alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### PROVIDENT LIFE AND ACCIDENT INSURANCE COMPANY, a Foreign Corporation authorized to do insurance business in the State of Florida, Arthur Hirschberg, and Firemen’s Fund Insurance Company, a Foreign Corporation authorized to do insurance business in the State of Florida, Appellants, v. Robert LEBO, Appellee.

Nos. 76-2088, 76-2089.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Feb. 21, 1978.

*196Shutts & Bowen and Brenton Ver Ploeg, Corlett, Merritt, Killian & Sikes, Greene & Cooper, Miami, for appellants.

Tobin & Fisch and Donald E. Krentsa, Miami, for appellee.

Before HAVERFIELD, C. J., and HEN-DRY and KEHOE, JJ.

HENDRY, Judge.

Appellants, defendants below, bring this consolidated appeal from an order vacating a judgment of dismissal, rendered pursuant to Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.540(b).

There is but one issue on appeal, to-wit: whether the trial court abused its discretion in allowing a substitution of party plaintiff more than 90 days after the filing of a “suggestion of death.” We hold that no abuse of discretion has been shown, and affirm.

Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.260(a)(1) provides that:

> “If a party dies and the claim is not thereby extinguished, the court may order substitution of the proper parties. The motion for substitution may be made by any party or by the successors or representatives of the deceased party and, together with the notice of hearing, shall be served on all parties as provided in Rule 1.080 and upon persons not parties in the manner provided for the service of a summons. Unless the motion for substitution is made within 90 days after the death is suggested upon the record by service of a statement of the fact of the death in the manner provided for the service of the motion, the action shall be dismissed as to the deceased party.”

The above statute has been interpreted liberally to allow substitution of a party after 90 days of the suggestion of death upon a showing of excusable neglect, inadvertence, mistake, etc. pursuant to Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.540(b)(1), *Relief from Judgment, Decrees or Orders. King v. Tyree’s of Tampa, Inc.,*315 So.2d 538 (Fla. 2d DCA 1975); and pursuant to Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.090(b), *Time. New Hampshire Insurance Company v. Kimbrell,*343 So.2d 107 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977). The trial judge, after a hearing, vacated his judgment of dismissal pursuant to Fla.R. Civ.P. 1.540(b), and in so doing, the record does not reflect an abuse of his discretion.

Accordingly, the order appealed from is affirmed and the cause remanded for further proceedings.

Affirmed.
Exhibit






Exhibit 10.1


AMENDMENT NO. 4
TO
PRECISION CASTPARTS CORP.
SUPPLEMENTAL EXECUTIVE RETIREMENT PROGRAM
LEVEL TWO PLAN—ONGOING




Precision Castparts Corp.
an Oregon corporation
4650 SW Macadam, Suite 200
Portland, OR  97239    Company


The 2005 Restatement of the Precision Castparts Corp. Supplemental Executive Retirement Program - Level Two Plan—Ongoing (the “Plan”), as amended through Amendment No. 3, is further amended pursuant to Plan section 6.3 as follows:


		
	1.
	Limited Amount Cash-outs




In order to allow for limited amount cash-outs as permitted by Treasury Regulation 1.409A-3(j)(4)(v), the following changes are made to the Plan:


1.1    The first sentence of section 3.1 is amended to add reference to “3.3-6” between “2” and “3.4-2(c)”.


1.2    Section 3.2-2 is amended to add the phrase “Except as provided in 3.3-6,” at the beginning of the first sentence.


1.3    A new section 3.3-6 is added to the Plan:


3.3-6    Notwithstanding any election made by a Participant under 3.3 or 3.4, the Company may distribute a Participant’s benefit from the Plan in a single lump sum payment if the value of the Participant’s vested benefit does not exceed the applicable dollar amount under Code section 402(g)(1)(B) as of the date of the distribution and the distribution results in the termination and liquidation of the entirety of the Participant’s interest under the Plan and any other agreements, methods, programs or other arrangements treated as deferred under a single nonqualified deferred compensation plan with the Plan under Treasury Regulation 1.409A-1(c)(2).  









		
	2.
	Effective Date




This amendment shall be effective August 1, 2015.


PRECISION CASTPARTS CORP.




