alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Daniel Prince WOODRUFF, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. HH-59.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

June 23, 1978.

*50Michael J. Minerva, Public Defender, Tallahassee, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and Raymond L. Marky, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, for appellee.

SMITH, Judge.

Woodruff appeals from his conviction upon charges of sexual battery and burglary of a dwelling. His trial counsel thoughtlessly conducted a group interview of prospective defense witnesses after the trial court had instructed all concerned that the rule of sequestration of witnesses would be invoked. When the prosecutor moved the court to exclude the testimony of the defense witnesses involved in the conference, defense counsel was given an opportunity to object, to attempt a showing that their testimony was critical to the defense, or to show that, for other reasons, justice did not require exclusion of the testimony. Defense counsel neither objected nor offered such a showing, and the court excluded the testimony of certain witnesses. Further inquiry by the court would have been appropriate, had counsel requested and assisted that inquiry. See *Dumas v. State,*350 So.2d 464 (Fla.1977). Defense counsel having failed to preserve the point at trial, appellant cannot raise it here. *State v. Barber, 301*So.2d 7 (Fla.1974).

AFFIRMED.

McCORD, C. J., and MELVIN, J., concur.
**Conference Call with EPA and Verizon November 22, 2011 at 1pm**  Participants: Elizabeth McDermott, OUST Erin Knighton, OUST Paul Miller, OUST Julianne Barnum, Verizon Greg M yka , Verizon

Discussion: EPA OUST and Verizon discussed wastewater treatment tanks including those that are exempt from the UST regulations and those that were previously deferred but may now come under the proposed UST regulations.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                       2,786,554
<SECURITIES>                                    67,437
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,605,932
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                  2,291,768
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             6,827,422
<PP&E>                                         653,942
<DEPRECIATION>                                 509,091
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               7,183,324
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          754,801
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        50,948
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 7,183,324
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             6,273,768
<CGS>                                        2,847,224
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                5,922,885
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                501,504
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            501,504
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   501,504
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .10
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .10


</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          OCT-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-01-1999
<CASH>                                           2,200
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   43,471
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     53,937
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               103,028
<PP&E>                                          57,780
<DEPRECIATION>                                (24,187)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 161,257
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           51,222
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           594
<OTHER-SE>                                      58,873
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   161,257
<SALES>                                        306,044
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               306,044
<CGS>                                          240,977
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  240,977
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                49,511
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,674
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 12,882
<INCOME-TAX>                                     5,174
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     7,708
<EPS-BASIC>                                       1.19
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.10


</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 153 (Friday, August 8, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 42770-42771]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-20942]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. CP97-674-000]


ANR Pipeline Company; Notice of Request Under Blanket 
Authorization

August 4, 1997.
    Take notice that on July 29, 1997, ANR Pipeline Company (ANR), 500 
Renaissance Center, Detroit, Michigan 48243, filed in Docket No. CP97-
674-000 a request pursuant to Sections 157.205 and 157.212 of the 
Commission's Regulations under the Natural Gas Act (18 CFR 157.205, 
157.212,) for approval to construct and operate an interconnection 
between ANR and Ohio Gas Company (Ohio Gas) for delivery of natural gas 
to Ohio Gas in Defiance County, Ohio, under ANR' blanket certificate 
issued in Docket No. CP82-480-000, pursuant to Section 7(c) of the 
Natural Gas Act (NGA), all as more fully set forth in the request which 
is on file with the Commission and open to public inspection.
    ANR states that the proposed interconnection will consist of a two-
inch hot tap, a two-inch positive displacement meter, an electronic 
measurement system, and approximately 150 feet of two-inch piping. ANR 
indicates that the total cost of the facilities is $99,500, which will 
be fully reimbursed by Ohio Gas. It is further indicated that Ohio Gas 
will use deliveries of natural gas under existing Part 284 
transportation service agreements with ANR to serve residential and 
commercial customers.
    Any person or the Commission's Staff may, within 45 days of the 
issuance of the instant notice by the Commission, file pursuant to Rule 
214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 
385.214), a motion to intervene and pursuant to Section 157.205 of the 
regulations under the

[[Page 42771]]

Natural Gas Act (18 CFR 157.205), a protest to the request. If no 
protest is filed within the time allowed therefor, the proposed 
activities shall be deemed to be authorized effective the day after the 
time allowed for filing a protest. If a protest is filed and not 
withdrawn 30 days after the time allowed for filing a protest, the 
instant request shall be treated as an application for authorization 
pursuant to Section 7 of the Natural Gas Act.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-20942 Filed 8-7-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
#### Kathryn K. GLASS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. HH-56.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Feb. 28, 1978.

