alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Michaels Development Group, Inc., Appellant, v Donald C. Greene, Doing Business as DCG Development Company, Respondent.

[700 NYS2d 275]

—Carpinello, J.

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court (Keniry, J.), entered December 3, 1998 in Saratoga County, which, *inter alia,*granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

At issue on this appeal is whether a March 18, 1998 single-page letter written by one sophisticated real estate developer to another was sufficiently definite and certain as to constitute an offer to sell a 26-lot municipally approved subdivision such that its verbal acceptance by the addressee created a legally binding contract. A review of the record reveals that the parties had been discussing the possible sale of the subdivision since July 1997 and that their negotiations had resulted in the exchange of various drafts of multipaged proposed contracts of sale. None of these drafts, each of which contemplated a minimum aggregate purchase price in excess of $1 million, was ever executed as the parties continued to negotiate back and forth on different points.

On March 18, 1998, defendant’s vice-president sent a letter to plaintiff’s president which began, “As a result of recent negotiations our position on [the subdivision] has evolved. The terms offered are as follows: * * The letter concludes, however, by noting that “if you feel [the letter] forms the basis for something we can work on let me know”. Contending that it verbally accepted this “written offer”, plaintiff sued for specific performance to compel the sale of the lots. Plaintiff’s appeal from Supreme Court’s order granting defendant sum-

*761mary judgment dismissing the complaint must result in an affirmance.

This case is not substantially different from *Concilla v May*(214 AD2d 848, 850, *lv denied*86 NY2d 705) in which this Court held that a similar letter had to “be viewed not as an offer but a suggestion of the terms of a future bargain”. Since the language employed in the subject letter unambiguously contemplated a future bargain, Supreme Court did not err in finding that no contract existed as a matter of law *(see, Keis Distrib. v Northern Distrib. Co.,*226 AD2d 967, 968; *Four Seasons Hotels v Vinnik,*127 AD2d 310, 316).

Mercure, J. P., Crew III, Peters and Graffeo, JJ., concur. Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
Exhibit 99.2


                              NBC ACQUISITION CORP.
                             4700 South 19th Street
                             Lincoln, NE 68501-0529


                                 March 31, 2006



NBC Holdings Corp.
4700 South 19th Street
Lincoln, NE  68501-0529
Attention:  President & Chief Executive Officer

RE: ISSUANCE OF CERTAIN SHARES BY NBC ACQUISITION CORP.
    (THE "COMPANY") TO NBC HOLDINGS CORP. ("HOLDINGS")

Ladies and Gentlemen:

         Reference is hereby made to the NBC Holdings Corp. 2005 Restricted
Stock Plan (the "Plan"). In accordance with the understandings reached by the
Company and Holdings with respect to the creation of the Plan, and for good and
valuable consideration received, the Company hereby confirms its agreement with
Holdings that with respect to each share of Holdings' common stock, $0.001 par
value per share ("Holdings Common Stock"), issued by Holdings under the Plan to
a Participant (as defined in the Plan), the Company shall issue to Holdings an
equivalent number of shares of the Company's common stock, $0.01 par value per
share ("Company Common Stock"), for the same purchase price per share.

         In the event that any shares of Holdings Common Stock issued under the
Plan are repurchased, redeemed or otherwise retired by Holdings from any
Participant in accordance with the Plan or any agreement executed in connection
therewith, the Company shall be required to repurchase from Holdings, and
Holdings shall be required to sell to the Company, an equivalent number of
shares of Company Common Stock at a purchase price of $.01 per share, with it
being intended that any such shares of Company Common Stock shall be retired.

         This letter agreement shall be construed and enforced in accordance
with the laws of the State of Delaware. This letter agreement shall bind and
inure to the benefit of the parties and their respective successors and
permitted assigns, legal representatives and heirs. This letter agreement may
not be amended, modified or terminated except by an instrument in writing duly
executed by each of the parties hereto.

                                        Very truly yours,

                                        NBC ACQUISITION CORP.



                                        By:  /s/  Alan G. Siemek
                                             -----------------------------------
                                            Alan G. Siemek
                                            Treasurer




ACKNOWLEDGED AND AGREED:


NBC HOLDINGS CORP.


