alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[No. 2447.]

#### Helgert v. Stewart.

1. Replevin — Burden of Proof.

In an action of replevin against a 'Sheriff to recover property taken by execution from the possession of the execution debtor, by one claiming to have purchased from the debtor, the burden of proof is upon plaintiff to show the validity of his purchase against the execution creditors.

2. Sales — Delivery—Notice—Fraud.

A sale of personal property in the possession of the vendor capable of manual delivery, not accompanied by delivery and followed by actual and continued change of possession, is fraudulent and void as to creditors of the vendor, notwithstanding such creditors had actual notice of the sale.

*Appeal from the County Court of Teller County.*

*203Mr. Scott-Ashton, for appellant.

Mr. J. Grattan O’Bryan, for appellee.,

Gunter, J.

Replevin by vendee — appellant—to recover from tb'e sheriff personal property held under execution against vendor. Judgment of nonsuit. Therefrom this appeal.

'There was evidence tending to show a sale, in April, to appellant of the personal property involved. At the time of the sale this property, used in the operation of a butcher shop, and capable of manual delivery, was in actual possession of the vendor. The following June it was levied upon under a writ ofr execution issued upon a judgment against the vendor. It was essential to the case in replevin by vendee— appellant — who took title through such sale, to show it valid against the execution creditor of the vendor. Requisite to the validity of the sale was a delivery followed by an actual and continued change of' possession of the property sold. — Mills’ Ann. Stats., vol. 1, sec. 2027.

“Nor can a case be taken out of the statute, nor can the statute be satisfied by proving that the sale was *bona fide*and no fraud intended. Unless the purchaser can show such a substantial compliance with its terms as affords visible notice to.the community of. a change in the ownership of the goods, the:-transaction constitutes a fraud in- law, and -.as such must be held to be void as to creditors and subsequent pnrchasers in good faith of the *vendor.”*— Bassinger *v. Spangler,*9 Colo. 175, 179.

No facts were shown evidencing the required change of possession.

If we assume there was evidence tending to' show that the judgment creditor- knew of the alleged sale *204to appellant when the execution was levied it would not affect the question before us.

“Whether the creditor has knowledge of such sale or not is of no *consequence.”*— Bassinger *v. Spangler, supra,*186.

Appellant having shown no title to the property involved as against appellee, the sheriff, was properly nonsuited.

Judgment affirmed. *Affirmed.*
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.3
                                                                    PAGE 1 OF 1





           CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PETROLEUM ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS



           As independent petroleum engineers and geologists, Netherland,
Sewell & Associates, Inc. hereby consents to (i) the reference to our firm as
experts and (ii) the summarization of our report in the Form 10-K for the
fiscal year ended December 31, 1995 of Global Natural Resources Inc. (the
"Company") as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
"Commission") which 10-K has been incorporated by reference in the Company's
Registration Statement on Form S-8 (Registration No. 33-62106) and the
Company's Registration Statement on Form S-8 (Registration No. 33-31537).





                                        NETHERLAND, SEWELL & ASSOCIATES, INC.





                                        By: /s/ Frederic D. Sewell
                                            ----------------------------------
                                            Frederic D. Sewell
                                            President

Dallas, Texas
March 14, 1996
i i i i i i



### MEMORANDUM OPI NIO N No. 04-09-00747- CV Rufus ODEM , Appellant

v. DELOIT TE & TOUCHE , LLP , J ohn Morg an, & Kathie Schwe rdtfeg er, Appellee s Fr om the 37th J udicial District Court, Be x ar County , Texas

Trial Court No. 2007-CI -15162 Honora ble David A. B erc helmann Jr., J udg e Presiding PER C URI AM Sitt ing: Catherine Stone, Chief Justice

Kar en Ang elini, J ustice Marialy n Ba rnar d, J ustice Deliver ed and F iled: September 1, 2010 MOTI ON TO D I SMI SS GR ANTED; APPEAL DI SMI SSED I

N PART Appellant Rufus Odem filed a motion to dismiss this appea l as to appellee J ohn Morg an. We g rant the motion and hold that the appea l as to appellee J ohn Morg an is dismiss ed. See T E X . R. A P P . P. 42.1(a) (1). The appea l rema ins pending as to appellee s Deloitte & Touche , L L P , an d Ka t hie Sch we rd t fe ger . Any costs incurre d by appellee J ohn Morg an are assessed ag ainst appellant. See T E X . R. A P P . P. 42.1(d)(a bsent ag ree ment of the pa rties, costs ar e taxed ag ainst appellant). PER C URI AM
#### Henry E. Gropp, Respondent, *v.*The Great Atlantic and Pacific Tea Company, Appellant.

*Gropp*v. *Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.,*141 App. Div. 372, reversed.

(Argued May 14, 1912;

decided June 4, 1912.)

Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered December 12,1910, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict in an action to recover for personal injuries alleged to have been sustained through the negligence of defendant.

*William Hazen Peck*and *John W. Crandall*for appellant.

*Don P. Almy*for respondent.

Judgment reversed and new trial granted, costs to abide event, on the ground that the amendment of the complaint allowed by the trial court introduced a new and different cause of action, as to which this court concurs in the dissenting opinion of Ingraham, P. J., below; no opinion.

Concur: Cullen, Ch. J., Haight, Werner, Willard Bartlett, Hisoock, Chase and Collin, JJ.
From: Merian Soto

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: accept IOM’s recommendations and rejecting the proposed religious refusal exemption provisions

Date: Wednesday, August 17, 2011 3:58:34 PM

I join with the American Association of University Women (AAUW) in asking you

to accept the recommendations of the Institute of Medicine as pertain to

coverage of preventive care under the new health care law, and to reject any

exemptions for “religious employers.” These preventive services are a critical

element of the new law and would provide countless women better access to

necessary health care.

While AAUW believes that “religious refusal” exemptions unjustly deny women

access to contraceptive services, others, driven by an ideological distaste for all

contraceptive services, are pushing the government to make exemptions even

larger. Indeed, some groups are pushing for the exemption to apply to

religiously-run health providers, so hospitals with religious affiliations would be

exempt from the coverage requirement, even though they employ people of all

faiths and ideologies. If granted, this larger exemption would deny access to

thousands of women just because of where they work.

I urge you to ensure women have access to quality preventive care by accepting

IOM’s recommendations and rejecting the proposed religious refusal exemption

provisions.
### BEFOR E TH E DEPARTMEN TO F TRANSPORTATIO N WASHINGTON , D.C . Agreement s Adopte d b yth e Traffi c Conference s o f th e Internationa l Ai r Transpor t Associatio n 

## OST-2011 - O^/ S

APPLICATIO N FO R APPROVA L O F AGREEMENT S

B YTH E INTERNATIONA L AI R TRANSPOR TASSOCIATIO N JAT A AGREEMEN T APPROVE D & IMMUNIZE D / i DOCKETOST - / /

• ^^1 ^ ACTIO N DAT E/^ ^ ^^ /

'^-^I f Tlii ? approval and.p,ran

r o f antitrus t immunity i s subject , wher e applicable , t o condition s previousl) ' im.wsed . Tiii s actio n i s effectiv e after 7 day s unles s apetitio n i s file dunder 1 4 CF R385.3 0 o r

arevie w i s undertake n o n ih e Department' s own motion , in view o f th e agreement' s noncontrovei^ial natur e an dth e availability o f th e abov e pMicedure , the^fl-dg y EeHOtCcH ^ cf R303.4 2 i s waived .



### 3 0 Novembe r201 1 Communication s wit h respec t t o thi s documen t shoul d b e sen t t o Dougla s E . Lavi n Regiona l Vic e Presiden t - Nort h Americ a Internationa l Ai rTranspor t Associatio n 177 6 K.St . N.W . #12 * Floo r Washingto n D C 2000 6
EXHIBIT
32

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 Journal
Register Company (the "Company") on Form 10-Q
for the period ended March 27, 2005, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), we, Robert M. Jelenic, Chairman,
President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Jean B.
Clifton, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, each certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 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.

/s/ Robert M. Jelenic
 Robert M.
Jelenic Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer May
6, 2005

/s/ Jean B. Clifton
 Jean B.
Clifton Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
May 6, 2005

This certification accompanies the Report
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall
not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the "Exchange
Act"), or incorporated by reference in any filing under
the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange Act, except as
may be expressly set forth by specific reference in any such filing. A
signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or
other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the
signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of
this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to
Journal Register Company and will be retained by Journal Register
Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
staff upon request.

---
Here's how you know
 **Official websites use .mil** .mil
 **Secure .mil websites use HTTPS** lock () https://


Skip to main content (Press Enter).
 Toggle navigation
            
            U.S. Central Command
                CENTCOM
        Search
                    Search CENTCOM:
                        Search
                Search CENTCOM:
                    Search
    Home

    ABOUT US
    
        COMMAND PRIORITIES

    LEADERSHIP

    COMPONENT COMMANDS

    HISTORY

    POSTURE STATEMENT

    CENTCOM AOR
    
        CENTCOM COALITION

    OPERATIONS AND EXERCISES
    
        USMTM

    CONTACT
    
        OPERATIONAL CONTRACT SUPPORT

    COMMUNITY RELATIONS

    THEATRE MEDICAL CLEARANCE

    INNOVATION VENDOR PORTAL

    MILITARY MEMBER INNOVATION PORTAL

    MEDIA
    
        SOCIAL MEDIA

    NEWS ARTICLES

    PRESS RELEASES

    STATEMENTS

    IMAGERY

    VIDEOS

    TRANSCRIPTS

    VISITORS AND PERSONNEL
    
        FAMILY CENTER

    FAMILY READINESS

    CENTCOM WEBMAIL

    SOCIAL MEDIA SECURITY

    ACCOUNTABILITY

    EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS

    USCENTCOM UNCLASSIFIED REGULATIONS

    FOIA LIBRARY

    INNOVATION OASIS

    WELCOME GUIDE  Search
 Search
 All Images All ImagesCommunity RelationsOtherPreviousCommanders
 Upload Date Upload DatePhoto DateTitle
  Share
  
