alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Gary B. LOGAN, a minor, by and through his natural parents and legal guardians, Theodore A. Logan, Jr., and Catherine Logan, and Theodore A. Logan, Jr., and Catherine Logan, Individually, Appellants, v. Clifton FLOOD, Sr., Appellee.

No. GG-63.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

June 22, 1977.

*1244Y. James Facciolo, of Searcy, Smith, Fac-ciolo & Kirby, Jacksonville, for appellants.

William R. Swain, of Webb, Swain & Watson, Jacksonville, for appellee.

*On Motion to Quash and Dismiss Appeal*

RAWLS, Acting Chief Judge.

American Bankers Insurance Company of Florida’s Motion to Quash and Dismiss Appeal reflects that on March 18, 1977, the trial court entered a summary judgment as to defendant, American Bankers, which was final in nature as to this defendant. On May 16, 1977, appellants-plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal in this cause and stated that the nature of the order appealed from is the summary judgment in favor of American Bankers entered on March 18, 1977. The sole assignment of error filed in this proceeding is that the trial court erred in granting the motion for summary judgment in favor of American Bankers.

Where a final judgment is entered in a cause as to one or more defendants, the method of review available to the plaintiffs is by appeal pursuant to Florida Appellate Rule 3.2.b. Upon the expiration of 30 days, this court is without any jurisdiction to review the final judgment. *Shute v. Keystone State Bank,*159 So.2d 106 (Fla. 1st DCA 1963); *McMullen v. McMullen,*145 So.2d 568 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1962); and *Laborers Int’l U. of No. Amer. v. Public Emp. Com’n,*336 So.2d 450 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976).

American Bankers Insurance Company of Florida’s motion is granted, and the appeal is dismissed.

McCORD and SMITH, JJ., concur.
# C_2015236EN.01000801.xml

| 20.7.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 236/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.7.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 236/8

---

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 13 May 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Lietuvos Aukščiausiasis Teismas (Lithuania)) — ‘Gazprom’ OAO

(Case C-536/13) (1)

1

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Area of freedom, security and justice - Judicial cooperation in civil matters - Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 - Scope - Arbitration - Not included - Recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards - Order issued by an arbitral tribunal having its seat in a Member State - Order that proceedings not be brought or continued before a court of another Member State - Power of the courts of a Member State to refuse to recognise the arbitral award - New York Convention))

(2015/C 236/10)

Language of the case: Lithuanian

Referring court

Referring court

Lietuvos Aukščiausiasis Teismas

Party to the main proceedings

Party to the main proceedings

Applicant:‘Gazprom’ OAO

Applicant:

Interested party: Lietuvos Respublika

Interested party

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters must be interpreted as not precluding a court of a Member State from recognising and enforcing, or from refusing to recognise and enforce, an arbitral award prohibiting a party from bringing certain claims before a court of that Member State, since that regulation does not govern the recognition and enforcement, in a Member State, of an arbitral award issued by an arbitral tribunal in another Member State.

---

(1)  OJ C 377, 21.12.2013.

1

---
No. 00-6794.

#### Mackey *v.*Dutton, Warden.

C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.
From: <Alicea.Jezebele@epamail.epa.gov>

To: "Eric Holder" <EHolder@indepmo.org>

Date: 7/20/2010 2:24 PM

Subject: Re: Plant ID's 06599 and 00664 Section 308 ICR Response Extension Request

Attachments: pic05303.jpg

Greetings,

EPA has reviewed your extension request for the steam electric effluent

guidelines questionnaire for the following Independence Power and Light

company stations:

 Blue Valley Station

 Missouri City

The deadline for your plant to submit Version 2 of the completed

questionnaire is extended to October 15, 2010.

If you need assistance during the completion of the steam electric

questionnaire, please contact the steam electric helpline via e-mail at

steamhelp@erg.com or by phone at 1-877-353-7560.