By:  /s/  Mark W. Oppegard
     ---------------------------------------
         Mark W. Oppegard
         President & Chief Executive Officer
#### Henry Medina, Jr., et al., Respondents, v Liberty Mutual Fire Insurance Company, Appellant.

[699 NYS2d 289]

—In an action to recover the proceeds of a homeowners’ insurance policy, the defendant appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Jones, J.), entered May 18, 1998, which, upon a jury verdict, is in favor of the plaintiffs and against it in the principal sum of $80,000.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The evidence was legally sufficient to support the verdict. Moreover, the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence *(see, Nicastro v Park,*113 AD2d 129).

The defendant’s remaining contentions lack merit. Sullivan, J. P., Joy, Krausman and Luciano, JJ., concur.
No. 45254.

#### Protest 21375-K of Tai Wo Tong (Los Angeles).

Opinion by

Evans, J.

It was stipulated that certain yuen yuk is similar to the merchandise passed upon in *Oy Wo Tong Co.*v. *United States*(C. D. 372). The claim for free entry under paragraph 1669 was therefore sustained.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1

                                  CERTIFICATION

      Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted), Edward A. Keible, Jr., Chief Executive Officer
of Endwave Corporation (the "Company"), and Julianne M. Biagini, Chief Financial
Officer of the Company, each hereby certify that, to the best of their
knowledge:

      1. The Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended March
31, 2004, to which this Certification is attached as Exhibit 32.1 (the
"QUARTERLY REPORT") fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and

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

      IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have set their hands hereto as of the
14th day of May, 2004.

/s/ EDWARD A. KEIBLE, JR.                          /s/ JULIANNE M. BIAGINI
--------------------------------------             -----------------------------
Edward A. Keible, Jr.                              Julianne M. Biagini
Chief Executive Officer                            Chief Financial Officer
# C_2012227EN.01003702.xml

| 28.7.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 227/37 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.7.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 227/37

---

Action brought on 18 June 2012 — ZZ v EMA

(Case F-47/12)

2012/C 227/62

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: ZZ (represented by: D. Abreu Caldas, A. Coolen, J.-N. Louis, É. Marchal and S. Orlandi, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Medicines Agency

Defendant:

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Annulment of the decision of the European Medicines Agency not to recognise the applicant’s permanent invalidity and not to award him an invalidity allowance.

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | Annul the decision of the European Medicines Agency of 15 September 2011 not to award the applicant an invalidity allowance because of his total permanent invalidity preventing him from performing the duties corresponding to a post in his function group and his grade; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision of the European Medicines Agency of 15 September 2011 not to award the applicant an invalidity allowance because of his total permanent invalidity preventing him from performing the duties corresponding to a post in his function group and his grade;

| — | so far as necessary, annul the decision of 16 January 2012 rejecting his complaint; |
| --- | --- |

—

so far as necessary, annul the decision of 16 January 2012 rejecting his complaint;

| — | order the European Medicines Agency to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the European Medicines Agency to pay the costs.

---
No. 96-5899.

#### Jones *v.*United States.

C. A. 4th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.
# C_2012379EN.01003502.xml

| 8.12.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 379/35 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.12.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 379/35

---

Action brought on 4 October 2012 — ZZ and Others v Commission

(Case F-112/12)

2012/C 379/59

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: ZZ and Others (represented by: D. Abreu Caldas, A. Coolen, J.-N. Louis, E. Marchal and S. Orlandi, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission

Defendant:

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Annulment of decisions on the transfer of the applicants’ pension rights under the European Union pension scheme which applies the new general implementing provisions concerning Articles 11 and 12 of Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations.

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | Annul the decisions transferring the applicants’ pension rights under Article 11(2) of Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations acquired before entry into service with the European Commission; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decisions transferring the applicants’ pension rights under Article 11(2) of Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations acquired before entry into service with the European Commission;

| — | where necessary, annul the decisions rejecting their complaints, which are identical, directed against the decisions transferring their pension rights; |
| --- | --- |

—

where necessary, annul the decisions rejecting their complaints, which are identical, directed against the decisions transferring their pension rights;

| — | order the Commission to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Commission to pay the costs.

