alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano 

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 November 25, 2015

d1118

Order 

Clerk

November 25, 2015

151368

STARR STIMPSON,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 151368

COA: 319165

Oakland CC: 2012-128168-NO

GFI MANAGEMENT SERVICES, INC.,

HARBOUR CLUB APARTMENTS, and

HARBOUR DETROIT SQUARE, L.L.C.,

Defendants-Appellants. 

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the February 24, 2015

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered and, pursuant to MCR 7.305(H)(1), in 

lieu of granting leave to appeal, we REVERSE that part of the Court of Appeals 

judgment holding that a reasonable jury could find that the plaintiff had no choice but to 

confront the hazard posed by the snow and ice. In Hoffner v Lanctoe, 492 Mich 450, 

468-69 (2012), this Court clarified that, for an unreasonably dangerous hazard to be 

“effectively unavoidable,” it must be essentially “inescapable.” Effective unavoidability 

is characterized by “an inability to be avoided, an inescapable result, or the inevitability 

of a given outcome.” Id. In this instance, it is undisputed that plaintiff selected the 

location where she parked her truck, chose to use that vehicle even though she had a 

second vehicle parked under a carport, and did not attempt to use the salt near her 

apartment door. The Oakland Circuit Court correctly granted summary disposition to the 

defendants and the Court of Appeals erred by reversing. We therefore REMAND this 

case to the circuit court for reinstatement of the judgment in favor of the defendants. 

We do not retain jurisdiction.
## L i D A R D r o n e S e r v i c e s , L L C

E q u i p m e n t C h e c k l i s t

A
. A i r c r a f t a . T r a v e l c a s e b
. L o g b o o k c . 2 c a m e r a m o u n t i n g s c r e w s d
. 2 b a t t e r y t r a y s B
. B a t t e r i e s a . F l i g h t b a t t e r i e s b
. V i d e o t r a n s m i t t e r b a t t e r i e s c . V e l c r o C
. C a m e r a E q u i p m e n t a . T r a v e l C a s e b
. B a t t e r i e s c . C h a r g e r d
. L e n s c a p e . L e n s f
. C l e a n i n g C l o t h s g . D u s t B l a s t e r h
. F i l t e r s i
. S D c a r d s D
. G r o u n d s t a t i o n s a . M o n i t o r s b
. T r i p o d s c . A n t e n n a s d
. B a t t e r i e s e . B a t t e r y a d a

p t e r c a b l e s E
. R a d i o s a . T r a v e l c a s e b
. B a t t e r i e s c . C h a r g e r F
. C h a r g e r a . P o w e r s u p p l y b
. P o w e r s u p p l y c a b l e c . C h a r g e r d
. B a l a n c e b o a r d s e . B a t t e r y a d a

p t e r s G
. L a p t o p a . P o w e r s u p p l y b
. L a p t o p c a r r y i n g c a s e H
. S p a r e p a r t s a . P r o p e l l e r s b
. Z i p t i e s c . S u p e r g l u e d
. D o ub l e ­ s i d e d t a

p e e . B o o m l o c k s f
. V e l c r o I
. T o o l s a . B a t t e r y v o l t a g e c h e c k e r s b
. T o o l k i t c . S c i s s o r s d
. A l l e n w r e n c h e s e . I n f r a r e d t h e r m o m e t e r f
. S o l d e r i n g i r o n g . S o l d e r h
. S h r i n k t ub e J
. P a y l o a d a . L i D A R s e n s o r b
. I M U u n i t c . G P S u n i t d
. I n t e l N u c O n b o a r d C o m p u t e r e . C a m e r a
Searched for **https://www.genome.gov/**

 

19961997199819992000200120022003200420052006200720082009201020112012201320142015201620172018201920202021202220232024

*Note:* This calendar view maps the number of captures of **https://www.genome.gov/**, *not* how many times the site was actually updated.

Look Up URL in general Internet Archive web collection.
# C o u rt o f

A p p ea ls
o f t h e S t a te o f

G eo rg ia

ATLANTA,_

_ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ Th e Co u rt

o f Ap p ea l s h er eb y p a s s es t h e f

o ll owi n g o r der :

A1 6 A0 75 7 . BOATSW AI N v . THE TJ X COMPANI ES, I NC. et a l

.
Th e ab o v e ap p eal was d ock et ed o n D ecem b er 2 9 , 2 0 1 5

. Th e ap p el l an t ’ s b ri ef

was d u e o n o r befo re J an u ary 1 8 , 2 01 6

. As o f t h e d at e o f t h i s o rd er, ap p el lan t h as n ot fi led ap p el l an t ’ s b ri ef an d en um erat i o n o f erro rs

. See Co u rt of A p p eal s Ru l e 2 3 (a). Th erefo re, ap p el l ee’ s m ot i o n t o d i s m i s s ap p eal i s h ereb y GRANTED.

