alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

 

ROBBINS MOTOR TRANSPORTATION, INC. : 

P.O. Box 38 : 

Essington, PA 19029 : 

 Plaintiff : CIVIL ACTION 

 : 

 v. : 

 : NO.: 02-CV-4446 

TRI-STATE MOTOR TRANSIT CO. : 

T/A TRISM D/B/A TRISM SPECIAL : 

SERVICES, INC. : 

 Defendant : 

STATUS REPORT

 Defendant, Tri State Motor Transit Company filed a Voluntary Petition under Chapter 

11 of the Bankruptcy Code in the United States District Court for the Western District of 

Missouri on December 18, 2001. 

 Pursuant to §362 of the United States Bankruptcy Code, all proceedings against 

defendant, Tri State Motor Transit Company, are automatically stayed. 

 As defendant is still protected by the automatic stay, we cannot proceed any further in 

the matter before the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania 

at this time. 

 Plaintiff’s attorney contacted Defendant’s counsel, Mark G. Stingley, Esquire 

regarding the status of the bankruptcy proceeding on February 11, 2004 and confirmed 

that status has not changed. 

 __________________________ 

 JOHN F. PEOPLES, ESQUIRE 

 Identification #19361 

 2701 West Chester Pike, Suite 104 

 Broomall, PA 19008 

 (610) 356-2711 

Date: 

Case 2:02-cv-04446-JD Document 7 Filed 02/13/2004 Page 1 of 2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

ROBBINS MOTOR TRANSPORTATION, INC. : 

P.O. Box 38 : 

Essington, PA 19029 : 

 : 

 Plaintiff : CIVIL ACTION 

 v. : 

 : NO.: 02-CV-4446 

TRI-STATE MOTOR TRANSIT CO. : 

T/A TRISM D/B/A TRISM SPECIAL : 

SERVICES, INC. : 

 Defendant : 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

 I, JOHN F. PEOPLES, hereby certify that a true and correct copy of Status Report 

has been served upon counsel for Defendant, Tri-State Motor Transit Co. t/a Trism d/b/a 

Trism Special Services, Inc. and The Honorable Jan E. DuBois whose address appears 

below, on February 11, 2004 by first class mail, postage prepaid. 

 Mark G. Stingley, Esquire 

 Bryan Cave, L.L.P. 

 3500 One Kansas City Place 

 1200 Main Street 

 Kansas City, MO 64105-2100 

 Attorney for Defendant 

 The Honorable Jan E. Dubois 

 United States District Court 

 Eastern District of Pennsylvania 

 United States Courthouse 

 Independence Mall West 

 601 Market Street 

 Chambers, Room 12613 

 Philadelphia, PA 19106 

 __________________________ 

 JOHN F. PEOPLES, ESQUIRE 

Date: Attorney for Plaintiff 

Case 2:02-cv-04446-JD Document 7 Filed 02/13/2004 Page 2 of 2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

JEAN CHARBONEAU :

: CIVIL ACTION NO. 02-CV-4308

Plaintiff, :

:

v. :

:

BAYER CORPORATION;

BAYER AG;

GLAXOSMITHKLINE, PLC;

GLAXOSMITHKLINE;

SMITHKLINE BEECHAM

:

:

:

:

:

ENTRY OF APPEARANCE

:

Defendants. :

ENTRY OF APPEARANCE

To the Clerk of the Court:

Kindly enter the appearances of Hope S. Freiwald, Aline Fairweather, Erin

Brennan and Kirstin J. Miller as attorneys for defendant SmithKline Beecham Corporation d/b/a

GlaxoSmithKline.

Respectfully Submitted,

_____________________________ _____________________________

Hope S. Freiwald Aline Fairweather

_____________________________ _____________________________

Erin Brennan Kirstin J. Miller

DECHERT PRICE & RHOADS

4000 Bell Atlantic Tower

1717 Arch Street

Philadelphia, PA 19103-2793

(215) 994-4000

Case 2:02-cv-04308-LDD Document 7 Filed 09/16/2002 Page 1 of 1
# March 2015

# April 2015

# May 2015

# June 2015

# July 2015
# 2016_09 Pivot Table 4

# 2016_09 MTS Table 4

&F	

&P/&N
Exhibit 23



                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS


The Board of Directors and Shareholders of
Whitman Corporation:

     We consent to  incorporation  by reference in  Registration  Statement Nos.
33-58209 and 333-16355 on Forms S-3, Registration Statement No. 33-62113 on Form
S-4 and Registration Statement Nos. 333-53883,  33-65006,  33-28238 and 33-53427
on Forms S-8 of  Whitman  Corporation  of our report  dated  January  25,  1999,
relating  to  the  consolidated   balance  sheets  of  Whitman  Corporation  and
subsidiaries  as of the end of  fiscal  years  1998  and  1997  and the  related
consolidated statements of income, shareholders' equity, and cash flows for each
of the fiscal  years  1998,  1997 and 1996 which  report  appears in this annual
report on Form 10-K.


/s/ KPMG LLP


Chicago, Illinois
March 29, 1999
# C_2017424EN.01003201.xml

| 11.12.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 424/32 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.12.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 424/32

---

Judgment of the General Court of 25 October 2017 — Lucaccioni v Commission

(Case T-551/16) (1)

1

((Civil Service - Officials - Exposure to asbestos and other substances - Industrial disease - Article 73 of the Staff Regulations - Common rules on the insurance against the risk of accident and of occupational disease - Article 14 - Article 266 TFEU - Misuse of power - Medical Committee - Collegiate principle - Breach of the Medical Committee’s mandate - Obligation to state reasons - Action for compensation - Length of the proceedings - Non-pecuniary harm))

(2017/C 424/46)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Arnaldo Lucaccioni (San Benedetto del Tronto, Italy) (represented initially by: M Velardo, and subsequently by: L. Gialluca, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: T. Bohr and G. Gattinara, acting as Agents, and A. Dal Ferro, lawyer)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Action brought on the basis of Article 270 TFEU seeking, firstly, the annulment of the Commission’s decision of 26 June 2014 to grant the applicant only an increase of 20 % of the allowance referred to in Article 14 of the Common rules on the insurance of officials of the European [Union] against the risk of accident and of occupational disease following the applicant’s request of 7 June 2000 and, secondly, compensation for the non-pecuniary harm which the applicant has allegedly suffered.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls the European Commission’s decision of 26 June 2014, granting Mr Arnaldo Lucaccioni an increase of 20 % of the allowance under Article 14 of the Common rules on the insurance of officials of the European [Union] against the risk of accident and of occupational disease; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls the European Commission’s decision of 26 June 2014, granting Mr Arnaldo Lucaccioni an increase of 20 % of the allowance under Article 14 of the Common rules on the insurance of officials of the European [Union] against the risk of accident and of occupational disease;

| 2. | Orders the Commission to pay Mr Lucaccioni compensation of EUR 5 000 in respect of the non-pecuniary harm caused; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the Commission to pay Mr Lucaccioni compensation of EUR 5 000 in respect of the non-pecuniary harm caused;

| 3. | Dismisses the remainder of the action; |
| --- | --- |

3.

Dismisses the remainder of the action;

| 4. | Orders the Commission to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

4.

Orders the Commission to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 279, 24.8.2015 (case initially registered before the European Union Civil Service Tribunal under number F-74/15 and transferred to the General Court of the European Union on 1.9.2016).