On Rehearing April 21, 1978.

Jason M. Chapnick, Gainesville, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and Charles W. Musgrove, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant’s sentence for possession of more than five grams of cannabis — five years imprisonment suspended after two years and followed by five years probation — exceeded the maximum allowable penalty for that offense. Section 775.-082(3)(d), Florida Statutes (1975). The cause is thus remanded for correction of the sentencing error. See footnote 4, *Noble v. State,*353 So.2d 819 (Fla.1977). Appellant’s other points are without merit.

ON REHEARING GRANTED

PER CURIAM.

The Appellant petitions for a rehearing urging that our opinion should have required that a different judge resentence her, citing *Santobello v. New York,*404 U.S. 257, 92 S.Ct. 495, 30 L.Ed.2d 427 (1971).

The Supreme Court in reversing the New York Court directed that should the Court upon remand require specific performance of the plea agreement, a different judge should resentence the defendant.

Our opinion affirmed the proceedings in the trial court except the sentence exceeding the maximum sentence provided by law.

*Santobello*dictates a different judge should resentence the defendant in this case.

McCORD, C. J., BOYER, J., and McLANE, RALPH M., Associate Judge, concur.
IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-08-00333-CV

GERMANIA INSURANCE COMPANY,

Appellant

v.

GARY BORTZ, SHEILA BORTZ, AND ALICIA 

HERNANDEZ, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS 

NEXT FRIEND OF D. M., A MINOR,

Appellees

From the 170th District Court

McLennan County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2008-1057-4

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant and appellees have filed a joint motion to dismiss this appeal. The 

parties state that all matters which were the subject of the appeal have been settled and 

request the appeal be dismissed with prejudice. Counsel for each party has signed the 

joint motion.

Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed with prejudice. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(a).

TOM GRAY

Chief Justice
Germania Insurance Company v. Bortz Page 2

Before Chief Justice Gray,

Justice Reyna, and

Justice Davis

Appeal dismissed

Opinion delivered and filed May 27, 2009

[CV06]
II 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1552 

To amend Public Law 97–435 to extend the authorization for the Secretary 

of the Interior to release certain conditions contained in a patent concerning certain land conveyed by the United States to Eastern Washington University until December 31, 2009. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 28, 2005 

Ms. CANTWELL introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 

referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

A BILL

To amend Public Law 97–435 to extend the authorization 

for the Secretary of the Interior to release certain conditions contained in a patent concerning certain land conveyed by the United States to Eastern Washington University until December 31, 2009.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2

•S 1552 IS

1 SECTION 1. EASTERN WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY LAND 

2 TRANSFER AUTHORIZATION EXTENSION. 

3 Section 1(c) of Public Law 97–435 (96 Stat. 2281) 

4 is amended by striking ‘‘five years after the enactment of 

5 this Act’’ and inserting ‘‘on December 31, 2009’’.

Æ
#### COGGAN v. COGGAN.

No. 37952.

Supremo Court of Florida.

Jan. 1969.

Certiorari denied without opinion. 213 So.2d 902.
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Michael J. Degen, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual Report of Nortech Systems Incorporated on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009, fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Annual Report on Form 10-K fairly presents in all material respects the
financial condition and results of operations of Nortech Systems Incorporated.

March 15, 2010

By:

/s/ MICHAEL J. DEGEN Michael J. Degen Chief Executive Officer
Nortech Systems Incorporated


I,
Richard G. Wasielewski, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual Report of
Nortech Systems Incorporated on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Annual Report on Form 10-K fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of
Nortech Systems Incorporated.

March 15, 2010

By:

/s/ RICHARD G. WASIELEWSKI Richard G. Wasielewski Chief Financial Officer
Nortech Systems Incorporated


---
Filed by Automated Filing Services Inc. (604) 609-0244 - Exploration Drilling International Inc. - Exhibit 10.44






LOAN AGREEMENT 

between 

EDI Exploration Drilling International Holding GmbH

represented by the managing director 
Günter Thiemann 
Goethestrasse
59, 45721 Haltern am See 

- in the following referred to as
lender -

and 

EDI Exploration Drilling International GmbH 
represented by
the managing director 
Rainer Rotthäuser 
Goethestrasse 59, 45721 Haltern
am See 

- in the following referred to as
borrower -

§ 1 Granting of loan 

	1. 	
      The lender grants the borrower a loan in the amount
    of



Euro 10,000.00 
(in words: Euro ten thousand) 

	2. 	
      The loan will be paid out by transfer into the borrower’s
      account at the National-Bank, branch code 360 200 30, account 110
    5167.



