alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Camille JOSEPH v. PATENT SCAFFOLDING CO. et al.

No. 9316.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, First Circuit.

April 24, 1973.

Rehearing Denied May 31, 1973.

A. G. Seale and Ken Barnette, Seale, Smith, Phelps, Baton Rouge, for defendant-appellants Pacific Signal Ins. Co. and Sky Climbers, Inc.

John I. Moore and Wm. L. Wilson, Taylor, Porter, Brooks & Phillips, Baton Rouge, for defendant-appellees Travelers Ins. Co., Patent Scaffolding, and others.

H. Alva Brumfield, Jr. and H. Alva Brumfield, III, Baton Rouge, for plaintiffs-appellees.

Before LOTTINGER, ELLIS, and CRAIN, JJ.

ELLIS, Judge.

This case, which is consolidated with cases Nos. 9313, 9314, 9315, and 9317, involves the identical parties and issues as does Harris v. Patent Scaffolding Company et al., 277 So.2d 483 (La.App. 1 Cir. 1973), this day decided.

For reasons therein assigned, the judgment herein is affirmed, at appellants’ cost.

Affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                                    <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                    6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                         576,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                7,225,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                   646,000
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             7,817,000
<PP&E>                                      12,087,000
<DEPRECIATION>                               2,399,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             128,005,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       65,995,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            6,000
<PREFERRED>                                      6,000
<COMMON>                                        49,000
<OTHER-SE>                                  53,756,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               128,005,000
<SALES>                                     20,556,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            18,465,000
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               16,598,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           3,058,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,393,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (1,393,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (4,147,000)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.85)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.85)
        


</TABLE>
#### Leroy WILLIAMS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. R-387.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Aug. 14, 1973.

Rehearing Denied Jan. 22, 1974.

*383Richard W. Ervin, III, Public Defender, and William C. Oven, Sp. Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and Michael M. Corin, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appel-lee.

RAWLS, Chief Judge.

Appellant brings this appeal from a judgment of conviction of one count of robbery and one count of possession of a firearm while engaged in a criminal offense, and a subsequent sentence on each count with the sentences to run consecutively.

After carefully reviewing the arguments of counsel and the record on appeal, we find the points posed by appellant to be without merit.

Sua sponte, we do find fundamental error in the sentences imposed by the trial court. The Supreme Court of Florida, in reviewing a similar factual situation in Cone v. State,1 quashed this Court’s per curiam affirmance of a judgment of the instant trial court imposing concurrent sentences: 1) for the offense of armed robbery, and 2) for the offense of displaying or using a firearm during the commission of the robbery.2 The Supreme Court held in Cone that the two crimes charged were a part of the same criminal act and directed the trial court to eliminate the sentence as to possession of a firearm while engaged in a criminal offense.

On the authority of Cone, supra, the cause is remanded with directions that the sentence below be amended by eliminating therefrom the part sentencing defendant to “ . . . twenty (20) as to Count Two [possession of a firearm while engaged in a criminal offense] said sentences to run consecutively.” Otherwise, the judgment of conviction is affirmed.

Affirmed in part; reversed in part and remanded with directions.

JOHNSON and CARROLL, DONALD K., JJ., concur.

1

. Cone v. State, Fla., 285 So.2d 12, Opinion filed March 7, 1973.

2

. The identical offenses in the case at bar.
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.3



                               TRUSERV CORPORATION

                        CEO AND SENIOR FINANCIAL OFFICERS
                                 CODE OF ETHICS

GENERAL PHILOSOPHY

The honesty, integrity and sound judgement of the CEO and senior financial
officers is fundamental to the reputation and success of TruServ Corporation
(the "Company"). The professional and ethical conduct of the CEO and senior
financial officers is essential to the proper function and success of the
Company as a leading hardware wholesale cooperative.

SENIOR FINANCIAL OFFICERS CODE OF ETHICS

Pursuant to the mandate of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (the "Act") and
regulations of the United States Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC")
promulgated pursuant to the authority and mandate of the Act, this Code of
Ethics has been adopted for our CEO, CFO, Controllers, Treasurer, and Director
of Internal Audit of the Company (the "Senior Financial Officers").



