alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
No. 61825.

#### Manca, Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 326874-K (New York).

Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the items marked *"A”*consist of parts of photo enlargers-; that said enlargers were held dutiable at 15 percent under paragraph 1551, as modified, as photographic cameras in *Manca, Inc.*v. *United States*(38 Cust. Ct. 271, C. D. 1874); and that, in accordance with said decision, parts for enlargers are properly dutiable as parts of photographic cameras under paragraph 1551, the claim of the plaintiff *520at 20 percent was sustained as to said items. Following *John P. Herber & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(30 Cust. Ct. 193, C. D. 1519), the protest was dismissed as to the items marked “B,” and the matter was remanded to a single judge sitting in reappraisement for determination of the value of the merchandise in the manner provided by law (28 U. S. C. § 2636 (d)).
Before the Third Division,

October 15, 1951

No. 55922.

protests 131553-K, etc. (New York).

#### Wm. S. Pitcairn Corp. et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Cline, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that certain items of the merchandise consist of earthenware and china figures similar in all material respects to the figures passed upon in *Wm. S. Pitcairn Corp.*v. *United States*(39 C. C. P. A. 15, C. A. D. 458), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
CASE STUDIES IN EMERGENCY ELECTION LITIGATION

Federal Judicial Center 7/16/2023 1

Refusal to Accept 

a Minor Candidate’s Campaign Ads 

Sloan v. Hearst Media Company 

(Paul J. Barbadoro, D.N.H. 1:16-cv-52) 

A pro se federal complaint filed on the afternoon of the day of presidential primary elections challenged the plaintiff’s exclusion from 

televised debates and challenged the refusal of a television station to 

air the plaintiff’s paid ads. The district judge denied the plaintiff a 

temporary restraining order on the day that the complaint was filed 

for failure to comply with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(b)(1)’s 

notice requirements for a temporary restraining order. A little over 

two months later, a magistrate judge reviewed the complaint and recommended its dismissal. Reviewing the plaintiff’s objections, the district judge adopted the recommendation, and the court of appeals 

affirmed the dismissal. 

Subject: Campaign activities. Topics: Campaign materials; pro 

se party; primary election. 

At 3:48 p.m. on the day of the 2016 presidential primary election in New 

Hampshire, a candidate filed a pro se federal complaint in the District of New 

Hampshire against a television station and a national party chair challenging 

the station’s refusal to the candidate’s his paid ads and challenging the candidate’s exclusion from television debates.1

 With his complaint, the candidate 

filed a motion for a temporary restraining order.2

District Judge Paul J. Barbadoro denied the motion that day for failure to 

comply with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(b)(1)’s notice requirements 

for a temporary restraining order.3

On April 28, Magistrate Judge Andrea K. Johnstone evaluated the complaint and recommended dismissal of the case.4

 Considering the candidate’s 

May 26 objections,5 Judge Barbadoro approved the recommendation on May 

31,6 a decision that the court of appeals summarily affirmed on October 28.7

1. Complaint, Sloan v. Hearst Media Co., No. 1:16-cv-52 (D.N.H. Feb. 9, 2016), D.E. 1. 

2. Temporary-Restraining-Order Motion, id. (Feb. 9, 2016), D.E. 2. 

3. Order, id. (Feb. 9, 2016), D.E. 4. 

4. Report and Recommendation, id. (Apr. 28, 2016), D.E. 5, 2016 WL 3063847. 

5. Objections, id. (May 26, 2016), D.E. 6. 

6. Order, id. (May 31, 2016), D.E. 7, 2016 WL 3077873. 

7. Order, Sloan v. Hearst Television, Inc., No. 16-1885 (1st Cir. Oct. 28, 2016).
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
No. 1D 17

- 437

_____________________________
Y

VES S AINTYL , Appellant,

v.

S TATE OF F LORIDA , Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Leon County

. James C. Hankinson , Judge

. March 28, 2018

P ER C URIAM

.
A FFIRMED

.
R OBERTS , R AY , and O STERHAUS , JJ., concur

.

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

.

_____________________________2 Andy Thomas, Public Defender, and Glen P. Gifford, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee
, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Amanda D. Stokes and Jennifer J. Moore, Assistant Attorneys General, Tallahassee
, for Appellee.