C o u r t o f A p p e a l s o f t h e S t a t e o

f G e o r g ia C le r k ’ s O f f i c e , A t la n t a ,

_

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I c e r t i f y th a t t h e a b o v e i s a t r u e e x t r a c t f r o m
t h e m i n u t e s o

f t h e C o u r t o

f A p p e a l s o f G e o r g i a

. W i tn e s s m y s i g n a t u r e a n d t h e s e a l o

f s a i d c o u r t h e r e t o a f f i x e d t h e d a y a n d y e a r l a s t a b o v e w r i t t e n

.

, C l e r k

. 

## 02/11/2016 February 11, 2016
<PAGE>
                                                                    Exhibit 23.2
 
                        CONSENT OF PRICE WATERHOUSE LLP
                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS
 
    We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statements on Form S-8 (No. 33-92594, No. 33-92596, No. 33-92598, No. 33-92600,
No. 33-92602, No. 33-92604, No. 33-92606, No. 33-92610, No. 33-92612, No.
33-92614, No. 33-92616, No. 33-92618, No. 33-92620, No. 33-92626, No. 33-92628,
No. 33-92630, No. 33-92674 and No. 33-93178) of U.S. Industries, Inc. of our
report dated November 11, 1996 appearing on page 26 of this Form 10-K.
 
/S/ PRICE WATERHOUSE LLP
Morristown, New Jersey
November 20, 1996
|   |   |   | Exhibit 31.1.1  |
|--------|--------|--------|----------------------|

| 1. | I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K/A of Sovran Self Storage, Inc.; and                                                                                                                                                                                                                               |
|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| 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. |

|   |    / S / Robert J. Attea                         Robert J. AtteaChairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer |
|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
EXHIBIT 99-2


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

     In  connection  with  the  Annual  Report  of  Matrix  Bancorp,  Inc.  (the
"Company") on Form 10-K for the year ending December 31, 2002, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Richard
V. Schmitz,  Co-Chief  Executive  Officer of the Company,  certify,  pursuant 18
U.S.C.  Section 1350, as adopted  pursuant to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that:

1.   The report fully complies with the  requirements  of Section 13(a) or 15(d)
     of the Securities and 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 the Company.



Dated:   March 14, 2003                       /s/ Richard V. Schmitz
                                              ----------------------------------
                                              Name: Richard V. Schmitz
                                              Title: Co-Chief Executive Officer
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsLunar and Mars Ascent and Descent/Entry Crew Abort Modes for the Hercules Single-Stage Reusable VehicleThe Hercules single-stage reusable vehicle is designed to support crewed missions to both the lunar surface and Mars surface. The design maximizes crew safety by providing full coverage crew abort capability during ascent and entry/descent, either through abort-to-surface or abort-to-orbit. This paper outlines each of the abort modes and discuss the Hercules vehicle design along with the base and orbital infrastructure required to enable the full coverage abort capability. For each abort mode, trajectory simulations are flown that illustrate the requisite design capabilities and highlight the sensitivity to key design variables.Document ID20180004390Acquisition SourceLangley Research CenterDocument TypeTechnical Memorandum (TM)AuthorsKomar, David R.*(NASA Langley Research Center Hampton, VA, United States)*Tartabini, Paul V.*(NASA Langley Research Center Hampton, VA, United States)*Clark, James R.*(Massachusetts Inst. of Technology (MIT) Cambridge, MA, United States)*Date AcquiredAugust 10, 2018Publication DateJune 1, 2018Subject CategorySpacecraft Design, Testing And PerformanceReport/Patent NumberNF1676L-29511NASA/TM-2018-219839L-20911Funding Number(s)WBS: WBS 295670.01.18.23.01Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightPublic Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType20180004390.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.2 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
CET SERVICES, INC.
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 I certify that, to the best of my knowledge, the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of CET
Services, Inc. for the period ending December 31, 2004: (1) complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934; and (2) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material aspects, the
financial condition and results of operations of CET Services, Inc. /s/ Dale W. Bleck  
 A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002 has been provided to CET Services, Inc. and will be retained by CET Services, Inc. and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission upon request.
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R.

47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 00-20972

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

WALDIR V. PEDROZA, also known as Juan Carlos Pineiro,

also known as John Doe,

Defendant-Appellant.

____________________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

WALDIR PEDROZA-VICTORIA, also known as Charlie,

Defendant-Appellant.

