alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 21-2527

___________________________

Ruby J. Watts lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant

v. Administrative Office of the Courts lllllllllllllllllllll

Defendant John Stewart, Director of Finance and Administration, Individually and Official Capacity; Andrea Lea, Auditor of State, Individually and in her Official Capacity

lllllllllllllllllllll Defendants - Appellees Does, Legislative Bureau Member of the Administrative Office of the Courts,

Individually and Official Capacity; Marty Garrity

lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant s

____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Central

____________ Submitted: April 20, 2022 Filed: April 25, 2022 [Unpublished]

____________ Before LOKEN, GRUENDER, and GRASZ, Circuit Judges.

____________PER CURIAM.

Ruby Watts appeals following the district court’s 1 adverse grant of judgment as a matter of law in her employment discrimination action. Watts argues the district court erred in failing to grant her leave to amend her complaint, and in denying her request to reopen discovery. She also argues the district court erred in granting judgment as a matter of law. After careful consideration, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in failing to grant Watts leave to amend her complaint or in declining to reopen discovery. See FGS Constructors, Inc. v. Carlow , 64 F.3d 1230, 1235 (8th Cir. 1995) (standard of review). We also conclude that the grant of judgment as a matter of law was warranted for the reasons stated on the record by the district court. See Sisk v. Picture People, Inc. , 669 F.3d 896, 899 (8th Cir. 2012) (reviewing de novo grant of judgment as a matter of law). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

______________________________

1 The Honorable James M. Moody Jr., United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas. -2-
› ·  ̈ ø  ̈ · ± 2 Ê È Î ⁄ a o

Ú Œa 1

Ú È Ô Í È Í Ó ð Ô ð

› ± 2  ̈ a 2  ̈ o ± © 2 ¥± ø o a o Ò ° Æ ·2  ̈ a o o Æ ± 3

ÿ a · 2 — 2¥ · 2 a  ̄  ̧  ̈ ̈ ° Ê Ò

Ò  ̧ a · 2 ± 2¥ · 2 a

Ú ± Æ 1 ̃

⁄ Æ · — 1⁄2  ̈ Ó Ô Í Ê Î Î Ê Ï Ï Ó ð ÔÎ

ÛÛ « ±  ́ Æ  ́ ­ a ± o  ̈  ̧ · ­ ÿ a · 2 — 2¥ · 2 a – ‹ ⁄ ·2 o · 1⁄2 ø  ̈ a ­ ß ±  ́ Æ ø 1⁄21⁄2 a °  ̈ ø 2 1⁄2a

± o ÿ a· 2 — 2 ¥ ·2 a  ̆ ­ Ã a Æ 3 ­ ø 2 o › ± 2 o ·  ̈ ·± 2 ­ ± o  ̈  ̧ a ¥ · 1⁄2 a 2 ­a

ø 1 Æ a a 3 a 2  ̈ ø TM ø · ¥ ø æ ¥a ø  ̈  ̧  ̈  ̈ ° Ê ÒÒ  ̧ a · 2 ± 2 ¥· 2 a

Ú ± Æ 1 Ò ÿ — ‘ Ò ‘ · 1⁄2 a 2 ­a

ÛÛ Ã  ̧ a ­ a ø Æ1⁄2  ̧  ̈ a ®  ̈ ± o  ̈  ̧ · ­ – ‹ ⁄ · ­ 1 a 2 a Æ ø  ̈ a o o Æ ± 3

 ́ 2 1⁄2 ± ÆÆ a 1⁄2  ̈ a o — › Œ  ̈ a ®  ̈Ú
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

Securities and Exchange Commission

100 F Street, N.E.

Washington, D.C. 20549

 

RE:     Certification pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350)

 

Ladies and Gentlemen:

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report of SandRidge Mississippian Trust I (the “Trust”) on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2016 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned, not in its individual capacity but solely as the Trustee of the Trust, certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, that to its knowledge:

 

(1)                                     The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

 

(2)                                     The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Trust.

 

The above certification is furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350) and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.

 
|   | /s/   Sarah Newell                                                                                 |
|--------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   | Sarah   Newell                                                                                     |
|   | Vice   President                                                                                   |
|   | The   Bank of New York Mellon Trust Company, N.A., as Trustee of SandRidge   Mississippian Trust I |

 

August 8, 2016

 

----
#### International Business Machines Corp., Respondent, v Murphy & O’Connell, Appellant.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Beatrice Shainswit, J.), entered March 28, 1990, which denied defendant’s motion for an order vacating a default judgment entered on September 21, 1989 against it in the total sum of $29,116.73, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff commenced this action to recover amounts allegedly owed it by the defendant law firm under a lease arrangement for a photocopying machine. The action was commenced by service of a summons with notice on the defendant.

In response to the summons with notice, defendant did not serve a demand for a complaint as required by CPLR 320 (a) and 3012 (b). Rather, defendant served an answer which consisted of a blank "Blumberg” form, with several blank spaces, which served as a general denial, but failed to plead the defense of lack of personal jurisdiction as required by *158CPLR 3211 (e). The answer was rejected by IBM for failure to comply with CPLR 320 (a) and 3012 (b). Thereafter, IBM successfully moved in September 1989 for a default judgment based upon the defendant’s failure to appear.

