersen LLP has provided assurance to Chief Consolidated
Mining Company that the audit was conducted in compliance with professional
standards, with the appropriate continuity of personnel working on the audit and
that national office consultation was available. Personnel at foreign affiliates
of Arthur Andersen LLP were not relevant to this audit.

Sincerely,

/s/ John E. Henderson

John E. Henderson
Treasurer and Secretary
over financial reporting that occurred during the Registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter(the Registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting;5. The Registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the Registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of the Registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe Registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information;and(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who havea significant role in the Registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.Date: November 12, 2009         */s/ Robert R. Jones, III*   Robert R. Jones, III   President and CEO
#### § 212.5 Filing.

Each State agency desiring to conduct investigative and surveillance activities must submit to the Associate Administrator for Safety, Federal Railroad Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, the documentation which contains the information prescribed by §§ 212.105 and 212.107.

[47 FR 41051, Sept. 16, 1982, as amended at 74 FR 25172, May 27, 2009]
#### § 236.12 Spring switch signal protection; where required.

Signal protection shall be provided for facing and trailing movements through spring switch within interlocking limits and through spring switch installed in automatic block signal, train stop, train control or cab signal territory where train movements over the switch are made at a speed exceeding 20 miles per hour, except that signal protection shall be required only with the current of traffic on track signaled for movement in only one direction.

Note:

Does not apply to spring switch installed prior to October 1, 1950 in automatic block signal, automatic train stop, or automatic train control territory.

[[49 FR 3383](https://www.federalregister.gov/citation/49-FR-3383), Jan. 26, 1984]
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

March 12, 2018

No. 04-18-00086-CV

IN RE MACONORI ENTERPRISES, LTD.

and Nolan Richardson, Individually

Original Mandamus Proceeding1

ORDER

Sitting: Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

Irene Rios, Justice

The Real Parties in Interest, Eloy Garcia and Rail Link International, Inc.'s Motion for 

Extension of Time to File Response to Relator's Petition for Writ of Mandamus is hereby 

GRANTED. Time is extended to April 19, 2018.

 PER CURIAM

ATTESTED TO: ________________________

 Keith E. Hottle

 Clerk of Court

 1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 2013CI09362, styled Macanori Enterprises, Ltd. and Nolan Richardson, 

Individually v. Rail Link International, Inc. and Eloy Garcia, Individually, pending in the 73rd Judicial District 

Court, Bexar County, Texas, the Honorable Rosie Alvarado presiding.
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 179 (Monday, September 17, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 52893]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-4570]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism; Notice of 
Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following 
meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and 
Alcoholism Initial Review Group, Health Services and Behavioral 
Research Review Subcommittee.
    Date: October 24-25, 2007.
    Time: 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: Doubletree Hotel, Executive Meeting Center--Bethesda, 
8120 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814.
    Contact Person: Lorraine Gunzerath, PhD, MBA, Scientific Review 
Administrator, National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, 
Office of Extramural Activities, Extramural Project Review Branch, 
5635 Fishers lane, Room 3043, Bethesda, MD 20892-9304, 301-443-2369, 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#a3eac4d6cdd9c6d1c2e3cec2cacf8dcdcacb8dc4ccd5"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="125b75677c68776073527f737b7e3c7c7b7a3c757d64">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.271, 
Alcohol Research Career Development Awards for Scientists and 
Clinicians; 93.272, Alcohol National Research Awards for Research 
Training; 93.273, Alcohol Research Programs; 93.891, Alcohol 
Research Center Grants, National Institutes of Health, HHS).

    Dated: September 7, 2007.
Jennifer Spaeth,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 07-4570 Filed 9-14-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 22-0715

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

 v.

JOSHUA RODNEY MEECH,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, 

and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including February 2, 2024, within which to prepare, file, 

and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

December 26 2023

12/26/2023

Case Number: DA 22-0715
#### § 29.928 What is the Department's burden of proof for a termination decision?

The Department must demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence the validity of the grounds for the termination.