 - - - - - - - - - - 

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. H-97-CR-236-1

- - - - - - - - - -

July 18, 2001

Before EMILIO M. GARZA, STEWART and PARKER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

 Counsel for Waldir Pedroza-Victoria (Pedroza), the Federal

Public Defender, has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a

brief as required by Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). 
No. 00-20972

- 2 -

Pedroza has received copies of counsel’s motion and brief but has

not filed a response. Our independent review of the brief and

the record discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal. See id.

Accordingly, counsel's motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED,

counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and

Pedroza’s APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.
II 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 2018 

To amend the Federal Meat Inspection Act to provide that a quality grade 

label issued by the Secretary of Agriculture for beef and lamb may 

not be used for imported beef or imported lamb. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

NOVEMBER 16, 2005 

Mr. JOHNSON (for himself and Mr. CONRAD) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry 

A BILL 

To amend the Federal Meat Inspection Act to provide that 

a quality grade label issued by the Secretary of Agriculture for beef and lamb may not be used for imported 

beef or imported lamb. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Truth in Quality Grad5 ing Act of 2005’’. 
2 

•S 2018 IS

1 SEC. 2. QUALITY GRADE LABELING OF BEEF AND LAMB. 

2 (a) DEFINITIONS.—Section 1 of the Federal Meat In3 spection Act (21 U.S.C. 601) is amended by adding at 

4 the end the following: 

5 ‘‘(w) BEEF.—The term ‘beef’ means meat produced 

6 from cattle (including veal). 

7 ‘‘(x) IMPORTED BEEF.—The term ‘imported beef’ 

8 means beef that is not United States beef, whether or not 

9 the beef is graded with a quality grade issued by the Sec10 retary. 

11 ‘‘(y) IMPORTED LAMB.—The term ‘imported lamb’ 

12 means lamb that is not United States lamb, whether or 

13 not the lamb is graded with a quality grade issued by the 

14 Secretary. 

15 ‘‘(z) LAMB.—The term ‘lamb’ means meat, other 

16 than mutton, produced from sheep. 

17 ‘‘(aa) UNITED STATES BEEF.— 

18 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The term ‘United States 

19 beef’ means beef produced from cattle slaughtered in 

20 the United States. 

21 ‘‘(2) EXCLUSION.—The term ‘United States 

22 beef’ does not include beef produced from cattle im23 ported into the United States. 

24 ‘‘(bb) UNITED STATES LAMB.— 
3 

•S 2018 IS

1 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The term ‘United States 

2 lamb’ means lamb produced from sheep slaughtered 

3 in the United States. 

4 ‘‘(2) EXCLUSION.—The term ‘United States 

5 lamb’ does not include lamb produced from sheep 

6 imported into the United States.’’. 

7 (b) MISBRANDING.—Section 1(n) of the Federal 

8 Meat Inspection Act (21 U.S.C. 601(n)) is amended— 

9 (1) in paragraph (11), by striking ‘‘or’’ at the 

10 end; 

11 (2) in paragraph (12), by striking the period at 

12 the end and inserting ‘‘; or’’; and 

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

14 ‘‘(13) if it is imported beef or imported lamb 

15 and bears a label that indicates a quality grade 

16 issued by the Secretary.’’. 

17 (c) REGULATIONS.—Not later than 1 year after the 

18 date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Agriculture 

19 shall promulgate final regulations to carry out the amend20 ments made by this section. 

21 (d) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

22 this section take effect 60 days after the date on which 

23 final regulations are promulgated under subsection (c). 

Æ
#### Tommy Lee GAINES v. STATE of Florida.

No. 39192.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Dec. 1969.

Mandamus denied without opinion.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                           82275
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                     8490
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      66035
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                156800
<PP&E>                                          242512
<DEPRECIATION>                                  299746
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  699058
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            10326
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         11345
<OTHER-SE>                                      677387
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    699058
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                  6325
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   297973
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 18914
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               45000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (355562)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (355562)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (355562)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (.015)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.01)
SERVED: August 21, 2013 

i- ------------ -------·-. --

1 

US DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, DC 

IN THE MATTER OF 

SKYWEST AIRLINES, INC. 

FAA DOCKET No. [TO BE ASSIGNED] 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

FDMS No. F AA-20 13-0617 

IN THE MATTER OF 

SKYWEST AIRLINES, INC. 

FAA DOCKET No. [TO BE ASSIGNED] 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

FDMS No. FAA-2013-0619 

ORDER GRANTING 

MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE 

Respondent SkyWest Airlines, Inc. ("Respondent") has filed a Motion to 

Consolidate the cases captioned above into a previously-consolidated proceeding 

encompassing six other cases ("Motion"). See, e.g., Order Granting in Part and 
2 

Denying in Part Motion to Consolidate in FDMS No. FAA-2012-0868 dated July 1, 

2013. In support, it states that the parties are the same as in those proceedings; 

the same violations of the Federal Aviation Regulations are alleged; the facts and 

issues are similar; and Respondent's defenses in each proceeding are the same or 

similar. Consolidation also will promote the effective dispatch of the agency's 

business. 