To the best of their knowledge and ability, the CEO and Senior Financial
Officers of the Company performing accounting, auditing, financial management or
similar functions must:


     -   Act with honesty and integrity, avoid actual or apparent conflicts of
         interest in personal and professional relationships.

     -   Provide colleagues, the SEC and the public with information that is
         accurate, complete, objective, relevant, timely and understandable.

     -   Comply with applicable laws, rules and regulations of federal, state,
         and local governments (both United States and foreign) and other
         appropriate private and public regulatory agencies.

     -   Act in good faith, with due care, competence and diligence, without
         misrepresenting material facts or allowing independent judgement to be
         subordinated.

     -   Respect the confidentiality of information acquired in the course of
         employment.

     -   Share knowledge and maintain skills necessary and relevant to the
         Company's needs.

     -   Proactively promote ethical and honest behavior within the Company's
         environment.

<PAGE>


     -   Assure responsible use of and control of all assets, resources and
         information of the Company.

     -   Report violations of this Code of Ethics to the General Counsel,
         Director of Internal Audit, or directly to the Audit Committee of the
         Board of Directors of the Company, promptly after learning of any such
         violation.

All senior financial officers are expected to adhere to the Company's Code of
Ethics for the CEO and Senior Financial Officers at all times. The board of
directors shall have the sole and absolute discretionary authority to approve
any deviation or waiver from the Code of Ethics for the CEO and Senior Financial
Officers. Any waiver and the grounds for such waiver for a senior financial
officer shall be promptly disclosed through a filing with the SEC on Form 8-K.
Additionally, any change of this Code of Ethics for the CEO and senior financial
officers shall be promptly disclosed to shareholders.
Page ly 0 fee sax Inquiries numbered 7, 16, and 17 are not to be asked in respect to infants. Inquiries numbered 11, 12, 15, 16, 17, 19, and 20 are to bg aswORR ‘at
| ( . merely by an affirmative mark, as /. et 0 5
| . RL, ¢

Scurpute 1.—Inhabitants in bid lily dite. lee Cev& __, in the County of hee Pitiincored * State
i 7 |
of Cabfeyras , enumerated by me on the _2%_ day of AZecce 1870. es

105
Post Office: Sie Lett C4700 : LZ Cece Be Ass’ Marshal.

—?}

i

o>

Lpvea- CONSETTL TIONAL
TION. KELATIONS,

VALUE OF REAL Estate
mune OWNED. PARENTAGE.

— --- ———-

o
rH
u

a
3
ee
|
rs)
uf,

|

If

under Ll yer, give monthe

in fractions, tus, %y.

of

Whether deaf |:
and dumb,
blind, insane,
or idiotic.

Place of Birth, naming Stata
or Territory of U. &.; or the
Country, if of foreign birth.

The name of every person whose
place of abode on the first day of
June, 1870, was in-this family.

Profession, Occupation,
or Trade of each person,
male or female.

—

the order of visitutien,
oF yisitutiva,

Females (F.)
mouth (Jan, Peb,, &c.)

Families, numbered in the, order
nouth (Jen, Feb,, &¢.)

If born within the yenr, state
If married! within the yenr, state
Attended school within the year

dented or abridged on

other grounds Unt ree
be Dion of other rime,

yearsotuee ami npwards, |
Whose right toe vote tal

Dwelling-honkes, numbered to
(15.), Mulatte (Mi), Chi-

neew (C.), lodiau (1.)

Yi years of age and up.

wards.

Value of Persona) Estate,

Value of Renal Estate,
Mother of foreign birth.
Male Citizens of US,
Mile Citivensef PL S.of

Ae at last birth-day,

!
|

Sex.—Males (M.),

Cannot write.

