alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### UNITED STATES, Appellee v WILLIAM E. WATERS, Private, U. S. Army, Appellant

14 USCMA 323, 34 CMR 103

No. 16,963

December 20, 1963

*Colonel Joseph L. Chalk, Captain Gary G. Keltner,*and *Captain Ronald L. Gainer*were on the brief for Appellant, Accused.

*Lieutenant Colonel Francis M. Cooper*and *Captain Otis D. Chapoton*were on the brief for Appellee, United States.

Opinion of the Court

PER CuRIAm:

This seventeen-year-old accused was convicted of a number of offenses in violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, including assault with a dangerous weapon, wrongful appropriation of a motor vehicle, wilful disobedience, and disrespect to superior noncommissioned officers. He was sentenced to a dishonorable discharge, total forfeitures, and confinement at hard labor for one year. A board of review affirmed the findings of guilty but reduced the dishonorable discharge to a bad-conduct discharge.

The question on this appeal is whether because of his age the accused should have been proceeded against in the Federal district court as a juvenile delinquent, rather than tried by court-martial. We considered, and decided, *324the issue adversely to the accused in United States v Baker, 14 USCMA 311, 34 CMR 91. Accordingly, the decision of the board of review is affirmed.
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 54 (Wednesday, March 21, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 13285]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-5171]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION


Notice of Agreements Filed

    The Commission hereby gives notice of the filing of the following 
agreements under the Shipping Act of 1984. Interested parties may 
submit comments on agreements to the Secretary, Federal Maritime 
Commission, Washington, DC 20573, within ten days of the date this 
notice appears in the Federal Register. Copies of agreements are 
available through the Commission's Office of Agreements (202-523-5793 
or <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#3c484e5d58595d525d50454f554f7c5a515f125b534a"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="720600131617131c131e0b011b0132141f115c151d04">[email protected]</span></a>).

    Agreement No.: 011223-037.
    Title: Transpacific Stabilization Agreement.
    Parties: APL Co. Pte. Ltd.; American President Lines, Ltd.; COSCO 
Container Lines Co., Ltd.; Evergreen Marine Corporation (Taiwan) Ltd.; 
Hanjin Shipping Co., Ltd.; Hapag-Lloyd AG; Hyundai Merchant Marine Co., 
Ltd.; Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha, Ltd.; Mitsui O.S.K. Lines, Ltd.; Nippon 
Yusen Kaisha; Orient Overseas Container Line Limited; and Yangming 
Marine Transport Corp.
    Filing Party: Wayne R. Rohde, Esq.; Sher & Blackwell LLP; 1850 M 
Street, NW.; Suite 900; Washington, DC 20036.
    Synopsis: The amendment authorizes additional information exchanges 
with industry and shipper communities, enhances TSA's research 
capabilities, updates the membership of Evergreen Marine, and reflects 
that the substitution of COSCO companies will not take place at this 
time.

    Agreement No.: 011972-001.
    Title: HSDG/Alianca/CMA CGM Space Charter Agreement.
    Parties: Alianca Navegacao e Logistica Ltda e CIA; CMA CGM, S.A.; 
and Hamburg-Sudamerikanische Dampfschifffahrts-Gesellschaft KG.
    Filing Party: Wayne R. Rohde, Esq.; Sher & Blackwell LLP; 1850 M 
Street, NW.; Suite 900; Washington, DC 20036.
    Synopsis: The amendment would reduce the number of slots chartered 
to CMA. The parties request expedited review.
    Agreement No.: 011982-001.

    Title: Evergreen Line Joint Service Agreement.
    Parties: Evergreen Marine Corp. (Taiwan) Ltd., Hatsu Marine Ltd., 
and Italia Marittima S.p.A.
    Filing Party: Paul M. Keane, Esq.; 61 Broadway; Suite 3000; New 
York, NY 10006-2802.
    Synopsis: The amendment would add Evergreen Marine (Hong Kong) Ltd. 
as a party and, effective May 1, 2007, change Hatsu Marine's name to 
Evergreen Marine (UK) Ltd.

    By order of the Federal Maritime Commission.