Sincerely,

(Embedded image moved to file: pic05303.jpg)

 

 From: "Eric Holder" <EHolder@indepmo.org> 

 To: Jezebele Alicea/DC/USEPA/US@EPA 

 Cc: "Leon Daggett" <LDaggett@indepmo.org>, "Paul Mahlberg" <PMAHLBERG@indepmo.org>

 Date: 06/28/2010 10:47 AM 

 Subject: Plant ID's 06599 and 00664 Section 308 ICR Response Extension Request

** High Priority **

** Reply Requested When Convenient **

Ms. Alicea,

Pursuant to your June 18, 2010 ICR Letter for our Missouri City (ID

06599) and Blue Valley (ID 00664) Power Plants, Independence Power &

Light formally requests a 45 day extension to the response period (i.e.,

response would be due Tuesday November 2, 2010). The extension is

necessary for the following reasons:
1) We are a small, municipally-owned utility with limited resources;

2) The amount of information requested is extensive requiring input

from various departments; and,

3) The standard response period occurs during the summer, our busiest

time of year, when our limited staff is already booked.

Thank you for your kind consideration of this extension request.

Regards,

Eric Holder

Environmental Compliance Engineer

Independence Power & Light

21500 E. Truman Road

Independence, MO 64051

(816) 325-7455 off

(816) 325-7474 fax

(816) 365-2378 cell
Exhibit 31.2

CERTIFICATION

Certification of Treasurer



I, Ramon Chimelis, Treasurer, certify that:



1.

I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Big Sky Industries V, Inc.;

2.

Based on my knowledge, this report 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 with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.

Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.

The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the small business issuer and have:

(a)

Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the small business issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

(b)

Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

(c)

Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuer's most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting; and

5.

The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the audit committee of the small business issuer's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

(a)

All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the small business issuer's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

(b)

Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting.



Dated: February 20, 2009



/s/ Ramon Chimelis

Ramon Chimelis, Treasurer
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

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

# Lack of sight doesn’t mean lack of vision

By Michael MolinaroDLA Land and Maritime Public Affairs

                COLUMBUS, Ohio  –              

**                    SHARE                

**                    PRINT
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 19 (Wednesday, January 29, 1997)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 4225-4226]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-2150]


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


FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 73

[MM Docket No. 97-33, RM-8937]


Radio Broadcasting Services; Victor, ID

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: This document requests comments on a petition for rule making 
filed on behalf of Victor Broadcasting of Idaho proposing the allotment 
of Channel 282A to Victor, Idaho, an incorporated community, as its 
first local aural transmission service. Coordinates used for Channel 
282A at Victor are 43-36-12 and 111-06-36.

DATES: Comments must be filed on or before March 17, 1997, and reply 
comments on or before April 1, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Secretary, Federal Communications Commission, Washington, DC 
20554. In addition to filing comments with the FCC, interested parties 
should serve the petitioner's counsel, as follows: Henry E. Crawford, 
Esq., Law Offices of Henry E. Crawford, 1150 Connecticut Avenue, NW., 
Suite 900, Washington, DC 20036.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nancy Joyner, Mass Media Bureau, (202) 
418-2180.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a synopsis of the Commission's 
Notice of Proposed Rule Making, MM Docket No. 97-33, adopted January 
17, 1997, and released January 24, 1997. The full text of this 
Commission decision is available for inspection and copying during 
normal business hours in the FCC's Reference Center (Room 239), 1919 M 
Street, NW., Washington, DC. The

[[Page 4226]]

complete text of this decision may also be purchased from the 
Commission's copy contractors, International Transcription Services, 
Inc., 2100 M Street, NW., Suite 140, Washington, DC 20037, (202) 857-
3800.
    Provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 do not apply 
to this proceeding.
    Members of the public should note that from the time a Notice of 
Proposed Rule Making is issued until the matter is no longer subject to 
Commission consideration or court review, all ex parte contacts are 
prohibited in Commission proceedings, such as this one, which involve 
channel allotments. See 47 CFR 1.1204(b) for rules governing 
permissible ex parte contacts.
    For information regarding proper filing procedures for comments, 
See 47 CFR 1.415 and 1.420.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73

    Radio broadcasting.