§ 2 Interest, term and repayment of loan 

	1. 	
      The annual interest payable on the loan shall be 5.0
      %.

	 	 
	2. 	
      The term of the loan shall be 12 months, ending on
      14/08/2008.

	 	 
	3. 	
      The loan shall be repaid on 14/08/2008 into the lender’s
      account.



§ 3 Early repayment 

The borrower is entitled to repay the loan including
accumulated interest in one lump sum at any time, including before the end of
the term of the loan. A prepayment penalty shall not be due. 




§ 4 Extraordinary right of cancellation 

The lender is entitled to recall the loan effective
immediately, if the borrowers’ financial circumstances deteriorate considerably,
thus putting the claim of repayment at risk. 

§ 5 Securities 

The borrower irrevocably transfers all of his claims as
managing director or shareholder (salary claims, profit distributions, new
shares issued, profit and loss transfers, liquidation proceeds, etc.) to the
lender. 

§ 6 Supplementary agreements, amendments, severability,
executed copies 

	1. 	
      There are no supplementary agreements. Amendments,
      additions as well as deletions of individual provisions of this agreement
      must be made in writing in order to be effective.

	 	 
	2. 	
      Should individual provisions of this agreement be
      invalid, the remainder of the agreement shall not be affected. In this
      case, the parties to the agreement are required to assume that a
      replacement provision has been agreed to, which fulfils the economic
      purpose of the invalid provision as much as possible.

	 	 
	3. 	
      This contract shall be issued in duplicate. The lender
      and the borrower shall each receive a copy signed by both parties to the
      agreement.




 

	Haltern, August 12, 2007 	  
	  	  
	  	  
	  	  
	Signature 	Signature 
	________________________________________	________________________________________  
	EDI Exploration Drilling International Holding GmbH 	EDI Exploration Drilling International GmbH
  
	Managing director, Günter Thiemann 	Managing director, Rainer Rotthäuser 
	- Lender - 	- Borrower - 


2
Amendment No. 3 to 1991 Employee Stock Purchase and Dividend Reinvestment Plan



 Exhibit 4(h) 
 Amendment No. 3 to 1991 Employee Stock Purchase and Dividend Reinvestment Plan 
 STATE AUTO FINANCIAL
CORPORATION 
 AMENDMENT NO. 3 
 TO 
 1991 EMPLOYEE STOCK PURCHASE 
 AND 
 DIVIDEND REINVESTMENT PLAN 
 The State Auto Financial Corporation 1991 Employee Stock Purchase and Dividend Reinvestment Plan (the “Plan”) is hereby amended pursuant to the
following provisions. 
 1. Shares Subject to the Plan. 
 As of March 1, 1996, the total number of common shares available for sale under the Plan was 800,000. As a result of a 1996 3-for-2 stock split and a 1998 2-for-1 stock split, the total number of common shares
available for sale under the Plan prior to the effective date of this amendment has been proportionately increased from 800,000 to 2,400,000 under Section XVI of the Plan. 
 In order to increase the number of common shares, without par value, available for sale under the Plan, the first sentence of Section VI of the Plan is
hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows: 
 The total number of shares to be available under Section IX of the Plan is 3,400,000
common shares, without par value, of the Company (“Stock”) which may be authorized but unissued shares or issued shares reacquired by the Company and held as treasury shares. 
 2. Effective Date; Construction. 
 The effective date of this amendment is May 1, 2007, and this amendment shall be deemed to be part of the Plan as of such date. In the event of any inconsistencies between the provisions of the Plan and this amendment, the provisions
of this amendment shall control. Except as expressly modified by this amendment, the Plan shall continue in full force and effect without change. 
 This amendment shall be submitted to the Company’s shareholders for their approval as soon as practicable but in no event later than 12 months after this amendment has been adopted by the Company’s board of directors. If this
amendment is not approved by the Company’s shareholders within such 12 month period, this amendment shall automatically become null and void and have no further force or effect, and the Plan shall continue in effect without this amendment.
Exhibit 10.4

 

July 21, 2015

 

Diplomat Pharmacy, Inc.