    Dated: March 16, 2007.
Bryant L. VanBrakle,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-5171 Filed 3-20-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6730-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
**Exhibit10.4**

 

January 24, 2006

 

**VIA HAND DELIVERY**

 

Dear John,

 

This letter agreement between you and Websense, Inc. (the “Company”)confirms an amendment to the terms of your employment agreement of May 10,1999, between you and the Company (the “Employment Agreement”).  Under this letter agreement, a new paragraph “(m)”is hereby added to Section 4 of the Employment Agreement which paragraphreads as follows:

 

“(m)                         Notwithstandingthe foregoing, if the Company determines that any cash severance payment benefitpayable to you fails to satisfy the distribution requirement of Section 409A(a)(2)(A) ofthe Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”), as a result of Section 409A(a)(2)(B)(i) ofthe Code, then the payment schedule will be modified as follows:  If acceleration of the benefit will avoidapplication of Section 409(a)(1) of the Code, then the Company willaccelerate the payment of the benefit to the minimum extent necessary so thatthe benefit is not subject to the provisions of Section 409A(a)(1) ofthe Code.  If acceleration of the benefitwould not avoid the application of Section 409A(a)(1) of the Code,however, then the Company will delay the benefit to the minimum extentnecessary so that the benefit is not subject to the provisions of Section 409A(a)(1) ofthe Code.  If any payments are delayed asa result of the previous sentence, all such delayed payments shall becomepayable in a lump sum on the first day they can be paid following thetermination date.  Thereafter, paymentswill resume in accordance with the payment schedule set forth in thisletter.  The Board may attach conditionsto or adjust the severance amounts paid to preserve, as closely as possible,the economic consequences that would have applied in the absence of these requirements;*provided, however*, that no suchcondition or adjustment shall result in the payments being subject to Section 409A(a)(1) ofthe Code.”

 

If this amendment of the Employment Agreement is acceptable to you,please sign below and return one original to me.

 

Sincerely,

 

 

Gene Hodges

President and Chief Executive Officer

 

**AGREED:**

 
| Date:  | January 24, 2006 |   |   |   |
|--------|-----------------------|--------|--------|--------|
|   | John  Carrington      |   |

 

----
Exhibit 32.1

Certification of Chief Executive Officer

Pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350)

In connection with the annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2011, (the Report) of Innovaro, Inc. (the Registrant), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Asa Lanum, the Chief Executive Officer of the Registrant, hereby certify, to
the best of my knowledge, that:



| | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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



/s/ Asa LanumName: Asa LanumDate: April 19, 2012
#### Thomas J. Cullen, Sr., Individually and as Father and Guardian of Thomas J. Cullen, Jr., an Infant, Appellant, v *855Lake Placid Vacation Corporation et al., Respondents, et al., Defendant.

[633 NYS2d 873]

—Crew III, J.

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court (Viscardi, J.), entered July 28, 1994 in Essex County, which granted a motion by defendants Lake Placid Vacation Corporation and Holiday Inns, Inc. for summary judgment dismissing the complaint against them.

In May 1989, Thomas J. Cullen, Jr. (hereinafter the infant) and some of his friends were leaving the Grandview Holiday Inn (hereinafter the Inn) in the Village of Lake Placid, Essex County, when they decided to run down the hill from the Inn to the parking lot where their chaperon’s car was parked. As the infant neared the bottom of the hill, he slipped on the grass, fell and went over the stone retaining wall and landed in the parking lot, as the result of which he fractured his right leg.

Plaintiff, the infant’s father, thereafter commenced this action against, among others, defendants Lake Placid Vacation Corporation and Holiday Inns, Inc. (hereinafter collectively referred to as defendants). Following discovery, defendants moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint against them. Supreme Court granted defendants’ motion and this appeal by plaintiff followed.*

We affirm. Initially, we note that the uncontroverted evidence establishes that defendants did not own, occupy or control the property where the allegedly dangerous or defective condition existed and, as such, cannot be held liable for the injuries that occurred *(see, Turrisi v Ponderosa, Inc.,*179 AD2d 956, 957-958). Moreover, with regard to plaintiff’s claim that defendants should have erected some sort of barrier at the top of the hill, we previously have held that "[p]roperty owners need not enclose natural geographical phenomena which present open and obvious, in contrast to latent, dangers” *(Casela v City of Troy,*161 AD2d 991).

Mercure, J. P., White and Peters, JJ., concur. Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

*

 Although plaintiffs notice of appeal appears to be premature, we will exercise our discretion and treat such notice as valid (see, *Matter of Charles BB.,*179 AD2d 904, 905).
##### 



Exhibit
10.30
 ESCROW AGREEMENT
 WHEREAS,
 NOW, THEREFORE,
 ARTICLE I
TERMS AND CONDITIONS
 1.1 Establishment of Funds.
 1.2 Treatment of Funds.
 A.
 B.
 1.3 Escrow Procedure and Payment Instruction.
 A.