Complainant Federal Aviation Administration ("Com.plainant") does not object 

to the Motion. 

Respondent's Motion is hereby GRANTED. The matters captioned above are 

hereby consolidated into the following six proceedings: FDMS No. FAA-2012-0868; 

-0869; -0872; -0873; -0874; and -0904. 

/ZA~C~~~ Richard C. Goodwin ~ 

U.S. Administrative Law Judge 

Attachment - Service List 
3 

SERVICE LIST 

ORIGINAL & ONE COPY 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2W10001 

Robert Spitzer, Complainant's Counsel 

Attorney, Office of the Regional Counsel 

Northwest Mountain Region, ANM-7 

Federal Aviation Administration 

1601 Lind Avenue, S.W. 

Renton, W A 98057 

TEL: 425-227-1847 

FAX: 425-227-1007 

ONE COPY 

Michael L. Dworkin, Respondent's Counsel 

Michael L. Dworkin and Associates 

465 California Street, Suite 210 

San Francisco, CA 94104-1808 

TEL: 415-421-2500 

FAJ(: 415-421-2560 

Todd C. Emerson, Esq. 

Director - Government and Legal Affairs 

SkyWest Airlines, Respondent 

444 South River Road 

St. George, UT 84 790 

TEL: 435-634-3530 

FAX: 435-634-3505 

FDMS Nos. FAA-2013-0617 

& FAA-2013-0619 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

1 Service was by U.S. MaiL For service in person or by expedited courier, use the following address: Federal 

Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2WIOOO, Washington, 

DC 20591; Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430. 
4 

The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin, Administrative Law Judge 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200New Jersey Avenue, S.E. (Ell-310) 

Washington, DC 20590 

TEL: 202-366-2139 Attorney-Advisor 

202-366-5121 Legal Assistant 

FAX: 202-366-7536
## U NITED 

## S TATES 

## A IR 

## F ORCE 

## C OURT OF 

## C RIMINAL 

## A PPEALS



### UNITED STATES ) ACM 39071 (rem) Appellee ) )

v. ) ) ORDER Xavier L. RICE ) Staff S ergeant (E

- 5 ) ) U.S. Air Force ) Appellant ) Panel 1

A general court

- martial composed of officers convicted Appellant, contrary to his pleas, of three specifications of abusive s exual contact (Specifications 3, 4, and 5 of the Charge) and one specifica tion of assault consummated by a battery (a les ser included offense of Specification 2 of the Charge) in violation of Articles 120 and 128, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), 10 U.S.C. §§ 920, 928. Th e mem bers sentenced Appellant to a bad

- conduct discharge, 30 days of hard labor without confineme nt, and reduction to E

- 1. The convening authority approved the sentence as adjudged. This court affirmed the findings
and sentence. United States v. Rice , No. ACM 39071, 2017 CCA LEXIS 745 (A.F. Ct. Crim. App. 21 Nov. 2017).

The United States Court of Appe als for the Armed Forces (CAAF) granted
review on the following issue:

WHETHER THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS ERRED IN
DECIDING THAT A PROPENSITY INSTRUCTION IN VIOLATION OF UNITED STATES v. HILLS WAS HARMLESS BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT BECAUSE IT DID NOT CONTRIBUTE TO THE VERDICT.

The CAAF summarily reversed our decision as to Specifications 3, 4, and 5of the Charge and the sentence, set aside the findings of guilty as to Specifications 3, 4, and 5 of the Charge and the sentence, and affirmed the remaining findings. The summary disposition returned the record to the Judge Advocate
General of the Air Force for remand to this court and expressly stat ed that this court may order a rehearing on Specifi cations 3, 4, and 5 of the Charge and the

sentence. United States v. Rice

, ___M.J.___ , No. 18

- 0101, 2018 CAAF LEXIS 208 (C.A.A.F. 18 Apr. 2018)

.United States v. Rice , No. ACM 39071 (rem)

2 Accordingly it is by the court on this 11th day of July, 2018

, ORDERED :

The record of trial is returned to The Judge Advocate General for remand to the convening authority for further action consistent with CAAF’s decision; a rehearing as to Specifications 3, 4, and 5 of the C harge and the sentence is
authorized. Article 66(e), Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), 10 U.S.C. § 866(e)

.

FOR THE COURT

CAROL K. JOYCE Clerk of the Court