4100 S. Saginaw Street

Flint, MI  48507

 

Re:          Termination of Voting Agreement

 

Ladies and Gentlemen:

 

Reference is made to that certain voting agreement (the “Voting Agreement”) dated as of August 15, 2014 by and among Diplomat Pharmacy, Inc., a Michigan corporation (the “Company”) and the persons listed on the signature pages thereto (the “Shareholders”).  Capitalized terms used herein and not otherwise defined shall have the meanings set forth in the Voting Agreement.

 

This letter constitutes the express written consent of Majority Holder to terminate the Voting Agreement pursuant to Section 9(c), effective immediately.  You are hereby notified that the Voting Agreement is no longer of any force or effect.

 

	
 
    	
Regards,
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
/s/   Philip R. Hagerman
    
	
 
    	
Philip   R. Hagerman
    
	
 
    	
Majority   Holder
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
cc:   Shareholders (Via Email)
# DLA Distribution employees honored at DLA 50th annual Employee Recognition Awards

/ Published Dec. 19, 2017
FORT BELVOIR, Va., Among the honorees at this year’s DLA 50th Annual Employee Recognition Program ceremony were 15 DLA Distribution employees honored for their outstanding performance and contributions to DLA and its customers. 
During ceremony, which took place on Thursday, Dec. 12, DLA Director Army Lt. Gen. Darrell Williams honored the following Distribution employees: 
      -  Michael Daigle, DLA Distribution Corpus Christi, Texas,****Top 10 Employee; 
      -  Devin Humphrey, DLA Distribution Warner Robins, Georgia, Top 10 Employee; 
      -  Emanuel Lee, DLA Distribution Norfolk, Virginia, Top 10 Employee; 
      -  Marc Chesson, DLA Distribution San Joaquin, California, Top 10 Employee; 
      -  Shannon Fry, DLA Distribution, Top 10 Employee; 
      -  Michael Timbang, DLA Distribution Pearl Harbor, Hawaii,****Leader of the Year; 
      -  Trevor Downing, DLA Distribution Corpus Christi, Texas,****Employee of the Quarter: 
      -  Air Force Capt. Dawn Pieper, DLA Distribution San Joaquin, California, Company Grade Officer of the Year; 
      -  Army Staff Sgt. William Fernandez, DLA Distribution, Junior Noncommissioned Officer of the Year; 
      -  Navy Reserve Lt. John Elswick, DLA Distribution, Junior Reserve Officer of the Year; 
      -  Navy Reserve LSC Susan Jerrim, DLA Distribution Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, Senior Reserve Noncommissioned Officer of the Year; 
      -  Beatrice Holman, DLA Distribution Anniston, Alabama, Safety Professional of the Year; 
      -  Kathy Braley, DLA Distribution Red River, Texas, Safety Champion of the Year; 
      -  Foreign Military Sales Tactical Vehicle Mission Support Team, DLA Distribution, Employee Safety/Voluntary Protection Program (VPP) Team Award; 
      -  Patrick VanSant, DLA Distribution, Acquisition Support Professional of the Year. 
      -
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

 v.

VICTOR MANUEL BOJORQUEZALVAREZ,

 Defendant - Appellant.

No. 12-10378

D.C. No. 2:09-cr-00294-LDG

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Nevada

Lloyd D. George, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted April 16, 2013** 

Before: CANBY, IKUTA, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.

Victor Manuel Bojorquez-Alvarez appeals from the 12-month sentence

imposed upon revocation of supervised release. We have jurisdiction under 28

U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

FILED

APR 22 2013

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 12-10378

Bojorquez-Alvarez contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable

in light of the fact that, at the time of sentencing, he had already served an 18-

month sentence for the immigration offense that triggered his revocation. The

district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing Bojorquez-Alvarez’s

sentence. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). The 12-month

sentence is substantively reasonable in light of Bojorquez-Alvarez’s failure to be

deterred and breach of the court’s trust. See 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e); United States v.

Simtob, 485 F.3d 1058, 1062-63 (9th Cir. 2007).

AFFIRMED.
#### STATE of Louisiana ex rel. Sammy Lee HAYES v. Ross MAGGIO, Warden Louisiana State Penitentiary.

No. 61239.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Jan. 27, 1978.

In re: Sammy Lee Hayes, applying for writ of habeas corpus. Parish of Ouachita.

Denied.