---



##### 



B.
    2




---



##### 



1.4 Termination.
 1.5 Rights of Lender.
 ARTICLE II
PROVISIONS AS TO THE ESCROW AGENT
 2.1 Limitation of the Escrow Agents Capacity.
 A.
 B.
 2.2 Authority to Act.
 A.
 B.
 C.
  3




---



##### 



D.
 E.
 2.3 Compensation/Indemnification.
 A.
 B.
 2.4 Miscellaneous.
 A.
 B.
 C.
  4




---



##### 



ARTICLE III
GENERAL PROVISIONS
 3.1 Discharge of the Escrow Agent.
 3.2 Escrow Instructions.
 3.3 Notice.
 (A)
    
    If to the Escrow Agent, addressed to:First Capital Bank4222 Cox Road, Suite 200Glen Allen, Virginia 23060Attn: Escrow Department(B)
    
    If to Buyer or the Surviving Corporation, addressed to:Rio Vista Energy Partners L.P.Attn: Ian T. Bothwell, Acting Chief Executive Officer840 Apollo Street, Suite 313El Segundo, California 90245andRegional Enterprises, Inc.Attn: Chief Executive Officer410 Water StreetHopewell, Virginia 23860andRZB Finance LLC1133 Avenue of the AmericasNew York, New York 10036Attn: Ms. Nancy Reminiwith copies, which shall not constitute notice, to:Law Offices of Kevin FinckAttn: Kevin W. Finck, Esq.Two Embarcadero Center, Suite 1670San Francisco, California 94111andChristian & Barton, L.L.P.Attn: Henry R. Pollard, V, Esq.909 East Main Street, Suite 1200Richmond, Virginia 23219-3095
  5




---



##### 



(C)
    
    If to Shareholders Agent, addressed to:W. Gary Farrar Jr.10803 Stoney Creek DriveRichmond, Virginia 23233with a copy, which shall not constitute notice, to:Cantor Arkema, P.C.Attn: Grant S. Grayson, Esq.1111 E. Main StreetP. O. Box 561Richmond, Virginia 23218-0561(D)
    
    If to Lender, addressed to:RZB Finance LLC1133 Avenue of the AmericasNew York, New York 10036Attn: Ms. Nancy Remini
  3.4 Governing Law.
 3.5 Construction.
 3.6 Amendment.
 3.7 Force Majeure
 3.8 Written Agreement.
 3.9 Counterparts.
   6




---



##### 



RIO VISTA ENERGY PARTNERS L.P.By:
    
    Rio Vista GP LLC, General PartnerBy:
    
    /s/ Ian T. BothwellPrint Name: Ian T. BothwellTitle: Acting Chief Executive OfficerREGIONAL ENTERPRISES, INC.By:
    
    /s/ Ian T. BothwellPrint Name: Ian T. BothwellTitle: President and Chief Executive Officer/s/ W. Gary Farrar, Jr.W. Gary Farrar, Jr., Shareholders Agent
  FIRST CAPITAL BANKBy:
    
    /s/ Katherine K. WagnerName: Katherine K. WagnerTitle: Senior VP and Chief Operating Officer
  7
**EXHIBIT
      32.1**


**CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO**


**18
      U.S.C. SECTION 1350**


**AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**


**SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**





The
      undersigned, Lev Zaidenberg, the Chief
      Executive Officer of
      Energtek Inc. (the “Company”), certify, under the standards set forth and solely
      for the purposes of 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge, the Quarterly Report on
      Form
      10-Q of the Company for the fiscal quarter ended June 30, 2008 fully complies
      with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange
      Act
      of 1934 and the information contained in that Form 10-Q fairly presents, in
      all
      material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
      Company.





Dated:
      August 13, 2008








By: /s/
      Lev Zaidenberg


Name:  Lev
      Zaidenberg


Title: Chief
      Executive Officer and Director


(Principal
      Executive Officer)








A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided
      to
      the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities
      and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### The Wheeler and Wilson Manufacturing Company, *Appellants, v.*James Hammond, *Respondent.*

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs.
#### LAWRENCE HOURUN, PLAINTIFF-PETITIONER, v. TOWNSHIP COMMITTEE OF UNION, *ET AL.,*DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS.

See same case below: 99 *N..J. Super.*58.

*Mr. Michael Jay Mehr*for the petitioner.

