alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
- 257 - Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets 308 Nebraska Reports DICK v . KOSKI PROF. GROUP Cite as 308 Neb. 257

Robert Dick, appellee and cross-appellant, v. Koski Professional Group, P.C., third-party plaintiff,

appellant and cross-appellee, and Bland &

Associates, P.C., third-party defendant, appellee and cross-appellant. ___ N.W.2d ___ Filed January 29, 2021. No. S-19-132.

supplemental opinion Appeal from the District Court for Douglas County: J Russell Derr , Judge. Former opinion modified. Motion for rehearing overruled. Robert M. Slovek and Dwyer Arce, of Kutak Rock, L.L.P., for appellant. Aaron A. Clark, Ruth A. Horvatich, and Cody E. Brookhouser-Sisney, of McGrath, North, Mullin & Kratz, P.C., L.L.O., for appellee Robert Dick. Ryan M. Kunhart and Jeffrey J. Blumel, of Dvorak Law Group, L.L.C., for appellee Bland & Associates, P.C.
Heavican , C.J., Cassel , Stacy , Funke , Papik , and Freudenberg , JJ.
Per Curiam

. This case is before us on a motion for rehearing filed by the appellant, Koski Professional Group, P.C. (KPG), Nebraska Supreme Court Online Library www.nebraska.gov/apps-courts-epub/ 04/09/2021 08:09 AM CDT- 258 - Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets 308 Nebraska Reports DICK v . KOSKI PROF. GROUP Cite as 308 Neb. 257 concerning our opinion in Dick v. Koski Prof. Group , 307 Neb. 599, 950 N.W.2d 321 (2020). We find no substantive merit to KPG’s motion and overrule it, but modify the opinion as follows: (1) In the background section, under the subheading

“ Peremptory Challenges ,” we withdraw the last sentence of the sole paragraph and substitute the following: “Other than a marked copy of a jury roster included in a supplemental tran

script, the jury selection process is not otherwise reflected in the appellate record.” (2) In the analysis section, under the subheading “ Peremptory Challenges ( Assignment of Error No . 1),” we withdraw the seventh paragraph and substitute the following: We do not decide that question here. While KPG has offered a marked copy of a jury roster in a supplemental transcript, the markings on that roster do not match the roster’s legend sufficiently to support KPG’s claim that it exhausted all its peremptory challenges. As such, the record is insufficient to support its assignment of error even if we found merit to KPG’s legal premise. The remainder of the opinion shall remain unmodified. Former opinion modified. Motion for rehearing overruled. Miller-Lerman , J., not participating.
April 3, 1957

No. 60608.

#### Paramount Import Export Co. and Paramount Import Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

protests 229116-K and 229998-K.

C. D. 1849. Plaintiffs’ application for rehearing denied.
EXHIBIT 99.2



[ex992002.jpg]





COMPENSATION COMMITTEE CHARTER



Introduction and Purpose



The Compensation Committee (the Committee) shall be responsible for setting and administering the policies and programs that govern both annual compensation and stock option programs for the executive officers and directors of the Company.  The Committee shall also be responsible for providing oversight with regard to the Companys various programs of compensation, including all incentive plans, stock option plans and stock purchase plans.



Composition and Membership



The Committee shall be composed entirely of Outside Directors who also meet the test for independence as set forth by the rules and regulations of the TSX Venture Exchange, the NADAQ Stock Market and the Securities and Exchange Commission.



Meetings



The Committee shall meet in person, telephonically or electronically at least twice during the year for purposes of performing its duties.



Responsibilities and Duties



The purpose and duties of the Committee shall include, but not be limited to, the following:



•

To review and report to the Board on the Companys programs for attracting, retaining and promoting executives and for developing future senior management;



•

To review and make recommendations to the Board regarding compensation for the chief executive officer, other executive level officers and directors;



•

To establish the process for the Board to evaluate the performance of the chief executive officer and other corporate officers;



•

To review appropriate performance targets, participation and level of awards for incentive award plans;



•

To review, approve and report to the Board concerning administration of compensation plans and compensation for executives at specified salary grade levels and monitor the Companys benefit plans;



•

To review, determine and recommend to the Board appropriate compensation for directors;



•

To produce, review and approve reports of the Committee required by the rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission, NASDAQ Stock Exchange and the TSX Venture Exchange;



•

To review and assess the adequacy of and update, if necessary, this Compensation Committee Charter annually;



•

To request and review such reports from management as it may require in carrying out its assigned responsibilities and advise the full Board of Directors as to the Committees oversight functions; and



•

To undertake from time to time such additional activities within the scope of the Committees primary functions as it may deem appropriate.



Public Disclosure and Website Publication



This Charter shall be included on the Companys website.  The Companys annual report to shareholders will state that this Charter is available on the Companys website and will be available upon request to the Companys Corporate Secretary.



Adoption



The Board of Directors of the Company has adopted this charter on the 22nd day of June, 2004.
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 171 Engrossed in House (EH)]

  1st Session

                            H. CON. RES. 171

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Congratulating the American Public Transit Association for 25 years of 
      commendable service to the transit industry and the Nation.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. CON. RES. 171

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Whereas public transportation is a fundamental public service and an integral 
        component of the Nation's surface transportation infrastructure;
Whereas public transportation service results in productive jobs for the 
        Nation's workers and provides broad support for business and economic 
        growth;
Whereas public transportation provides safe and efficient mobility for millions 
        of people in the United States each day;
Whereas the American Public Transit Association was established in 1974 to 
        promote and advance knowledge in all matters relating to public 
        transportation; and
Whereas, during a period of remarkable resurgence in public transportation, the 
        American Public Transit Association has provided a quarter of a century 
        of service to the Nation as the professional association representing 
        the transit industry: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That the Congress congratulates the American Public Transit Association 
for 25 years of commendable service to the transit industry and the 
Nation.

            Passed the House of Representatives October 4, 1999.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
```
----

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

| (2) | The      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the      Company. |
|-----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | By:                                                                                                                            | /s/ Chad C. Braun |
|--------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------|
|   | Name:      Chad C. Braun                                                                                                       |
|   | Title:      Chief Financial Officer of AmREIT Monthly Income & Growth III      Corporation, General Partner of the Company |
|   |                                                                                                                           |
|   | Date:      March 31, 2008                                                                                                      |

----
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

ORDER

Page - 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT TACOMA

LARRY LLOYD,

Plaintiff,

v.

C/O PAYNE, et al., 

Defendants.

Case No. C06-5365 RJB/KLS

ORDER GRANTING

APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN

FORMA PAUPERIS AND

DIRECTING INSTITUTION TO

CALCULATE, COLLECT, AND

FORWARD PAYMENTS

The Court, having reviewed plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis, does hereby find

and ORDER. 

Plaintiff’s declaration indicates he is unable to afford the court’s filing fee or give security therefor. 

Accordingly, plaintiff’s application to proceed as a pauper is GRANTED. As set forth below, an initial

partial filing fee will be collected, and plaintiff is required to make monthly payments of 20 percent

of the preceding months income credited to his/her account until the full amount of the filing fee is

satisfied.

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915 and plaintiff’s approved application to proceed in forma pauperis,

the agency having custody of the above named plaintiff is directed to calculate an initial partial filing fee

equal to 20 percent of greater of -- the average monthly deposits to the prisoner’s account or the average

monthly balance in the prisoner’s account for the 6-month period immediately preceding the date of this

Order. The initial partial filing fee should be forwarded to the court clerk as soon as practicable.

Subsequently, if the prisoner’s account exceeds $10.00, each month the agency is directed to

collect and forward payments equal to 20 percent of the prisoner’s preceding month’s income credited to

Case 3:06-cv-05365-RJB Document 7 Filed 09/26/06 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

ORDER

Page - 2

the prisoner’s account. In the event that the monthly payment would reduce the prisoner’s account below

$10.00, the agency should collect and forward only that amount which would reduce the prisoner’s

account to the $10.00 level. Please note that this $10.00 limit does not apply to the initial partial filing fee

described above. Finally, the monthly payments should be collected and forwarded to the court until the

entire filing fee ($350.00) for this matter has been paid. 

The Clerk is directed to send plaintiff a copy of this Order and the General Order, and a copy of

this Order along with a copy of plaintiff’s Acknowledgement and Authorization portion of the IFP

application to the attention of the inmate account manager of Clallam Bay Corrections Center at Clallam

Bay, Washington.

DATED this 26th day of September, 2006.

A

Karen L. Strombom

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:06-cv-05365-RJB Document 7 Filed 09/26/06 Page 2 of 2
<PAGE>   1
 
   
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1
    
 
   
                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS
    
 
   
     We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Prospectus
constituting part of Amendment No. 1 to this Registration Statement on Form S-3
of our report dated February 2, 1998, which appears on page 23 of the 1997
Annual Report to Shareholders of Central Newspapers, Inc. ("the Company") which
is incorporated by reference in the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the
year ended December 28, 1997. We also consent to the incorporation by reference
of our report on the Financial Statement Schedule, which appears on page 17 of
such Annual Report on Form 10-K. We also consent to the references to us under
the headings "Experts" and "Selected Consolidated Financial Data" in such
Prospectus. However, it should be noted that PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP has not
prepared or certified such "Selected Consolidated Financial Data."
    
 
   
PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS LLP
    
 
   
PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
    
   
Phoenix, Arizona
    
   
December 7, 1998
Case No. 8,894.

#### In re McLELLAN.

[The case reported under above title in 6 Law Rep. 440, is the same as Case No. 17,887.]
1999

- Milk Production, 07.15.99 [ Text |   PDF ]  Milk Production, 06.15.99[ Text | PDF ]Milk Production, 05.17.99
[ Text |
 PDF ]
- Milk Production, 04.15.99 [ Text |   PDF ]  Milk Production, 03.16.99[ Text | PDF ]Milk Production, 02.16.99
[ Text |
 PDF ]
- Milk Production, 01.15.99 [ Text | PDF ]
Attachment 4
Depositor Certification

BANC OF AMERICA SECURITIES AUTO TRUST 2005-WF1

	William A. Glenn, certify that:

1.      I have reviewed the annual report on Form 10-K. and all Monthly Form
        8-K's containing Indenture Trustee's Certificates filed in respect of
        periods included in the year covered by this annual report, of the
        Banc of America Securities Auto Trust 2005-WF1;

2.	Based on my knowledge, the information in these reports, taken as a
        whole, does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or
        omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made,
        in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made,
        not misleading as of the last day of the period covered by this annual
        report;

3.	Based on my knowledge. the distribution or servicing information
        required to be provided to the Indenture Trustee by the Servicer under
        the Amended and Restated Servicing Agreement, dated as of
        July 7. 2005 (the "Agreement"). among Wells Fargo Bank. NA., as
        servicer (the "Servicer") and Bank of America, National Association
        ("BANA") inclusion in these reports is included in these reports;

4.	Based on my knowledge and upon the annual compliance statement
        included in the annual report on Form I 0-K and required to be
        delivered to U.S. Bank National Association, as indenture
        trustee (the "Indenture Trustee"), in accordance with the terms of the
        Agreement. and except as disclosed in the reports, the Servicer has
        fulfilled its obligations under the Agreement;

5.	The reports disclose all significant deficiencies relating to the
        Servicer's compliance with the minimum servicing standards based upon
        the report provided by an independent public accountant, after
        conducting a review in compliance with the Uniform Single Attestation
        Program for Mortgage Bankers or similar procedure. as set forth in
        the Agreement, that is included in these reports; and

6.	In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on
        information provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties:
        Wells Fargo Bank. N.A. and U.S. Bank National Association.

                                       BANC 0F AMERICA SECURITIES
                                       AUTO TRUST 2005-WF1
                                       By: BAS Securitization LLC. as Depositor
                                       of Banc of America Securities Auto Trust
	                               2005-WF1

                                              By: /s/ William A Glenn
                                              Name: William A. Glenn
                                              Title:  President
					      Date: March 15, 2006
[if !vml]>[endif]>
[if !vml]>[endif]>
Youhave reached the Federal Depository Library Program Electronic Collection(FDLP/EC) Archive. This archive assures ongoing access to publications in theFDLP/EC. Access to publications in the archive is available through GPO's suiteof cataloging and locator services, including the Catalog of U.S. GovernmentPublications (CGP).
**Title:****Compliance report as of ...
 
SuDoc Number:I 1.117/7:
Item Number:0603-B-12 (online)
CGP System Number:000648475
 
**Date
**Title
12/30/2013
Compliance Report as  of December 2013
12/30/2012
Compliance Report as  of December 2012
12/30/2011
Compliance Report as  of December 2011
12/30/2010
Compliance Report as  of December 2010
12/30/2009
Compliance Report as  of December 2009
12/30/2008
Compliance Report as  of December 2008
12/30/2007
Compliance Report as  of December 2007
12/30/2006
Compliance Report as  of December 2006
12/30/2005
Compliance Report as  of December 2005
06/29/2005
Compliance Report as of  June 2005
12/30/2004
Compliance Report as  of December 2004
06/29/2004
Compliance Report as of  June 2004
12/30/2003
Compliance Report as  of December 2003
06/29/2003
Compliance Report as of  June 2003
12/30/2002
Compliance Report as  of December 2002
06/29/2002
Compliance Report as of  June 2002
12/30/2001
Compliance Report as  of December 2001
06/29/2001
Compliance Report as of  June 2001
 
October 2, 2017
 
 ******
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
No. 1D 18

- 4234

_____________________________
A NTHONY R AY P EEK , Appellant,

v.

F LORIDA C OMMISSION ON O FFENDER R EVIEW , Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Leon County

. Kevin J. Carroll , Judge

. May 7, 2019

P ER C URIAM

.
A FFIRMED

.
W OLF , W ETHERELL , and M AKAR , JJ., concur

.

_____________________________
Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331

.

_____________________________2 Anthony Ray Peek, pro se
, Appellant.

Rana Wallace, General Counsel, Florida Commission on Offender Review, Tallahassee
, for Appellee.
2nd

A

March
#### James Opleton BRADLEY, Jr., Plaintiff—Appellant, v. NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; North Carolina Prisoner Legal Services, Incorporated, Defendants—Appellees.

No. 05-6105.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: July 14, 2005.

Decided: Aug. 16, 2005.

*161James Opleton Bradley, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Elizabeth F. Parsons, North Carolina Department of Justice, Raleigh, North Carolina; Michael Stephen Ham-den, North Carolina Prisoner Legal Services, Inc., Raleigh, North Carolina; Michael J. Reece, Woodruff, Reece & Fortner, Smithfield, North Carolina, for Appellees.

Before WILKINSON, LUTTIG, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM:

James Opleton Bradley, Jr., appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. *See Bradley v. North Carolina Dep’t of Corr.,*No. CA-04-44-5-FL (E.D.N.C. Dec. 9, 2004). 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*
<PAGE>   1



                                                                     EXHIBIT 11

         STATEMENT REGARDING COMPUTATION OF DILUTED EARNINGS PER SHARE

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                         THREE          THREE
                                         MONTHS         MONTHS
                                         ENDED          ENDED
                                       3/31/98         3/31/97
                                      ----------      ----------
<S>                                   <C>         <C>
Weighted average shares
        outstanding                   10,286,000      9,770,000 (A)

Weighted average common stock
   equivalents outstanding:
        Common stock
        Options                        1,094,000               
        Warrants                         171,000               
                                     -----------               
        Total                          1,265,000               
                                                               
Assumed treasury stock                                         
  repurchases:                                                 
        Common stock                                           
        Options                          953,000               
        Warrants                          35,000               
                                     -----------               
        Total                            988,000               
                                                               
Net weighted average common stock    -----------               
   equivalents                           277,000               
                                                               
                                                               
                                                               
Total diluted weighted average                                 
   common stock and common stock     -----------               
   equivalents outstanding            10,563,000               
                                     -----------               
</TABLE>


Note A:  The effect of common stock equivalents was excluded from the
calculation for the three months ended March 31, 1997 due to the net loss
recorded for the period.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26 ORDER - 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT TACOMA

THERMION, INC.,

Plaintiff,

v.

THERMION METALIZING SYSTEMS,

LTD.,

Defendant.

Case No. C05-5409FDB

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S

MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY

Plaintiff Thermion, Inc. moves to compel discovery and details the particular requests for

admission, production, and interrogatories at issue. TMS opposes the motion to compel and details

what it has produced as well as arguing that certain requests for admission involving the application

of law to fact are inappropriate. 

On the record shown, the Court concludes that Defendant Thermion Metalizing Systems,

Ltd. has properly responded and will supplement the record as necessary. ACCORDINGLY, 

IT IS ORDERED: Plaintiff Thermion, Inc.’s Motion To Compel Discovery [Dkt. # 69] is

DENIED. 

DATED this 18th day of July, 2006.

AFRANKLIN D. BURGESS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:06-cv-05382-FDB Document 2 Filed 07/19/2006 Page 1 of 1

Richardson et al vs Bremerton City of et al Doc. 2

Dockets.Justia.com