1

---
```

[Federal Register: July 8, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 130)]
[Notices]               
[Page 39324]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr08jy10-146]                         

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Office of the Secretary

 
Notice of Applications for Certificates of Public Convenience and 
Necessity and Foreign Air Carrier Permits Filed Under Subpart B 
(Formerly Subpart Q) During the Week Ending June 12, 2010

    The following Applications for Certificates of Public Convenience 
and Necessity and Foreign Air Carrier Permits were filed under Subpart 
B (formerly Subpart Q) of the Department of Transportation's Procedural 
Regulations (See 14 CFR 301.201 et seq.). The due date for Answers, 
Conforming Applications, or Motions to Modify Scope are set forth below 
for each application. Following the Answer period DOT may process the 
application by expedited procedures. Such procedures may consist of the 
adoption of a show-cause order, a tentative order, or in appropriate 
cases a final order without further proceedings.
    Docket Number: DOT-OST-2010-0148.
    Date Filed: June 8, 2010.
    Due Date for Answers, Conforming Applications, or Motion to Modify 
Scope: June 29, 2010.
    Description: Application of Privilege Style, S.A. requesting an 
exemption and foreign air carrier permit to conduct charter foreign air 
transportation of persons, property and mail between a point or points 
in the European Community and the Member States of the European Union, 
and a point or points in the United States, to the full extent allowed 
under the Air Transport Agreement between the United States and the 
European community and the Member States of the European Union.
    Docket Number: DOT-OST-2010-0150.
    Date Filed: June 9, 2010.
    Due Date for Answers, Conforming Applications, or Motion to Modify 
Scope: June 30, 2010.
    Description: Application of Acropolis Aviation Limited requesting 
an exemption and a foreign air carrier permit authorizing Acropolis 
Aviation to engage in charter foreign air transportation of persons, 
property and mail to and from points in the United States to the full 
extent permitted by its homeland operating authority and the EU-U.S. 
open-skies agreement, as well as other charters pursuant to the prior 
approval requirements.

Renee V. Wright,
Program Manager, Docket Operations, Federal Register Liaison.
[FR Doc. 2010-16621 Filed 7-7-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P
```
Case 2:02-cv-04435-AB Document 58 Filed 04/29/2004 Page 1 of 37
Case 2:02-cv-04435-AB Document 58 Filed 04/29/2004 Page 2 of 37
Case 2:02-cv-04435-AB Document 58 Filed 04/29/2004 Page 3 of 37
Case 2:02-cv-04435-AB Document 58 Filed 04/29/2004 Page 4 of 37
Case 2:02-cv-04435-AB Document 58 Filed 04/29/2004 Page 5 of 37
Case 2:02-cv-04435-AB Document 58 Filed 04/29/2004 Page 6 of 37
Case 2:02-cv-04435-AB Document 58 Filed 04/29/2004 Page 7 of 37
Case 2:02-cv-04435-AB Document 58 Filed 04/29/2004 Page 8 of 37
Case 2:02-cv-04435-AB Document 58 Filed 04/29/2004 Page 9 of 37
Case 2:02-cv-04435-AB Document 58 Filed 04/29/2004 Page 10 of 37
Case 2:02-cv-04435-AB Document 58 Filed 04/29/2004 Page 11 of 37
Case 2:02-cv-04435-AB Document 58 Filed 04/29/2004 Page 12 of 37
Case 2:02-cv-04435-AB Document 58 Filed 04/29/2004 Page 13 of 37
Case 2:02-cv-04435-AB Document 58 Filed 04/29/2004 Page 14 of 37
Case 2:02-cv-04435-AB Document 58 Filed 04/29/2004 Page 15 of 37
Case 2:02-cv-04435-AB Document 58 Filed 04/29/2004 Page 16 of 37
Case 2:02-cv-04435-AB Document 58 Filed 04/29/2004 Page 17 of 37
Case 2:02-cv-04435-AB Document 58 Filed 04/29/2004 Page 18 of 37
Case 2:02-cv-04435-AB Document 58 Filed 04/29/2004 Page 19 of 37
Case 2:02-cv-04435-AB Document 58 Filed 04/29/2004 Page 20 of 37
Case 2:02-cv-04435-AB Document 58 Filed 04/29/2004 Page 21 of 37
Case 2:02-cv-04435-AB Document 58 Filed 04/29/2004 Page 22 of 37
Case 2:02-cv-04435-AB Document 58 Filed 04/29/2004 Page 23 of 37
Case 2:02-cv-04435-AB Document 58 Filed 04/29/2004 Page 24 of 37
Case 2:02-cv-04435-AB Document 58 Filed 04/29/2004 Page 25 of 37
Case 2:02-cv-04435-AB Document 58 Filed 04/29/2004 Page 26 of 37
Case 2:02-cv-04435-AB Document 58 Filed 04/29/2004 Page 27 of 37
Case 2:02-cv-04435-AB Document 58 Filed 04/29/2004 Page 28 of 37
Case 2:02-cv-04435-AB Document 58 Filed 04/29/2004 Page 29 of 37
Case 2:02-cv-04435-AB Document 58 Filed 04/29/2004 Page 30 of 37
Case 2:02-cv-04435-AB Document 58 Filed 04/29/2004 Page 31 of 37
Case 2:02-cv-04435-AB Document 58 Filed 04/29/2004 Page 32 of 37
Case 2:02-cv-04435-AB Document 58 Filed 04/29/2004 Page 33 of 37
Case 2:02-cv-04435-AB Document 58 Filed 04/29/2004 Page 34 of 37
Case 2:02-cv-04435-AB Document 58 Filed 04/29/2004 Page 35 of 37
Case 2:02-cv-04435-AB Document 58 Filed 04/29/2004 Page 36 of 37
Case 2:02-cv-04435-AB Document 58 Filed 04/29/2004 Page 37 of 37
Case 2:05-cv-00112-PBT Document 15 Filed 02/14/05 Page 1 of 1
BE IT REMEMBERED:

THAT at the term of the Honorable Court of Appeals for the Tenth District of the State of Texas, begun and holden at Waco on the 1st day of January, 2016, present Chief Justice TOM GRAY and Justices REX D. DAVIS and AL SCOGGINS

In the cause

No. 10-16-00004-CV

IN RE TROY PAUL

Original Proceeding

the following Judgment was entered on the 5th day of May, 2016:

“Came on to be heard the original Petition for Writ of Mandamus filed herein by Relator Troy Paul, and the same having been considered, because it is the opinion of this Court that the Petition for Writ of Mandamus is meritorious and should be granted; it is therefore ordered, adjudged and decreed that the Petition for Writ of Mandamus be, and hereby is, granted in accordance with the opinion of this Court, and mandamus will issue only if the Honorable William Bosworth fails to comply.”

I, SHARRI ROESSLER, Clerk of the Court of Appeals for the Tenth District of Texas, at the City of Waco, hereby certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the Judgment entered herein by this Court in the above entitled and numbered cause as appears of record in Minute Book 13, Page 804.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I hereunto set my hand and affix the seal of said Court at Waco, this 5th day of May A.D. 2016.

						SHARRI ROESSLER, CLERK

						By: ___________________________

							Nita Whitener, Deputy Clerk

# image1.jpeg

# image2.png
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                       1,481,821
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,013,887
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                      99,522,240
<DEPRECIATION>                              44,356,453
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             138,817,067
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        5,629,004
<BONDS>                                    100,000,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                (47,572,174)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               138,817,067
<SALES>                                     29,995,868
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            29,995,868
<CGS>                                       17,146,928
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           8,887,422
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (5,816,169)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (5,816,169)
<EPS-BASIC>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
II 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1634 

To require auto dealers to fix outstanding safety recalls before selling or 

leasing a used passenger motor vehicle. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 26, 2017 

Mr. BLUMENTHAL (for himself and Mr. MARKEY) introduced the following 

bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, 

Science, and Transportation 

A BILL 

To require auto dealers to fix outstanding safety recalls 

before selling or leasing a used passenger motor vehicle. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Used Car Safety Recall 

5 Repair Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. USED PASSENGER MOTOR VEHICLE CONSUMER 

7 PROTECTION. 

8 Section 30120 of title 49, United States Code, is 

9 amended by adding at the end the following: 


asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 1634 IS

1 ‘‘(k) LIMITATION ON SALE OR LEASE OF USED PAS2 SENGER MOTOR VEHICLES.—(1) Except as provided 

3 under paragraphs (2) and (4), a dealer may not sell or 

4 lease a used passenger motor vehicle until after any defect 

5 or noncompliance determined under section 30118 with re6 spect to the vehicle has been remedied. 

7 ‘‘(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply if— 

8 ‘‘(A) the recall information regarding the used 

9 passenger motor vehicle— 

10 ‘‘(i) was not available at the time of sale 

11 or lease using the means established by the Sec12 retary under section 31301 of the Moving 

13 Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (49 

14 U.S.C. 30166 note); and 

15 ‘‘(ii) was not available on the manufactur16 er’s website; or 

17 ‘‘(B) notification of the defect or noncompliance 

18 is required under section 30118(b), but enforcement 

19 of the order is set aside in a civil action to which 

20 section 30121(d) applies. 