Federal Communications Commission.
John A. Karousos,
Chief, Allocations Branch, Policy and Rules Division, Mass Media 
Bureau.
[FR Doc. 97-2150 Filed 1-28-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-U
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 152 (Thursday, August 7, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 42536-42537]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-20808]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. GT97-59-000]


East Tennessee Natural Gas Company; Notice of Refund Report

August 1, 1997.
    Take notice that on July 29, 1997, East Tennessee Natural Gas 
Company (East Tennessee), filed its report of refunds reflecting 
refunds to jurisdictional customers. East Tennessee states that the 
purpose of these refunds was to flow through to its jurisdictional 
customers refunds received from its former upstream supplier, Tennessee 
Gas Pipeline Company (Tennessee). On May 16, 1997, East Tennessee 
states that it received from Tennessee a refund of amounts paid under 
its former Rate Schedules CD-1 and SS contracts with Tennessee. 
Tennessee effectuated the refund pursuant to Article VII of the 
Stipulation and Agreement filed on June 2, 1993, as approved by the 
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's order issued on October 29, 1993 
in Docket No. RP91-203 et al.
    On July 29, 1997, East Tennessee states that it disbursed refunds, 
with interest, to its jurisdictional customers entitled to a refund 
totaling $143,175 with detailed calculations supporting the refunded 
amount.
    East Tennessee states that a copy of this filing including Appendix 
A has been mailed to each affected state

[[Page 42537]]

regulatory commission and to East Tennessee's customers.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should 
file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426, 
in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of 
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). All such motions 
or protests should be filed on or before August 8, 1997. Protests will 
be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action 
to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the 
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to 
intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and 
are available for public inspection.
Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-20808 Filed 8-6-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-7109

BENJAMIN E. COX,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

ANTHONY HATHAWAY, III, Superintendent; FRANKLIN FREEMAN,

Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, District

Judge. (CA-95-952-5-H)

Submitted: November 21, 1996 Decided: December 12, 1996

Before HALL, WILKINS, and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Benjamin E. Cox, Appellant Pro Se. Sharon Coull Wilson, Associate

Attorney General, Mark John Pletzke, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF

JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying

relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (1994), amended

by Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, Pub. L.

No. 104-132, 110 Stat. 1214. We have reviewed the record and the

district court's opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a

certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Cox v. Hathaway, No. CA-95-952-5-H

(E.D.N.C. July 11, 1996). 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.

DISMISSED
```
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 145 (Tuesday, July 29, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 40514]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-19874]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. ER97-2758-000]

Advantage Energy, Inc.; Notice of Issuance of Order

July 23, 1997.
    Advantage Energy, Inc. (Advantage Energy) submitted for filing a 
rate schedule under which Advantage Energy will engage in wholesale 
electric power and energy transactions as a marketer. Advantage Energy 
also requested waiver of various Commission regulations. In particular, 
Advantage Energy that the Commission grant blanket approval under 18 
CFR Part 34 of all future issuances of securities and assumptions of 
liability by Advantage Energy.
    On July 14, 1997, pursuant to delegated authority, the Director, 
Division of Applications, Office of Electric Power Regulation, granted 
requests for blanket approval under Part 34, subject to the following:
    Within thirty days of the date of the order, any person desiring to 
be heard or to protest the blanket approval of issuances of securities 
or assumptions of liability by Advantage Energy should file a motion to 
intervene or protest with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 
First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426, in accordance with Rules 
211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 
385.211 and 385.214).
    Absent a request for hearing within this period, Advantage Energy 
is authorized to issue securities and assume obligations or liabilities 
as a guarantor, endorser, surety, or otherwise in respect of any 
security of another person; provided that such issuance or assumption 
is for some lawful object within the corporate purposes of the 
applicant, and compatible with the public interest, and is reasonably 
necessary or appropriate for such purposes.
    The Commission reserves the right to require a further showing that 
neither public nor private interests will be adversely affected by 
continued approval of Advantage Energy's issuances of securities or 
assumptions of liability.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing motions to 
intervene or protest, as set forth above, is August 13, 1997. Copies of 
the full text of the order are available from the Commission's Public 
Reference Branch, 888 First Street, N.E. Washington, D.C. 20426.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-19874 Filed 7-28-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
```
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 157 (Thursday, August 14, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 43517]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-21506]