By:      /s/ Steven C. Blackmore        
    
Name of signer:  Steven C. Blackmore    
                            
Date signed:      August 25        , 2015
EXHIBIT (23)

                         INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT


DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP
1700 Market Street
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania   19103-3984
Telephone (215) 246-2300
Facsimile (215) 569-2441




INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

We consent to the  incorporation  by reference in  Registration  Statements  No.
33-15167  and No.  33-82172  of State  Bancorp,  Inc. on Forms S-8 of our report
dated  January 24, 2001,  appearing in this Annual  Report on Form 10-K of State
Bancorp, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2000.




s/DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

March 26, 2001
Exhibit 31.1
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  1)
    
    I have reviewed this amended quarterly report on Form 10-Q/A of American Spectrum Realty, 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 registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this
report;4)
    
    The registrants other certifying officer 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)) for the registrant 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 registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is 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 registrant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; andc)
    
    disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter that
has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants
internal control over financial reporting;
 5)
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent
evaluation of the internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and
audit committee of the registrant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 registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information;
andb)
    
    any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who
have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.
 Date: October 8, 2008
    By:
    /s/ William J. CardenWilliam J. CardenChief Executive Officer 25
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 160 (Tuesday, August 19, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 44108]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-21962]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration
[A-201-504]


Certain Porcelain-on-Steel Cookware From Mexico; Notice of 
Extension of Time Limit for Antidumping Duty Administrative Review

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.

EFFECTIVE DATE: August 19, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kate Johnson or Dolores Peck at (202) 
482-4929, or Mary Jenkins at (202) 482-1756, Office of AD/CVD 
Enforcement, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, N.W., 
Washington, DC 20230.

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (the Department) is extending the 
time limit for the preliminary results of the tenth administrative 
review of the antidumping duty order on porcelain-on-steel cookware 
from Mexico for the period December 1, 1995, through November 30, 1996. 
This extension is made pursuant to the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended 
by the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (hereinafter, ``the Act'').

POSTPONEMENT: Under the Act, the Department may extend the deadline for 
completion of an administrative review if it determines it is not 
practicable to complete the review within the statutory time limit of 
365 days. The Department finds that it is not practicable to complete 
the tenth administrative review of certain porcelain-on-steel cookware 
from Mexico within this time limit.
    In accordance with section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act, the Department 
will extend the time for completion for the preliminary results of this 
review from a 245-day period to no later than a 365-day period. 
Therefore, the final results are now due by December 31, 1997.

    Dated: August 13, 1997.
Jeffrey P. Bialos,
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 97-21962 Filed 8-18-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-M
# C_2023151EN.01002701.xml

| 28.4.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 151/27 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.4.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 151/27

---

Corrigendum to Statement of revenue and expenditure of the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training (Cedefop) for the financial year 2022 – amending budget No 1

(
  Official Journal of the European Union C 73 of 28 February 2023
  )

(2023/C 151/06)

On page 86, Revenue, Chapter 1:

for:

‘REVENUE

| Title
  Chapter | Heading | Budget 2022 | Amending budget No 1 | New amount |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 1 | EUROPEAN UNION SUBSIDY | | | |
| 1 0 | EUROPEAN UNION SUBSIDY | 18 360 000 | | 18 360 000 |
| | Title 1 — Total | 18 360 000 | | 18 360 000 |
| ... | | | | |
| | GRAND TOTAL | 18 834 420 | | 18 834 420 ’ |

Title

Chapter

Heading

Budget 2022

Amending budget No 1

New amount

1

EUROPEAN UNION SUBSIDY

1 0

EUROPEAN UNION SUBSIDY

18 360 000

18 360 000

Title 1 — Total

18 360 000

18 360 000

...

GRAND TOTAL

18 834 420

18 834 420 ’

read:

‘REVENUE

| Title
  Chapter | Heading | Budget 2022 | Amending budget No 1 | New amount |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 1 | EUROPEAN UNION SUBSIDY | | | |
| 1 0 | EUROPEAN UNION SUBSIDY | 18 360 000 | – 400 000 | 17 960 000 |
| | Title 1 — Total | 18 360 000 | – 400 000 | 17 960 000 |
| ... | | | | |
| | GRAND TOTAL | 18 834 420 | – 400 000 | 18 434 420 ’ |

Title

Chapter

Heading

Budget 2022

Amending budget No 1

New amount

1

EUROPEAN UNION SUBSIDY

1 0

EUROPEAN UNION SUBSIDY

18 360 000

– 400 000

17 960 000

Title 1 — Total

18 360 000

– 400 000

17 960 000

...