Color,—White (W.), Black
Cannot read.

oe
Nw
phe
ei
|
mw
as
a)
—
ca
rr

~

}

Cy
YS

N K ha | Father of forego birt.
et ie Ps

Q

R

=
S [> IF Ss Isla ls ly B

8

|

IN AS

SS :

SLE IE IE IE Ps lS | FS IS [SAS

]
,

/
a
/
/

Z
ras
~
VA

ZG Les oe ee ae, ee es
Historic census records are maintained and released by
the National Archives and Records Administration,

not the U.S. Census Bureau.

BLS |e bs PLS LS bs |

————_
Stel fb
G¢ é, Nisit http:/www.archives.gov for more information about publicly

te, available records like the one shown here.
oF ——————— = = Beaty — j aa —_) gE OO

/ Y F ae at Le eee C= ;

+.
In A Fé

_ — —
$$ ee

c

—

AVA
JV
A\7

———

SIO Vo \/C.
No. of dwellings, No. of white females, No of mates; fireianborn,_°@ A ae LS2U 95 b60 No. of insane; 17 1G
ws /

“oso families, J. scald colored males, ot ode females, -é ae oy
‘* “ white males, 2S ay ie “ females, * “ blind,

—
# STATEOFLOUISIANA



# COURTOFAPPEAL,FIRSTCIRCUIT

CROSSTEX ENERGY SERVICES, LP, CROSSTEX LIG, LLC AND CROSSTEX PROCESSING SERVICES, LLC VERSUS NO. 

### 2022 CW 0867

TEXAS BRINE COMPANY, LLC, ET 

### AUGUST 16, 2022 AL
In Re: Texas Brine 

## Company, LLC, applying for 

### supervisory writs, 

### 23rd Judicial District Court, Parish of Assumption, No. 

### 34202.
BEFORE: McDONALD, HOLDRIDGE, AND WOLFE, JJ.

WRIT GRANTED. The 

### district court' s August 

### 11, 2022 

### judgment, granting 

## Legacy Vulcan, LLC's Motion 

### in Limine to Preclude Proffer of Evidence Relative to Dismissed Claims 

### is reversed. Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure article 

### 1636 provides, "[ w]hen the court rules against the admissibility of 

### any evidence, 

### it shall either permit the 

### party offering such evidence to make a complete record thereof, or permit 

## the party to make a statement setting 

### forth the nature of the evidence." The word " shall" 

### is mandatory. Sanchez v. Georgia Gulf 

## Corp., 2002-1617 ( La. 

### App. 1st Cir. 

### 8/ 13/03), 

### 853 So.2d 697, 704. 

## Accordingly, the 

### district court 

### is instructed to allow Texas Brine 

## Company, LLC to either offer such evidence to make a 

## complete recordthereofortomakeastatement setting forth the nature of the evidence. JMM GH EW

COURT OFAPPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT

DEPUTY CLERK OF COURT FOR THE COURT
Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,
Chief Justice

Stephen J. Markman Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein

, 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.

September 23, 2015 

# Order

September 2 3 , 2015

152237

- 9 ( 100)(101 )

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN

, Plaintiff

- Appell ee
,

v

CHRISTOPHER LEE JOHNSON

, Defendant

- Appell ant

. SC: 152237

- 9

COA: 316314; 316983; 320014 Wayne CC: 12

- 010789

- FC;

12

- 010595

- FC; 13

- 001600

- FC

________________________________________/

On order of the Chief Justice, the motions of defendant

- appellant for leave to file an application in excess of the page limit restriction and to file a pro per supplemental application are GRANTED. The 62

- page application and the pro per supplemental application submitted on August 31, 2015, are accepted for filing.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          FEB-28-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             MAR-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               FEB-28-1998
<CASH>                                       2,598,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                7,146,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                   370,000
<INVENTORY>                                 21,491,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            32,575,000
<PP&E>                                      18,489,000
<DEPRECIATION>                              13,776,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              40,582,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       16,134,000
<BONDS>                                      2,791,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     3,465,000
<OTHER-SE>                                  17,681,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                40,582,000
<SALES>                                     57,913,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            57,913,000
<CGS>                                       35,951,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               50,972,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                              (35,000)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           1,222,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              5,749,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                 2,208,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          3,541,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 3,541,000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.90
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.82
        

</TABLE>
#### Clarence Earl JAMES, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 72-770.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Oct. 13, 1972.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal quashed.
Jan 11 2011

Exemption No. 5549J Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2000-8434

Mr. Paul W. Railsback Air Transport Association 1301 Pennsylvania Ave., NW Suite 110 Washington, DC 20004 Dear Mr. Railsback: This letter is to inform you that we have granted your petition to extend Exemption No. 5549, as amended. It explains the basis for our decision and describes its effect. The Basis for Our Decision By letter dated October 25, 2010, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on behalf of Air Transport Association (ATA) for an extension of Exemption No. 5549, as amended. That exemption from § 121.652(a) and (c) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) allows a new pilot in command (PIC) of any ATA member airline, and of any similarly situated part 121 certificate holder, who is subject to higher landing weather minimum requirements to operate to the normal, lower Category I and Category II minimums under the conditions stipulated. In your petition, you indicate that there has been no change in the conditions and reasons relative to public interest and safety that were the basis for granting the original exemption. The FAA has determined that good cause exists for not publishing a summary of the petition in the Federal Register because the requested extension of the exemption would not set a precedent, and any delay in acting on this petition would be detrimental to the affected airlines. Our Decision The FAA has determined that the justification for the issuance of Exemption No. 5549, as amended, remains valid with respect to this exemption and is in the public interest. Therefore, under the authority provided by 49 U.S.C. 40113 and 44701, which the FAA Administrator has delegated to me, I grant your petition. The Effect of Our Decision Our decision extends the termination date of Exemption No. 5549, as amended, to January 31, 2013, unless sooner superseded or rescinded. All conditions and limitations of Exemption No. 5549, as amended, remain the same. This letter must be attached to, and is a part of, Exemption No. 5549. Sincerely,

Lower Minimum

https://webopss.faa.gov/Designator/Exemption/Exemption.aspx?ExemptionId=46003 (1 of 2) [7/27/2012 8:39:14 AM]Lower Minimum

/s/ Raymond Towles Acting Director, Flight Standards Service

AFS-11-033-E

https://webopss.faa.gov/Designator/Exemption/Exemption.aspx?ExemptionId=46003 (2 of 2) [7/27/2012 8:39:14 AM]
VININGS INVESTMENT PROPERTIES TRUST

                           SCHEDULE OF SUBSIDIARIES OF
                                December 31, 1998
                                -----------------


---------------------------------------------------------
                                         Jurisdiction of
Subsidiary                                Organization
---------------------------------------------------------

Bradford Place I, L.P.                       Delaware

Bradford Place II, L.P.                      Delaware

Cambridge Apartments, L.P.                   Delaware

Cottonwood, L.P.                             Delaware

Delta Bluff, L.P.                            Delaware

Foxgate, L.P.                                Delaware

Hampton House, L.P.                          Delaware

Heritage Place, L.P.                         Delaware

The Landings I, L.P.                         Delaware

Laurelwood, L.P.                             Delaware

Northwood Place, L.P.                        Delaware

River Pointe L.P.                            Delaware

Riverchase I, L.P.                           Delaware

Riverchase II, L.P.                          Delaware

Riverchase III, L.P.                         Delaware

Southwind I, L.P.                            Delaware

Southwind II Apartments, L.P.                Delaware

Thicket Apartments, L.P.                     Delaware

Thicket Holdings, Inc.                       Delaware

Trace Ridge, L.P.                            Delaware

Vinings Communities, L.P.                    Delaware

Vinings Holdings, Inc.                       Delaware

Vinings Investment Properties, L.P.          Delaware
I GILA RIVER INOIAN COMMUNITY 

Department of Environmental Quality 

Air Quality Program 

P.O. Box 97 

Sacaton, AZ. 85247 

We would like to request placement on the agenda for the upcoming 

Communitymeetingon ak~e 5 . The air quality program will make a presentation on the following 

subject: rnflo~cflc~a bC &Ad (c.qwl@ 

ev& ft&~rq%&? odtr?a~s 

I Please call Janet Travis at (520) 562-2234 ext. 286 to confirm 

placement on the agenda. 