21 ‘‘(3) Notwithstanding section 30102(a)(1), in this 

22 subsection— 

23 ‘‘(A) the term ‘dealer’ means a person that has 

24 sold at least 10 motor vehicles to one or more con25 sumers during the most recent 12-month period; and 


asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 1634 IS

1 ‘‘(B) the term ‘used passenger motor vehicle’ 

2 means a motor vehicle that has previously been pur3 chased other than for resale. 

4 ‘‘(4) By rule, the Secretary may exempt the auc5 tioning of a used passenger motor vehicle to dealers from 

6 the requirements under paragraph (1) if such exemption 

7 does not harm public safety.’’. 

8 SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE. 

9 This Act shall take effect on that date that is 18 

10 months after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with BILLS
No. 56367.

protest 176465-K (New York).

#### James E. Fox & Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protest.
----

Publication of decisions by Member States to grant or revoke operating licenses pursuant to Article 13(4) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2407/92 on licensing of air carriers (1) (2)

(2006/C 223/03)

(Text with EEA relevance)

GERMANY

Operating licences granted

Category A:   Operating licences without the restriction of Article 5(7)(a) of Regulation (EEC) No 2407/92

Category B:   Operating licences including the restriction of Article 5(7)(a) of Regulation (EEC) No 2407/92

----

(1)OJ L 240, 24.8.1992, p. 1.

(2)  Communicated to the European Commission before 31.8.2005.

----
No. 53998.

#### Koeller-Struss Co. *v.*United States,

protest 47293-K (St. Louis).

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

It was stipulated that the issue herein is the same in all material respects as that presented in *Mamary Bros., Inc.*v. *United States*(21 Cust. Ct. 135, C. D. 1142). In accordance therewith it was held that the-currency of the invoice should be converted at the buying rate in the New York market at noon on the day of exportation (the “free” rate of exchange for pounds, sterling), as certified by the Federal Reserve bank and set forth by the collector on the entry.
PH2\708029.1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR

THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

__________________________________________

LEXINGTON INSURANCE COMPANY, : CIVIL ACTION

:

Plaintiff, :

:

v. : NO. 02-CV-4435

:

DAVID FORREST AND :

T. BEAUCLERC ROGERS IV, :

:

Defendants. :

__________________________________________:

SUBSTITUTION OF AFFIDAVIT

Kindly substitute the attached original Affidavit of Susan Wright as Exhibit "A" to

Defendant Forrest's Reply Memorandum in Further Support of His Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s 

Complaint or, Alternatively, Stay the Instant Proceedings Pending Conclusion of Parallel 

Proceedings in England that was filed on February 12, 2003 for the unnotarized copy currently 

appended thereto. 

DUANE MORRIS LLP

By: _______________________________

Edward M. Dunham, Jr., Esquire

Pa. I.D. Nos. 21550

One Liberty Place

Philadelphia, PA 19103-7396

215.979.1148

Attorney for Defendant

DAVID FORREST

Dated: February 19, 2003

Case 2:02-cv-04435-AB Document 31 Filed 02/19/2003 Page 1 of 2
PH2\708029.1 2

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on this date I caused a true and correct copy of the foregoing 

Substitution of Affidavit to be served by U.S. First Class Mail or international mail upon the 

following:

Jeffrey R. Lerman, Esquire

Glenn F. Rosenblum, Esquire

Montgomery, McCracken, Walker & Rhoads, LLP

123 South Broad Street

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19109

and

Edward P. Krugman, Esquire

Cahill, Gordon & Reindel

80 Pine Street

New York, New York 10005

Counsel for Plaintiff

James J. Rohn, Esquire

Nicholas M. Centrella, Esquire

Kevin Dooley Kent, Esquire

Conrad O'Brien Gellman & Rohn PC

1515 Market Street, 16th floor

Philadelphia, PA 19102

Counsel for Defendant T. Beauclerc Rogers IV

Dated: February 19, 2003 ______________________________

Shannon Hampton Sutherland

Case 2:02-cv-04435-AB Document 31 Filed 02/19/2003 Page 2 of 2