GRAND TOTAL

18 834 420

– 400 000

18 434 420 ’

---
No. 00-6766.

#### Kibler *v.*Walters.

C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT

The undersigned Chairman of the Board, Chief Executive Officer and President and Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of AMC
Entertainment Inc. (the "Company"), each hereby certifies, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:



Dated:
June 23, 2004

|/s/PETER C. BROWNPeter C. Brown
Chairman of the Board, Chief Executive
Officer and President |  | 
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | 
|/s/CRAIG R. RAMSEYCraig R. Ramsey
Executive Vice President and
Chief Financial Officer       |  | 

[A
signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to AMC Entertainment Inc. and will be retained by AMC Entertainment Inc. and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.]

---



QuickLinks
No. 00-6909.

#### Glass *v.*Douglas et al.

C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

(18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)

I, George J. Bilek, Vice President, Finance of Juno Lighting, Inc., certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:
(1)  The annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended November 30, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on February 25, 2005 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
(2)  The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Juno Lighting, Inc. 
Dated: February 25, 2005



/s/ GEORGE J. BILEK
George J. Bilek
Executive Vice President,
Chief Financial Officer



Page 58
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 112 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 112

            For the relief of Denes Fulop and Gyorgyi Fulop.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            January 24, 2005

Mrs. Feinstein introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
               referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
            For the relief of Denes Fulop and Gyorgyi Fulop.

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

SECTION 1. ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS.