 Small () Medium () Full Size (0.8 MB)
 
 USCENTCOM Barksdale Air Force Base U.S. Central Command CENTCOM B-52H Gen. Frank McKenzie
 Photo Gallery
 About UsCommand PrioritiesLeadershipComponent
   CommandsHistoryPosture Statement
   Area of
   ResponsibilityCENTCOM Coalition
   Operations And
   ExercisesOperation Inherent
   ResolveResolute Support
   MediaSocial MediaNews ArticlesPress ReleasesVideo And Imagery
   Visitors And
   PersonnelFamily ReadinessCENTCOM WebmailSocial MediaSecurityAccountabilityEmergency
   Preparedness
   ContactCommunity Relations
                    Stay Connected
                
                Privacy & Security  Inspector General  FOIA  Privacy Act
            

Hosted by Defense Media Activity - WEB.mil
From: harold.way@ahmchealth.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:26:59 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Harold Way

Chino Hills, CA 91709
Exhibit 23

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

We
hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-3 (File Nos. 33-61853, 333-51790, 333-31548,
333-63802, 333-100727, 333-109179) and in the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (File Nos. 33-58359, 33-60437, 333-10003,
333-33249, 333-83677, 333-51906, 33-30007, 33-68208, 333-33265, 333-10005, 333-33251,
333-83669, 333-33291, 33-21241, 333-55126, 333-42371, 333-81275, 333-87967, 333-81277,
333-83673, 333-64103, 333-83681, 333-51872, 333-52202, 333-66130, 333-70310, 333-76762,
333-76766, 333-76768, 333-76770, 333-100722, 333-90514, 333-90512, 333-90510, 333-64095, 333-106691,
333-106692, 333-111314) of our report dated February 7, 2004, except for Notes C and P, as to which the date is March 11, 2004, relating to the consolidated financial statements and financial
statement schedule of Genzyme Corporation and of our report dated January 27, 2004 relating to the financial statements of BioMarin/Genzyme LLC, which appear in this Form 10-K.

/s/
PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

Boston,
Massachusetts
March 15, 2004

---

QuickLinks
Exhibit








Exhibit 10.2
FORM OF EXTENSION OF TERM
OF EMPLOYMENT PERIOD
MEMORANDUM




		
	To:
	     


		
	From:
	Patricia Smith Lawler,


EVP/Human Resources Division
		
	Re:
	Extension of Employment Period


		
	Date:
	May ___, 2016


The Board of Directors of BankFinancial, F.S.B. (the “Bank”) and its Human Resources Committee have completed their annual review of your Employment Agreement with the Bank dated                      and have determined to offer to amend your Employment Agreement to extend the term of the “Employment Period” as referenced in Section 2(a) of your Employment Agreement to                     .
If you are agreeable to amending your Employment Agreement as provided above, please sign and date this document in the space indicated below and return it to me by no later than _________________. 
If you do not sign and return this document to me by such date, the term of your Employment Period and the Anniversary Date applicable to your Employment Agreement will remain unchanged. 


		
	Name:
	     




		
	Signature:
	     




		
	Date:
## The survey instrument will collect limited demographic information, numeric rating to satisfaction

- related questions, and an open

- ended response. 1. Would you describe yourself as a ____________? a. Current student b. Prospective/future student c. Former student d. Parent or guardian of student e. Congressional office f. Other 2. Was the response you received clear and eas y to understand? a. Yes b. No 3. Was the response you received helpful? a. Very helpful b. Somewhat helpful c. Not helpful 4. Were y ou satisfied that all of your conc erns were addressed in the response y ou received? a. Very satisfied b. Somewhat satisfied c. Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied d. Somewhat dissatisfied e. Very dissatisfied 5. How long did it take for you to receive your response? a. 1 to 2 weeks b. 3 to 4 weeks c. 5 to 6 week s d. More then 6 weeks 6. Where did you find our contact information? a. Department of Education Web site b. Department of Education Publication c. School Web site d. School publication or letter e. Federal Student Aid Information Center (calling 1

- 800
- 4
- FED
- AI D) f. Other 7. What could the Federal Student Aid Correspondence Unit do to improve its service? a. Open
- ended**Paperwork Burden Statement** According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, no persons are required to respond to a collection of information unless such collection displays a valid OMB control number. The valid OMB control number for this information collection is 1845
- 0045
. The time required to complete this information collection is estimated to average one minute per response, including the time to review instr uctions, search existing data resources, gather the data needed, and complete and review the information collection. **If you**  **have any**  **comments concerning**  **the accuracy**  **of the**  **tim e**  **estimate(s) or**  **suggestions for**  **im proving**  **this form** **, please**  **wr ite**  **to:** U.S. De partment of Education, Washington, D.C. 20202
- 4700. **If you**  **have comments**  **or concerns**  **regarding the**  **status of**  **your individual**  **submission of**  **this form** **, wr** **ite directly**  **to:** Kwaku Appiah, U.S. Department of Education, UCP 31F4, Washington, D.C. 20202.
107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 1029

AN ACT

To clarify the authority of the Department of Housing and

Urban Development with respect to the use of fees during fiscal year 2001 for the manufactured housing program.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

S 1029 ES

1 SECTION 1. MANUFACTURED HOUSING.

2 (a) AVAILABILITY OF FEES.—Notwithstanding sec3 tion 620(e)(2) of the National Manufactured Housing

4 Construction and Safety Standards Act of 1974 (42

5 U.S.C. 5419(e)(2)), any fees collected under that Act, in6 cluding any fees collected before the date of enactment of

7 the American Homeownership and Economic Opportunity

8 Act of 2000 (12 U.S.C. 1701 note) and remaining unobli9 gated on the date of enactment of this Act, shall be avail10 able for expenditure to offset the expenses incurred by the

11 Secretary under the National Manufactured Housing Con12 struction and Safety Standards Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C.

13 5401 et seq.), otherwise in accordance with section 620

14 of that Act.

15 (b) DURATION.—The authority for the use of fees

16 provided for in subsection (a) shall remain in effect during

17 the period beginning in fiscal year 2001 and ending on

18 the effective date of the first appropriations Act referred

19 to in section 620(e)(2) of the National Manufactured

20 Housing Construction and Safety Standards Act of 1974
3

S 1029 ES

1 (42 U.S.C. 5419(e)(2)) that is enacted with respect to a

2 fiscal year after fiscal year 2001.

Passed the Senate June 13, 2001.

Attest:

Secretary.

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 1029

AN ACT

To clarify the authority of the Department of

Housing and Urban Development with respect tothe use of fees during fiscal year 2001 for themanufactured housing program.
1 Local Rule 47.5 provides: "The publication of opinions that

have no precedential value and merely decide particular cases on

the basis of well-settled principles of law imposes needless

expense on the public and burdens on the legal profession."

Pursuant to that Rule, the Court has determined that this opinion

should not be published.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

for the Fifth Circuit

_____________________________________

No. 95-10356

Summary Calendar

_____________________________________

MIGUEL MEDELLIN,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

VERSUS

ROBERT SHAW; JUDI SHEERIN STONEDALE, Dr.; 

JOHN DOE, Safety Inspector,

Defendants-Appellees.

______________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

(3:95 CV 13 P)

______________________________________________________

July 28, 1995

Before DUHÉ, WIENER and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:1

Appellant Medellin, an inmate of the Texas State Prison

system, brought this civil rights suit against officials of the

place of his incarceration alleging deliberate indifference to his

serious medical needs and to his safety. Upon the recommendation

of the magistrate judge the district court dismissed the pro se

complaint as frivolous. We affirm.
2

Appellant's complaints concerning the medical treatment he

received after he was injured in a slip and fall accident leaving

the shower allege no more than negligence which is not actionable

under § 1983. He has asserted no state tort cause of action.

As to his safety, Appellant alleges that he fell due to a

slippery condition on the shower floor and that this condition was

known to some unnamed safety inspector because some unstated number

of unnamed inmates had fallen in the same spot and been injured.

These allegations do not state a claim of deliberate indifference.

A prison official acts with deliberate indifference under the

Eighth Amendment "only if he knows that [an] inmate[] face[s] a

substantial risk of serious harm and [ he] disregards that risk by

failing to take reasonable measures to abate it." Farmer v.

Brennan, 114 S. Ct. 1970, 1984 (1994). Appellant's allegations

lack the particularity necessary to plead deliberate indifference.

AFFIRMED.
EXHIBIT 23

               CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

To the Board of Directors
Hills Bancorporation

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference of our report dated February
16, 2001 with respect to the financial  statements of Hills  Bancorporation  and
subsidiaries  included in the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Hills Bancorporation
for the year ended  December 31, 2000 in Registrant  Statement  No.  33-73606 on
Form S-8 filed  December 30, 1993 and  Registrant  Statement No. 33-2657 on Form
S-8 filed January 10, 1986.

                                                      /s/McGLADREY & PULLEN, LLP


Iowa City, Iowa
March 27, 2001