Than k-you 
TRANSMISSION VERIFICATION REPORT 

TIME : 05/31/2006 15: 46 

NAME : DEPT :DEQ 

FAX : 5205622245 

IEL : 5205622234 

DATE, TIME 

FAX NO. /NAME 

DURATION 

PAGE (S) RESULT 

MODE 

15204183665 

00: 00: 26 

01 

OK 

STANDARD 

ECM 

Department of E nvironrnental Quality 

Air Quality Program 

P.O. Box 97 

Sacaton, AZ. 85247 

Date: MCkj 30, '~(p 

To: District & 

We would like to reqwst placement on the agenda for the upcoming 

Community meeting on JUVI e 5 .The air quality program will make a presentation on the following 
TRANSMISSION VERIFICATION REPORT 

TIME : 06/05/2006 10: 34 

NAME : DEPT DEQ 

FAX : 5205622245 

TEL : 5205622234 

FAX NO. /NAME 

DURATION 

PAGE (S) RESULT 

MODE 

I ~ATT TTIIAC 06/05 10:34 

15204183665 

00: 00: 22 

0 1 

OK 

STANDARD 

-n., 

I GILA RfVER INNAN COMMUNITY 

Department of Environmental Quality 

Air Quality Program 

P.O. B0x.97 

Sacaton, AZ. 85247 

Office: (520) 562-2234 I 

Fa: (520) 562-2245 

I 

Date: MCkj 30, 'Up 

To: District I?- 

We would like To request placement on the agenda for the upcoming 

Community meeting on ~LLM CL 5-. I 

I 

The air quality program will make a presentation on the fo~~bwin~ I 

subject: ,!~Y,Y~oLcJ~cQ~ 6ffl&4 ~.C~WWM~ I 

P wiad +ALV~UK~ ~lrdth~~si 

I 

I 

I 

I The resenta at ion will be aiven hv VI; P,( R\ n ;r
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Transportation

###### Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

# AGENCY:

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.

# ACTION:

Notice of Unified Carrier Registration Plan Board of Directors (UCR Board) and Subcommittee Meetings.

# TIME AND DATE:

The meetings will occur on the following schedule and will take place in the Mountain (Daylight) Time Zone:

## Thursday, August 23, 2018

8:15 a.m.-9:00 a.m. Registration System Subcommittee

9:00 a.m.-12:00 Noon. UCR Board

# PLACE:

These meetings will be open to the public at the Radisson Hotel Salt Lake City Downtown, 215 West South Temple, Salt Lake City, UT 84101, and via conference call. Those not attending the meetings in person may call toll-free; 1-877-422-1931, passcode 2855443940, to listen and participate in the meetings.

# STATUS:

Open to the public.

# MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

                        The Unified Carrier Registration Plan Board of Directors (the Board) will continue its work in developing and implementing the Unified Carrier Registration Plan and Agreement and to that end, may consider matters properly before the Board. An agenda for these meetings will be available no later than 5:00 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time, August 14, 2018 at:                         *https://ucrplan.org.*

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mr. Avelino Gutierrez, Chair, Unified Carrier Registration Board of Directors at (505) 827-4565.

Issued on: July 16, 2018.

Larry W. Minor,

Associate Administrator, Office of Policy, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration.

[FR Doc. 2018-15603 Filed 7-17-18; 4:15 pm]

 BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P
#### In the Matter of the Succession of William W. HARLEAUX.

No. 61272.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Jan. 20, 1978.

In re: Osborne and Richard applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit. Parish of Iberville. 351 So.2d 1267.

Granted. It is ordered that the writ of review issue; that the Court of Appeal send up the record in duplicate of the case; and that counsel for plaintiff and defendant be notified.