    (a) In General.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law or any 
order, for the purposes of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 
U.S.C. 1101 et seq.), Denes Fulop and Gyorgyi Fulop shall be deemed to 
have been lawfully admitted to, and remained in, the United States, and 
shall be eligible for issuance of an immigrant visa or for adjustment 
of status under section 245 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 
U.S.C. 1255).
    (b) Application and Payment of Fees.--Subsection (a) shall apply 
only if the applications for issuance of immigrant visas or the 
applications for adjustment of status are filed with appropriate fees 
within 2 years after the date of enactment of this Act.
    (c) Reduction of Immigrant Visa Numbers.--Upon the granting of 
immigrant visas to Denes Fulop and Gyorgyi Fulop, the Secretary of 
State shall instruct the proper officer to reduce by 2, during the 
current or subsequent fiscal year, the total number of immigrant visas 
that are made available to natives of the country of the aliens' birth 
under section 202(e) or 203(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act 
(8 U.S.C. 1152(e), 1153(a)), as applicable.
                                 <all>
```
NUMBER 13-17-00252-CR

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

PHILLIP JACKSON, Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee.

On Appeal from the 105th District Court

of Nueces County, Texas.

SUPPLEMENTAL ABATEMENT ORDER

Before Justices Rodriguez, Benavides, and Longoria

Order Per Curiam

Appellant, Phillip Jackson, filed a notice of appeal with this Court from a judgment 

nunc pro tunc signed on April 20, 2017. The record currently before the Court fails to 

include a certification of appellant’s right to appeal. This appeal was abated and 

remanded by this Court on August 23, 2017, to the trial court for entry of a certification of 
2

appellant’s right to appeal. The trial court has advised this Court that a hearing was 

scheduled and appellant failed to appear. 

This sequence of events requires us to effectuate our responsibility to avoid further 

delay and to preserve the parties' rights. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.3(a)(1). Accordingly, 

this appeal remains abated. The trial court shall utilize whatever means necessary to 

make appropriate findings and recommendations concerning the following: (1) whether 

appellant can be located; (2) whether appellant has abandoned his appeal; and (3) if any 

other orders are necessary to ensure the proper and timely pursuit of appellant’s appeal. 

If it is determined appellant has not abandoned his appeal, the trial court should enter a 

certification of the appellant’s right to appeal. 

The trial court shall cause its finding and recommendations, together with any 

orders it may enter regarding the aforementioned issues, to be included in a supplemental 

clerk's record. Furthermore, the trial court shall cause a supplemental reporter's record 

of any proceedings to be prepared. The supplemental clerk's record and supplemental 

reporter's record, if any, shall be filed with the Clerk of this Court within thirty days from 

the date of this order.

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

PER CURIAM

Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).

Delivered and filed the

17th day of November, 2017.
#### STATE ex rel. Austin DUNCAN v. STATE of Louisiana.

No. 97-KH-3145.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 15, 1998.

In re Duncan, Austin; — Plaintiffs); applying for supervisory and/or remedial writ; Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court, Div. “C”, No. 366-982; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 97KW-1441.

Denied.

TRAYLOR, J., not on panel.
#### Lazaro J. DIEZ, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 77-662.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

June 6, 1978.

*56Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender and Warren S. Schwartz, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen. and Anthony C. Musto, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

Before HAYERFIELD, C. J., and PEARSON and NATHAN, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Defendant, Lazaro Diez, appeals his conviction for burglary of a dwelling and attempted petit larceny (as reduced from grand larceny).

At the conclusion of the trial, the court rendered the following instruction to the jury:

> “The defendant, Lazaro Diez, did not take the witness stand and testify. This is a matter of passing interest only since there is no obligation passed upon the defendant to do or say anything. The entire burden is upon the State of Florida to prove the truth of the charge and you are not to draw any inferences from the fact that the defendant did not testify.”

Defendant argues that the instruction constitutes reversible error because it was contradictory and misleading inasmuch as the first portion of the instruction that the defendant’s failure to testify is a matter of passing interest conflicts with the latter portion of the instruction that the defendant’s failure to testify is a matter the jury is not to consider.

A challenged jury instruction or portion of the instruction must be considered with the whole instruction or other instructions bearing on the same subject in determining whether the law was fairly presented or whether the instruction might have misled the jury. Waters *v. State,*298 So.2d 208 (Fla. 2d DCA 1974).

Looking at the challenged instruction as a whole, we find that it was neither contradictory nor improper. After reading the entire instruction, we cannot agree with the defendant that the first portion thereof using the phrase “of passing interest” indicated to the jury that defendant’s failure to testify was of interest. That interpretation is possible only if this portion is read in isolation. However read i'n context, the instruction is quite consistent and proper.

Affirmed.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 159 (Monday, August 18, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 44010]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-21876]


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

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM


Sunshine Act Meeting

Agency Holding the Meeting: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve 
System.

Time and Date: 10:00 a.m., Thursday, August 21, 1997.

Place: Marriner S. Eccles Federal Reserve Board Building, C Street 
entrance between 20th and 21st Streets, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20551.

Status: Open.

Matters To Be Considered:

    1. Proposed amendments to the prudential restrictions (firewalls) 
imposed on the operations of section 20 subsidiaries of bank holding 
companies (proposed earlier for public comment; Docket No. R-0958).
    2. Publication for comment of proposed amendments to the Federal 
Reserve Board's risk-based capital guidelines concerning treatment of 
recourse obligations, direct credit substitutes, and securitized 
transactions (proposed earlier for public comment; Docket No. R-0835).
    3. Any items carried forward from a previously announced meeting.

    Note: This meeting will be recorded for the benefit of those 
unable to attend. Cassettes will be available for listening in the 
Board's Freedom of Information Office, and copies may be ordered for 
$5 per cassette by calling (202) 452-3684 or by writing to: Freedom 
of Information Office, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve 
System, Washington, D.C. 20551.

Contact Person For More Information: Mr. Joseph R. Coyne, Assistant to 
the Board; (202) 452-3204.

    Dated: August 14, 1997.
Jennifer J. Johnson,
Deputy Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 97-21876 Filed 8-14-97; 10:26 am]
BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
# Official Journal C 117/2013

| | ISSN 1977-091X
  doi:10.3000/1977091X.C_2013.117.eng |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 117 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 5624 April 2013 |

ISSN 1977-091X

doi:10.3000/1977091X.C_2013.117.eng

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 117

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 5624 April 2013

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | IV   Notices |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2013/C 117/01 | Euro exchange rates | 1 |

Notice No

Contents

page

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2013/C 117/01

Euro exchange rates

1

---

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN