alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### RMJ Securities Corp., Respondent, v Cantor Fitzgerald, L. P., et al., Appellants.

[654 NYS2d 376]

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Leland Degrasse, J.), entered on or about July 1, 1996, which, in an action between government securities dealers for unfair competition, denied defendants’ motion to compel arbitration, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

*169There is no merit to defendants’ contention that rules of the National Association of Securities Dealers (NASD), in which the parties are members, require arbitration of this dispute. Government securities dealers are exempt from the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 USC § 78c [a] [12] [A] [i]; [42]) and its amendments (15 USC § 78o-3 [f]), under which the NASD’s rule-making authority is derived, and the record shows that NASD has never imposed its arbitration code on government securities dealers. We would also note that NÁSD’s rule-making authority is restricted to prohibiting fraudulent practices against the investing public and discipline *(see, Harden v Raffensperger, Hughes & Co.,*65 F3d 1392, 1397), matters not implicated in the instant dispute. We have considered defendants’ remaining claims and find them to be without merit. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Milonas, Rosenberger and Rubin, JJ.
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 551 Engrossed in House (EH)]

H. Res. 551

                In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

                                                    September 28, 1994.
    Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this resolution the Speaker 
may, pursuant to clause 1(b) of rule XXIII, declare the House resolved into the 
Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of the 
bill (H.R. 4779) to amend the Solid Waste Disposal Act to authorize local 
governments and Governors to restrict receipt of out-of-State municipal solid 
waste, and for other purposes. The first reading of the bill shall be dispensed 
with. General debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed one hour 
equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of 
the Committee on Energy and Commerce. After general debate the bill shall be 
considered for amendment under the five-minute rule for a period not to exceed 
four hours (excluding time consumed by recorded votes and proceedings incidental 
thereto). It shall be in order to consider as an original bill for the purpose 
of amendment under the five-minute rule the amendment in the nature of a 
substitute recommended by the Committee on Energy and Commerce now printed in 
the bill. Each section of the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute 
shall be considered as read. Any amendment offered by the chairman of the 
Committee on Energy and Commerce or his designee may amend portions of the bill 
not yet read for amendment. At the conclusion of consideration of the bill for 
amendment the Committee shall rise and report the bill to the House with such 
amendments as may have been adopted. Any Member may demand a separate vote in 
the House on any amendment adopted in the Committee of the Whole to the bill or 
to the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute. The previous question 
shall be considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final 
passage without intervening motion except one motion to recommit with or without 
instructions.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
252 La. 110

#### Charles D. ARCENEAUX, Individually and on behalf of Mary Abigail Arceneaux and Charles D. Arceneaux, Jr. v. Al H. GERMAN and Allstate Insurance Company.

No. 49182.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

April 19, 1968.

In re: Charles D. Arceneaux, individually, and on behalf of Mary Abigail Arce-neaux, and Charles D. Arceneaux, Jr., applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, Parish of East Baton Rouge. 207 So.2d 244.

Writ refused. Only a factual question is presented. On the facts found by the Court of Appeal, there is no error of law in its judgment.
# C_2021513EN.01002802.xml

| 20.12.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 513/28 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.12.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 513/28

---

Order of the General Court of 22 October 2021 — Equinoccio-Compañía de Comercio Exterior v Commission

(Case T-22/21) (1)

(Action for annulment - Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance - Non-member State - National public procurement - Termination of the contract by the contracting authority - Request for enforcement by the contracting authority of a bank guarantee - Countersignature by the Head of the EU Delegation in the Non-member State or his deputy - Lack of jurisdiction)

(2021/C 513/42)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Equinoccio-Compañía de Comercio Exterior, SL (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: D. Luff and R. Sciaudone, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: D. Bianchi and T. Van Noyen, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of the Commission’s letter of 5 November 2020, with reference GK/Regio.ddg.d. 1(2020)6793282, concerning the enforcement of the bank guarantee requested by the Turkish Ministry of Science, Industry and Technology.

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The action is dismissed. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The action is dismissed.

| 2. | Equinoccio-Compañía de Comercio Exterior, SL shall pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Equinoccio-Compañía de Comercio Exterior, SL shall pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 128, 12.4.2021.

---
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-7418

KEVIN J. KENDRICK,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

ROBERT D. CENDO, Medical Doctor,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Baltimore. J. Frederick Motz, Chief District Judge.

(CA-97-1000-JFM)

Submitted: April 29, 1998 Decided: May 14, 1998

Before MURNAGHAN, NIEMEYER, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Kevin J. Kendrick, Appellant Pro Se. Conrad Whiting Varner,

Frederick William Goundry, III, VARNER & KASLICK, P.C., Frederick,

Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals the district court's orders denying relief

on his civil complaint filed pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown

Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971),

and denying his motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the

record and the district court's opinions and find no reversible

error. Accordingly, we deny Appellant's motions for appointment of

counsel, for a stay of this appeal pending his release, and for

imposition of a lien against Appellee. We affirm on the reasoning

of the district court. Kendrick v. Cendo, No. CA-97-1000-JFM (D.

Md. Aug. 14, 1997; Sept. 10, 1997). 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.

AFFIRMED
# C_2023235EN.01003302.xml

| 3.7.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 235/33 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.7.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 235/33

---

Judgment of the General Court of 24 May 2023 — Gusachenka v Council

(Case T-579/21) (1)

(Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures adopted in view of the situation in Belarus - Freezing of funds - Restriction on entry into the territory of the Member States - Inclusion of the applicant’s name on the lists of persons, entities and bodies concerned - Duty to state reasons - Error of assessment - Proportionality)

(2023/C 235/44)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Siarhei Gusachenka (Minsk, Belarus) (represented by: D. Litvinski, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: A. Limonet and V. Piessevaux, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Council Implementing Decision (CFSP) 2021/1002 of 21 June 2021 implementing Decision 2012/642/CFSP concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Belarus (OJ 2021 L 219 I, p. 70), and of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/997 of 21 June 2021, implementing Article 8a(1) of Regulation (EC) No 765/2006 concerning restrictive measures in respect of Belarus (OJ 2021 L 219 I, p. 3), in so far as those acts concern him.

Operative part

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Mr Siarhei Gusachenka to bear, in addition to his own costs, those incurred by the Council of the European Union. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Mr Siarhei Gusachenka to bear, in addition to his own costs, those incurred by the Council of the European Union.

---

(1)  OJ C 11, 10.1.2022.

---
#### Donna LYLES v. CITY OF TAMPA.

No. 38696.

Supreme Court of Florida.

July 1969.

Certiorari denied without opinion.
PROMISSORY NOTE





From:  Load Hog Industries Inc.





To:    AMERICAN PLASTICS PROCESSING PRODUCTS INC



Effective Date: 12/31/2008



Amount: $16,000.00



Interest: $199.89





Load Hog Industries Inc., a Michigan Corporation promises to pay on demand to the order of American Plastics Processing Products, Inc Sixteen Thousand dollars and no cents ($16,000.00) at 8% interest rate per annum and One Hundred Ninety Nine dollars and 89 cents ($199.89) of accrued interest.  This note is secured by Load Hog Industries, Inc. present and future goods, including (but not limited to) equipment and inventory, and all of debtor's present and future intangible collateral, including (but not limited to) pure intangibles, and semi-intangibles, i.e. documents, instruments, and chattel paper.



Load Hog Industries, Inc..



By: /s/ Tatsiana Husarava,



Corporate Secretary



Accepted and Agreed  to

This  31st day of
December, 2008



By:
/s/ Name:  Mario DiNello

Title: President
House Calendar No. 60

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. RES. 210

[Report No. 103–160]

RESOLUTION

Waiving certain points of order against the bill

purposes.ending September 30, 1994, and for the otherthe revenues of said District for the fiscal yearactivities chargeable in whole or in part againsternment of the District of Columbia and other(H.R. 2492) making appropriations for the govJUNE 28, 1993

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be

printed
IV

House Calendar No. 60

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. RES. 210

[Report No. 103–160]

Waiving certain points of order against the bill (H.R. 2492) making appropriations for the government of the District of Columbia and other

activities chargeable in whole or in part against the revenues of said

District for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1994, and for the

other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JUNE 28, 1993

Mr. BONIOR, from the Committee on Rules, reported the following resolution;

which was referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed

RESOLUTION

Waiving certain points of order against the bill (H.R. 2492)

making appropriations for the government of the District

of Columbia and other activities chargeable in whole

or in part against the revenues of said District for the

fiscal year ending September 30, 1994, and for the other

purposes.

1 Resolved, That all points of order against consider2 ation of the bill (H.R. 2492) making appropriations for

3 the government of the District of Columbia and other ac-
2

HRES 210 RH

1 tivities chargeable in whole or in part against the revenues

2 of said District for the fiscal year ending September 30,

3 1994, and for other purposes, for failure to comply with

4 the provisions of clause 7 of rule XXI are waived. During

5 consideration of the bill, all points of order against provi6 sions in the bill for failure to comply with clause 2 of rule

7 XXI are waived.
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 139 (Thursday, July 19, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 34144]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-15359]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke; Notice 
of Closed Meetings

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Neurological Disorders 
and Stroke Special Emphasis Panel; Planning Grant to Develop Phase 
III Clinical Trials for LBD.
    Date: August 6, 2018.
    Time: 3:00 p.m. to 4:30 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: National Institutes of Health, Neuroscience Center, 6001 
Executive Boulevard, Rockville, MD 20852 (Telephone Conference 
Call).
    Contact Person: Ana Olariu, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, 
Scientific Review Branch, NINDS/NIH/DHHS, Neuroscience Center, 6001 
Executive Blvd., Suite 3208, MSC 9529, Bethesda, MD 20892-9529, 
(301) 496-9223, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#3d5c535c1352515c4f54487d535455135a524b"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="19787778377675786b706c59777071377e766f">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.853, 
Clinical Research Related to Neurological Disorders; 93.854, 
Biological Basis Research in the Neurosciences, National Institutes 
of Health, HHS)

    Dated: July 13, 2018.
Natasha M. Copeland,
Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2018-15359 Filed 7-18-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4140-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
H. Res. 766 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

December 3, 2014. 

Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall 

be in order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 5771) to 

amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend certain 

expiring provisions and make technical corrections, and for 

other purposes. All points of order against consideration of 

the bill are waived. The amendment printed in part A of the 

report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution shall be considered as adopted. The bill, as amended, 

shall be considered as read. All points of order against provisions in the bill, as amended, are waived. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill, as amended, 

and on any further amendment thereto, to final passage without intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate equally 

divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority 

member of the Committee on Ways and Means; and (2) one 

motion to recommit with or without instructions. 

SEC. 2. Upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in 

order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 647) to amend 
2 

•HRES 766 EH 

the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide for the tax 

treatment of ABLE accounts established under State programs for the care of family members with disabilities, and 

for other purposes. All points of order against consideration 

of the bill are waived. In lieu of the amendment in the nature 

of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Ways and 

Means now printed in the bill, the amendment in the nature 

of a substitute printed in part B of the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution shall be considered as adopted. The bill, as amended, shall be considered as 

read. All points of order against provisions in the bill, as 

amended, are waived. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill, as amended, and on any further 

amendment thereto, to final passage without intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the 

Committee on Ways and Means; and (2) one motion to recommit with or without instructions. 

SEC. 3. In the engrossment of H.R. 5771 the Clerk 

shall— 

(a) add the text of H.R. 647, as passed by the House, 

as new matter at the end of H.R. 5771; 

(b) conform the title of H.R. 5771 to reflect the addition 

of H.R. 647, as passed by the House, to the engrossment; 
3 

•HRES 766 EH 

(c) assign appropriate designations to provisions within 

the engrossment; and 

(d) conform cross-references and provisions for short titles within the engrossment. 

Attest: 

Clerk.
# C_2022303EN.01004502.xml

| 8.8.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 303/45 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.8.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 303/45

---

Order of the General Court of 14 June 2022 — FZ and Others v Commission

(Case T-236/21) (1)

(Civil service - Officials - Remuneration - Commission staff posted to a third country - Interim update of correction coefficients - Manifest error of assessment - Retroactive effect - Legal certainty - Duty to have regard for the welfare of officials - Action manifestly lacking any foundation in law)

(2022/C 303/58)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicants: FZ and the 15 other applicants whose names are set out in the annex to the order (represented by: J.-N. Louis and N. Maes, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: B. Mongin, I. Melo Sampaio and A.-C. Simon, acting as Agents)

Re:

By their action under Article 270 TFEU, the applicants seek annulment of their pay slips established by the European Commission for the month of July 2020, by which it was decided to apply, for the first time, the correction coefficients laid down, with retroactive effect from 1 October 2019 and 1 January 2020.

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The action is dismissed as manifestly lacking any foundation in law. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The action is dismissed as manifestly lacking any foundation in law.

| 2. | FZ and the other applicants whose names are set out in the annex shall pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

FZ and the other applicants whose names are set out in the annex shall pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 242, 21.6.2021.

---
JEFF L. ROSE, CHIEF JUSTICE DAVID PURYEAR, JUSTICE BOB PEMBERTON, JUSTICE MELISSA GOODWIN, JUSTICE SCOTT K. FIELD, JUSTICE CINDY OLSON BOURLAND, JUSTICE
The Honorable Velva L. Price Civil District Clerk 

### Travis County Courthouse P.O.Box 1748 Austin, TX 78767 * DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL * 

# Court ofAppeals Third District ofTexas P.O. BOX 12547, AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711-2547 www.txcourts.gov/3rdcoa.aspx (512) 463-1733

JEFFREY D. KYLE. CLERK


### Marclv-572015



### RE: CourtofAppeals Number: 03-09-00518-CV Trial Court Case Number: D-l-GN-06-002615 

### Style: Black + Vernooy Architects, J. Sinclair Black, and D. Andrew Vernooy v. Lou Ann Smith; Jimmy Jackson Smith, Individually and asNext Friend ofRachel and Grayson Smith; and Karen E. Graveley Dear Honorable Velva L. Price: 

### The Third Court ofAppeals has issued the mandate in this cause. Therefore, I amreturning the following original exhibits: 

### Reporter's Record Volumes 6-8 andPlaintiffs exhibits 2, 17, 19A, 19B and 36. Very truly yours, Jeffrey D. Kyle, Clerk
Filed in The District Court

ofTravis County, Texas 

### MAR 12 2015 At M. Velva L Price, DistrictClerk 

## V.1 /
#### James Edward NEWSOM, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 72-1095.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

March 8, 1974.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
EXHIBIT 21.1

              List of Subsidiaries of Olympus Communications L.P.1

OLYMPUS COMMUNICATIONS, L.P. (a Delaware limited partnership)

        ADELPHIA CABLE PARTNERS, L.P. (99.98% general partnership interest) (a
         Delaware limited partnership)

                Key Biscayne Cablevision (50% general partnership interest) (a
                 Pennsylvania general partnership)

                Southeast Florida Cable, Inc. (a Florida corporation)

                        Palm Beach Group Cable Inc. (a Florida corporation)

                               Palm Beach Group Cable Joint Venture (50% general
                                partnership interest)(a Florida general
                                partnership)

                South Florida Cable Advertising (14.28571% general partnership
                 interest) (a Florida general partnership)

                Timotheos Communications, L.P. (a Delaware limited partnership)2

        OLYMPUS CAPITAL CORPORATION (a Delaware corporation)

        LEADERSHIP ACQUISITION LIMITED PARTNERSHIP (100% general and limited
         partnership interests held by Olympus and its wholly-owned
         subsidiaries) (a Delaware limited partnership)

        NATIONAL CABLE ACQUISITION ASSOCIATES, L.P. (100% general and limited
         partnership interests held by Olympus and its wholly-owned
         subsidiaries) (a Delaware limited partnership)

        TELESAT ACQUISITION LIMITED PARTNERSHIP (100% general and limited
         partnership interests held by Olympus and its wholly-owned
         subsidiaries) (a Delaware limited partnership)

        WEST BOCA ACQUISITION LIMITED PARTNERSHIP (100% general and limited
         partnership interests held by Olympus and its wholly-owned
         subsidiaries) (a Delaware limited partnership)

                Starpoint, Limited Partnership (50.36% limited partnership
                 interest) (a Pennsylvania limited partnership)

                        Cable Sentry Corporation (a Florida corporation)

                        Automatic Alarms Company, Inc. (a Florida corporation)

                West Boca Security, Inc. (a Delaware corporation)






--------
1  Ownership of subsidiaries is indicated by indentations. Ownership of each
   subsidiary is 100% unless otherwise indicated parenthetically or by footnote.
2 Adelphia Cable Partners, L.P. and Olympus Communications, L.P. own 99.9% and
   .1%, respectively, of the partnership interests of Timotheos Communications,
   L.P. (a Delaware limited partnership).