---
IPublleNmce''20HProposedRuf*AirQuaIltYAmblentAilurds'..I45CSR14-Perrn~tsforConstruct~onandMalorModifrcatronofMatorftaIlonarvSourcesforthePreventtonofSigniilcantDeter,iyaflonofAlr.Quoli-*Y,T.b.g...'&c$k<6-StandardsofPerformanceforNewStatlonanSWi-feSTheWestYtrrrahraDlviwonofAltQualityhasscheduledapublichear-IngonJutvd&20t3fords2014bmpdsedIeg~~Iattvemle%,$hichWillrakeptace'Iv~;~onater,vtronmlbPP~ectro-n'sCharlestonhbudsuarLEMLADVERnSEPEWTCumtry1611andMaiorModlf~&rrfMaier5fa-ttonow.SOLI!&SWh~ch.CauseocCmtrrbutetO.,NonaftainmenfAreasCHARLESTONNEWSPAPERSP.O.Box2993Charleston,WestVirginia25330Billing348-4898Classified34848481-800-WVA-NEWSP.-1..11--uu7LV/LJImIcEDATErACCOUNTIUBRr1WVDIVISIONOFAIRQUAI;ITYBILLED60157THSTREETSETOCHARLESTONW25304USAPleasereturnthisportionwithyourpayment.AMOUNTPAID:Makecheckspayableto:CharlestonNewspapersCHARLESTONNEWSPAPERSP.O.Box2993Charleston, WestVirginia25330Billing348-4898classified348-48481-IO@WVA-NEWSLegaIpricingisbased upon63wordspercolumn inch.PEIN55-0676079Eachsuccessiveinsertionisdiscountedby25%ofthefirstinsertionrate.StateofWestVirginia,I,THECHARLESTONGAZETTE,dosolemn1swearthatthelea1noticeof:PUBLIC~~PICE~OIIP%OPOSEDwas dulypublishedinsaidnewspaper(s)atthestated pricefortherespectivenewspapSubscribedandsworntobefore methis
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Small Business Administration

          - [Disaster Declaration #10857 and #10858] 

# AGENCY:

Small Business Administration. 

# ACTION:

Amendment 2. 

# SUMMARY:

This is an amendment of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for the State of New Hampshire (FEMA-1695-DR), dated 04/27/2007. 

*Incident:*                         Severe Storms and Flooding.                               ( print page 28092)    

*Incident Period:*                         04/15/2007 through 04/23/2007.                     

# DATES:

*Effective Date:*                         05/10/2007.                     

*Physical Loan Application Deadline Date:*                         06/26/2007.                     

*EIDL Loan Application Deadline Date:*                         01/28/2008.                     

# ADDRESSES:

Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW., Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416. 

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The notice of the Presidential disaster declaration for the State of New Hampshire, dated 04/27/2007 is hereby amended to include the following areas as adversely affected by the disaster: 

*Primary County:*                     Belknap.                 

All other counties contiguous to the above named primary county have previously been declared. 

All other information in the original declaration remains unchanged. 

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 59002 and 59008)

James E. Rivera, 

Acting Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance. 

 [FR Doc. E7-9580 Filed 5-17-07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
RAY SCHREINER,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D16-4482

_____________________________/

Opinion filed September 1, 2017.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County.

Mark J. Borello, Judge.

Ray Schreiner, pro se, Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

LEWIS, RAY, and JAY, JJ., CONCUR.
# C_2016090EN.01001301.xml

| 7.3.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 90/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.3.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 90/13

---

Judgment of the General Court of 28 January 2016 — Austria v Commission

(Case T-427/12) (1)

1

((State Aid - Banking sector - Aid implemented by Germany and Austria for the benefit of Bayerische Landesbank in the course of its restructuring - Decision declaring the aid compatible with the internal market, provided that certain conditions are met - Repeal of the initial decision drawn up in a language other than that of the Member State - Action for annulment - Challengeable act - Admissibility - Definition of State aid - Advantage - Rights of defence - Obligation to state reasons))

(2016/C 090/17)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Republic of Austria (represented by: C. Pesendorfer, M. Windisch, W. Peschorn and S. Ullreich, acting as Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: L. Flynn, T. Maxian Rusche and R. Sauer, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Action for the annulment of Article 1(1)(d) and 1(2) of Commission Decision C (2012) 5062 final of 25 July 2012 on State aid SA.28487 granted by Germany and Austria to Bayerische Landesbank (C 16/09, ex N 254/09), and, following the repeal of that decision by Article 1 of Commission Decision (EU) 2015/657 of 5 February 2013 on State aid granted by Germany and Austria to Bayerische Landesbank (Case SA.28487 (C 16/09, ex N 254/09)) (OJ 2015 L 109, p. 1), for the annulment of Article 2(1)(d) and 2(2) of the latter decision.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court hereby:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders the Republic of Austria to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the Republic of Austria to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 373, 1.12.2012.