*Messrs. Kein, Scott, Pollatscheh, Iacopino & Kein*for the respondents.

May 28, 1968.

Denied.
No. 38897.

#### Protests 830446-G, etc., of W. A. Taylor & Co. et al. (San Francisco and New York).

Opinion by

Evans, J.

There was nothing in the records to warrant disturbing the decisions of the collectors. The protests were therefore dismissed.
II 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 4659 

To require that the President’s annual budget submission to Congress and 

any concurrent resolution on the budget include the ratio of the public 

debt to the estimated gross domestic product of the United States, 

and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 10, 2024 

Mr. BRAUN (for himself, Mr. MARSHALL, Mr. SCOTT of Florida, and Mr. 

TILLIS) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on the Budget 

A BILL 

To require that the President’s annual budget submission 

to Congress and any concurrent resolution on the budget 

include the ratio of the public debt to the estimated 

gross domestic product of the United States, and for 

other purposes. 

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 ‘‘Debt-to-GDP Trans5 parency and Stabilization Act’’. 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 4659 IS

1 SEC. 2. RATIO OF PUBLIC DEBT TO GDP INCLUDED IN 

2 PRESIDENT’S BUDGET SUBMISSION AND CON3 CURRENT RESOLUTION ON THE BUDGET. 

4 (a) PRESIDENT’S BUDGET SUBMISSION.—Section 

5 1105(a) of title 31, United States Code, is amended by 

6 adding at the end the following: 

7 ‘‘(40) the ratio of the public debt to the esti8 mated gross domestic product.’’. 

9 (b) CONCURRENT RESOLUTION ON THE BUDGET.— 

10 Section 301(a) of the Congressional Budget and Impound11 ment Control Act of 1974 (2 U.S.C. 632(a)) is amended— 

12 (1) in paragraph (6), by striking ‘‘and’’ at the 

13 end; 

14 (2) in paragraph (7), by striking the period at 

15 the end and inserting ‘‘; and’’; and 

16 (3) by adding at the end the following: 

17 ‘‘(8) the ratio of the public debt to the esti18 mated gross domestic product.’’. 

Æ 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
#### Ann Doyle, *Executrix, Plaintiff, v.*Peter Mulvihill, *Defendant.*

Judgment ordered for defendant. Opinion by Daniels, J.
No. 52680.

protests 137887-K, etc. (New York).

#### Tuteur Bio Chemicals, Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Cole, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise in question is the same in all material respects as the estrogenic hormone passed upon in *Roche-Organon*v. *United States*(35 C. C. P. A. 99, C. A. D. 378). The claim at 10 percent under paragraph 34 was therefore sustained.
### MAPA-4 

## Notice of Agency Rule-making Adoption AGENCY: Department of Environmental Protection CHAPTER NUMBERANDTITLE: 125 Perchloroethylene Dry Cleaner Regulation

ADOPTED RULE NUMBER : .* . - i,~< < 

# ?"Oog _ ~ ~ 1 CONCISE SUMMARY The Department of Environmental Protection has adopted amendments to the Perchloroethylene Dry Cleaner Regulation that will prohibit the installation of new dry cleaners in a building colocated with a residence or a facility inhabited by children or the elderly; require that co-located dry cleaners cease operations on December 21, 2020 ; require all drycleaners to inspect equipment weekly with a gas analyzer ; and limit to fifteen days the amount of time dry cleaning equipment can operate while awaiting repairs. Copies of this rule are available upon request by contacting the Agency contact person listed below or on the DEP website at www .maine.gov/dep/air/regulations/recentlyadopted .htm



## - . _-, EFFECTIVE DATE: 

## JUN 2 4 2009 AGENCY CONTACT PERSON : Andrea Lani AGENCY NAME: - Department of Environmental Protection ADDRESS: 17 SHS Augusta, ME 04333 

### TELEPHONE: 207-287-2437

Please approve bottomportion of this formand assign appropriate MFASIS number . APPROVED FOR PAYMENT FUND AGENCY ORG APP JOB OBJT AMOUNT DATE: 3hi9' O



## - o6A 17s3 le1_-
### LVM and SVM Maximum Feed
David A Klarich David A Klarich to: David Ogulei 03/21/2012 08:59 AM
History: This message has been replied to and forwarded .

1 attachment

Max Metals Feed Jan 2008_May 2008.xlsx



### David,

As we discussed, I have attached the file for the maximum 12 HRA values for LVM and SVM for January, 2008 through May, 2008.