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

COMMITTEE FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF TEXTILE AGREEMENTS


Adjustment of Import Limits for Certain Wool and Man-Made Fiber 
Textile Products Produced or Manufactured in Romania; Correction

August 8, 1997.
    In the letter to the Commissioner of Customs published in the 
Federal Register on July 23, 1997 (62 FR 39501), column 2, under the 
heading ``Adjusted twelve-month limit,'' the unit of measure for 
Category 410 should be corrected from ``dozen'' to ``square meters.''
Troy H. Cribb,
Chairman, Committee for the Implementation of Textile Agreements.
[FR Doc. 97-21506 Filed 8-13-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DR-F
<PAGE>

                                                                  EXHIBIT 23.02

                   CONSENT OF KPMG LLP, INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

The Board of Directors
Rational Software Corporation

  We consent to incorporation by reference in the registrations statements
(Nos.33-77382, 33-85906, 33-97044, 333-15007, 333-15015, 333-21563, 333-22687,
333-25815, 333-31505, 333-32991, 333-39455, 333-39569, 333-45393, 333-52017,
333-60579 and 333-70989) on form S-8 of Rational Software Corporation of our
report dated January 21, 1997, except as to Note 2, which is as of January 31,
1997, relating to the consolidated statements of operations, stockholders'
equity, and cash flows of Pure Atria Corporation and subsidiaries for the year
ended December 31, 1996 which, report appears in the March 31, 1996, annual
report on Form 10-K of Rational Software Corporation.

                                          /s/ KPMG LLP

Mountain View, California
June 24, 1999
#### Com. of Pa., for use, *v.*Long et al.

Argued April 19, 1933.

Before Trexler, P. J., Keller, Cunningham, Baldrige, Stadtfeld, Parker and James, JJ.

*Edward J. Harlans,*of *Scanlon & Harhins,*and with him *James M. Magee,*for appellants.

P. *J. Little,*for appellee.

July 14, 1933:

Opinion *by*

Baldrige, J.,

The American Surety Company of New York is a surety on the bond of Simon P. Long, tax collector, covering the 1924 duplicate. On December 3,1924, the auditors made a settlement. This report was not filed in the court of quarter sessions, but was delivered to the secretary of the board of supervisors. It showed a balance of $2,086.73 of uncollected road taxes on the 1924 duplicate. This, and subsequent reports received in evidence, established a balance due of $571.07. The *8amount of taxes thus proven to have been uncollected was not denied on the part of the appellant company. The court directed a verdict in the sum of $571.07, with interest from January 5, 1925.

The facts in this case are analogous to, and the legal principles involved therein are controlled by, Commonwealth for use of Croyle Township, Cambria County, v. S. P. Long et al., 110 Pa. Superior Ct. 1. In which case an opinion has been filed this day.

Judgment affirmed.
#### Antonio FERNANDEZ et ux., Appellants, v. Leonard VALIDO, Appellee.

No. 77-1576.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Jan. 31, 1978.

Rehearing Denied March 3, 1978.

*141Horton, Perse & Ginsberg, Brunier, Moss, Cohen & Rodgers, Miami, for appellants.

Knight, Peters, Pickle, Niemoeller & Flynn and John E. Salmon, Miami, for ap-pellee.

Before PEARSON, NATHAN and HUB-BART, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. *Youngblood v. Citrus Associates of the New York Cotton Exchange, Inc.,*276 So.2d 505 (Fla. 4th DCA 1973).