1

---
Order entered December 7, 2015

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05
- 15
- 00653
- CV DEBORAH HUMPHREY, Appellant

V. DAVID YANCEY AND NAT IONWIDE SLATE, Appellee s On Appeal from the 191st Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC
- 13
- 07257



### O RDER
W e GRANT the parties’ December 2, 2015 amended motion for abatement, SUSPEND
all deadlines, and ABATE the appeal to allow the parties an opportunity to settle. The appeal will be reinstated January 16, 2015 or upon motion by the parties to reinstate and dismiss or reinstate and reset the deadlines, whichever occurs sooner.

.
/s/ CRAIG STODDART JUSTICE
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

Defense Logistics AgencyThe Nation's Combat Logistics Support Agency

Search
Search

Search

-  Home		 
-  What DLA Offers    -  Excess Property Disposal             
  -  Document Services             
  -  Products             
  -  Services             
  -  Programs 
-  Working With DLA    -  Applications             
  -  Small Business             
  -  Federal and International Cataloging             
  -  Defense Data Standards             
  -  Events             
  -  Procurement Policies             
  -  Government Programs             
  -  Forms 
-  Organizations    -  DLA Headquarters             
  -  DLA Aviation             
  -  DLA Disposition Services             
  -  DLA Distribution             
  -  DLA Energy             
  -  DLA Land and Maritime             
  -  DLA Troop Support             
  -  DLA CENTCOM & SOCOM             
  -  DLA Europe & Africa             
  -  DLA Indo-Pacific 
-  Customer Support    -  Self Help Tools             
  -  How to Order             
  -  Find Your Order             
  -  Customer Facing Offices             
  -  Training             
  -  Brochures             
  -  Warfighter Support             
  -  Customer Service Management 
-  Careers		 
-  About DLA    -  Contact Us             
  -  Locations             
  -  Leaders             
  -  News             
  -  History             
  -  Media Gallery             
  -  DLA Campaigns 

HomeAbout DLANewsNews Article View

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

# Corps to assess boots at Parris Island

By Kaitlin Kelly, MCSC Office of Public Affairs and CommunicationMarine Corps Systems Command

                MARINE CORPS BASE QUANTICO, Va.  –              Marine Corps Systems Command*Editor's note: The original story can be viewed on the Marine Corps Systems Command website.*

**                    SHARE                

**                    PRINT                

combat boothot weather bootDannertropical bootParris IslandbootsMarine Corps Systems Command
# C_2017022EN.01002701.xml

| 23.1.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 22/27 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.1.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 22/27

---

Judgment of the General Court of 1 December 2016 — Universidad Internacional de la Rioja v EUIPO — Universidad de la Rioja (UNIVERSIDAD INTERNACIONAL DE LA RIOJA uniR)

(Case T-561/15) (1)

1

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark UNIVERSIDAD INTERNACIONAL DE LA RIOJA uniR - Earlier EU word mark UNIRIOJA - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2017/C 022/35)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Universidad Internacional de la Rioja, SA (Logroño, Spain) (represented by: C. Lema Devesa and A. Porras Fernandez-Toledano, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: A. Schifko, acting as Agent)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Universidad de la Rioja (Logroño, Spain) (represented initially by: J. Diez-Hochleitner Rodríguez, D. Garayalde Niño and A. I. Alpera Plazas, lawyers, and subsequently by J Diez-Hochleitner Rodríguez and D Garayalde Niño

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 22 June 2015 (Case R 1914/2014-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Universidad de la Rioja and Universidad Internacional de la Rioja.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Universidad Internacional de la Rioja, SA to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Universidad Internacional de la Rioja, SA to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 389, 23.11.2015.

1

---