Dave

Dave Klarich Veolia ES Technical Solutions, L.L.C.
# 7 Mobile Avenue Sauget, IL 62201 618-271-2804, X120 office 618-271-9704 fax david.klarich@veoliaes.com http://www.veoliaes.com/

Service first. Safety always.

This e-mail message from Veolia ES Technical Solutions is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review , use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please communicate with the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message and delete same from all computers.

From: David A Klarich Sent: Tuesday , March 20, 2012 5:00 PM
To : ogulei.david@epa.gov Subject: Highest 12-Hour Rolling Averages (7 / 1 / 04 - 1 / 1 / 08)



### David,

During our March 8 conference call, you were curious why some of the maximum 12-hour rolling average (HRA) metals feed values in Veolia’s February 25, 2010 Significant Modification were different from those that the USEPA had documented. Specifically, the values for Unit 2 SVM, Unit 3 SVM, and Unit 4 LVM were different. In Table 1 from the agenda for the March 8 call, you have maximum rates listed for the time period 7/1/04 to 1/1/08 in column 4. After reviewing documents from that time period, I discovered a summary spreadsheet that showed maximum 12 HRA feedrates through 5/31/08. In this document, the maximum rate for Unit 2 SVM is 91 lbs/hr, for Unit 3 SVM is 82 lbs/hr, and for Unit 4 LVM is 77 lbs/hr. These rates were the result of operations during the first five months of 2008.

### These are the maximum 12 HRA values that are in the resubmittal of the Significant Modification on

February 25, 2010. Veolia had apparently included these updated values in this document.

Should you have any further questions , please contact me.

Dave.

Dave Klarich Veolia ES Technical Solutions, L.L.C.
# 7 Mobile Avenue Sauget, IL 62201 618-271-2804, X120 office 618-271-9704 fax david.klarich@veoliaes.com http://www.veoliaes.com/

Service first. Safety always.

This e-mail message from Veolia ES Technical Solutions is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review , use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please communicate with the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message and delete same from all computers.
COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA

Present: Judges Elder, B eales and Senior Judge Willis

STEPHEN OSTRANDER t/a HARD TIME LOGGING MEMORANDUM OPINION * v. Record No. 0481-06-3 PER CURIAM JULY 18, 2006 FREDDIE FULLER, JR.

FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION (Gerald L. Gray; Brian K. Pa tton; Gerald Gray Law Firm, A Professional Corporation, on briefs), for appellant. (Kerry S. Hay; Lee & Phipps , P.C., on brief), for appellee.

Stephen Ostrander t/a Hard Time Logging (e mployer) appeals a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Commission finding that (1) Freddie Fuller, Jr. proved he sustained an injury by accident arising out of and in the course of his employment on September 20, 2004; and (2) employer had two or more employees regularl y in service, and thus was an “employer” subject to the Workers’ Compensation Act. We have reviewed the record and the commission’s opinion and find that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the commission in its final opinion. See Fuller v. Stephen Ostrander t/a Hard Time Logging , VWC File No. 221-48-20 (Jan. 24, 2006). We di spense with oral argument and summarily affirm because the facts and legal contentions ar e adequately presented in the materials before the Court and argument would not ai d the decisional process. See Code § 17.1-403; Rule 5A:27.

Affirmed.

* Pursuant to Code § 17.1-413, this opin ion is not designated for publication.
No. 57367.

protests 198199-K and 200127-K (New York).

#### Mr. Leon Marks *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of earthenware teapots and coffeepots, each encased in a metal felt-lined cozy, the same in all material respects as the merchandise the subject of *Leon Marks*v. *United States*(28 Cust. Ct. 98, C. D. 1393), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
#### Earl Ray NEIGHBORS v. STATE of Arkansas

RC 90-69

804 S.W.2d 728

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Opinion delivered March 18, 1991

*J. F. Atkinson, Jr.,*for appellant.

*Winston Bryant,*Att’y Gen., by: *Clint Miller,*Asst. Att’y Gen., for appellee.

Per Curiam.

Appellant, Earl Ray Neighbors, by his attorney, has filed for a rule on the clerk.

His attorney, J.F. Atkinson, Jr., admits that the record was tendered late due to a mistake on his part.

*90We find that such an error, admittedly made by the attorney for a criminal defendant, is good cause to grant the motion. See our Per Curiam opinion dated February 5, 1979, In Re: Belated Appeals in Criminal Cases, 265 Ark. 964.

A copy of this opinion will be forwarded to the Committee on Professional Conduct.