The failure to raise the defense of lack of personal jurisdiction in a responsive pleading constitutes a waiver of the defense (CPLR 3211 [e]), even where service of process is obviously defective. *(See, DeAngelis v Friedman,*46 AD2d 66, *appeal dismissed*38 NY2d 737.) The defendant served an answer, which at best constituted a general denial, and in which the defense of lack of personal jurisdiction was not asserted. Thus, even though the defendant’s claims based on alleged defects in service may raise a question of fact as the hearing court suggested, they are ineffectual, given the valid waiver.

In order to vacate a default judgment pursuant to CPLR 5015 (a) (1), a defendant must demonstrate a meritorious defense to the cause of action together with a reasonable excuse for his failure to appear *(Boorman v Deutsch,*152 AD2d 48, 51, *lv dismissed*76 NY2d 889). Defendant relies on the rule that a motion predicated on lack of personal jurisdiction need not assert a meritorious defense because a judgment entered without obtaining either jurisdiction over the person of the defendant or a waiver of the issue of personal jurisdiction is ineffective and voidable. *(Supra.)*Here, we agree that no meritorious defense was set forth.

Here, there was a waiver of the jurisdictional defense. While the timeliness of the service of defendant’s answer arguably raises a question of fact, plaintiff’s evidence that the summons was served on June 16, 1989 created a presumption that service was effected on that date *(Quantum Heating Servs. v Austern,*100 AD2d 843), which was not rebutted by the defendant’s unsupported denial *(see, Bloom v Kernan,*146 AD2d 916, 918). Concur—Milonas, J. P., Ross, Kassal, Smith and Rubin, JJ.
11 TH COURT OF APPEALS
EASTLAND , TEXAS
JUDGMENT

Traci Lee Alaniz
, * From the 244th District Court of Ector County, Trial Court No. C

- 19

- 0578

- CR

.

Vs. No. 11

- 19

- 00 399

- CR * July 14 , 20 2 2

The State of Texas
, * Opinion by Trotter , J. (P anel consists of: Bailey , C.J., Trotter , J. , and W illiams, J.

This court has inspected the record in this cause and concludes that there is no error in the judgment below. Therefore, in accordance with this court ’ s opi nion, the judgment of the trial court is in all things affirmed.
```

[Federal Register: September 13, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 176)]
[Notices]               
[Page 55626]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr13se10-97]                         

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

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 7161]

 
Determination and Certification Under Section 7046(b) of the 
Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs 
Appropriations Act, 2010

    Pursuant to the authority vested in the Secretary of State under 
section 7046(b) of the Department of State, Foreign Operations, and 
Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2010 (Div. F, Pub. L. 111-117), 
which incorporates by reference and amends, in part, section 7046(d) of 
the Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs 
Appropriations Act, 2009 (Div. H, Pub. L. 111-8) (FY 2009 SFOAA), I 
hereby determine and certify that the Government of Colombia is meeting 
the conditions described in section 7046(d)(2) of the FY 2009 SFOAA, 
and that I have consulted with Congress as consistent with section 
7046(d)(1) of the FY 2009 SFOAA, as amended.

    Dated: August 31, 2010.
Hillary Rodham Clinton,
Secretary of State.
[FR Doc. 2010-22758 Filed 9-10-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-29-P
```
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 Health and Human Services [Document Identifier OS-4040-0010]
 AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, HHS.
 ACTION: Notice.
 SUMMARY: In compliance with the requirement of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Office of the Secretary (OS), Department of Health and Human Services, is publishing the following summary of a proposed collection for public comment.
 DATES: Comments on the ICR must be received on or before October 1, 2018.
 ADDRESSES: Submit your comments to 
                        *OIRA_submission@omb.eop.gov*
                         or via facsimile to (202) 395-5806.
 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sherrette Funn, 
                        *Sherrette.Funn@hhs.gov*
                         or (202) 795-7714. When submitting comments or requesting information, please include the document identifier 4040-0010-30D and project title for reference.


SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Interested persons are invited to send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including any of the following subjects: (1) The necessity and utility of the proposed information collection for the proper performance of the agency's functions; (2) the accuracy of the estimated burden; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology to minimize the information collection burden. *Title of the Collection:*
                     Project Abstract Summary. *Type of Collection:*
                     Extension. *OMB No.:*
                     4040-0010. *Abstract:*
                     Project Abstract Summary is an OMB-approved collection (4040-0010). This information collection is used by grant applicants. This IC expires on January 31, 2019. We are requesting a three-year clearance of this collection. Estimated Annualized Burden Table
Type of respondent
Number of
                             respondents
Number
                             responses per 
                             respondent
Average
                             burden per 
                             response 
                             (in hours)
Total burden
                             hoursGrant Applicant
3,467
1
0.5
3,467Total

3,467

3,467
 Terry Clark, Office of the Secretary, Asst. Paperwork Reduction Act Reports Clearance Officer.


[FR Doc. 2018-18965 Filed 8-30-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4151-AE-P
----

----

I Teave

Komisjon

----

Euro vahetuskurss (1)

15. märts 2005

(2005/C 64/01)

1 euro= 

----

(1)

Allikas: EKP avaldatud viitekurss.

----

----

Muud KOM-dokumendid, kui komisjoni poolt vastu võetud seadusandlikud ettepanekud

(2005/C 64/02)

Need tekstid on kättesaadavad EUR-Lexist: http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/lex/

----

----

Euroopa Ühenduse asutamislepingu artiklite 87 ja 88 raames antava riigiabi lubamine

Juhud, mille suhtes komisjonil ei ole vastuväiteid

(2005/C 64/03)

(EMPs kohaldatav tekst)

Otsuse vastuvõtmise kuupäev: 

Liikmesriik: Saksamaa (Sachsen-Anhalt)

Abi nr: N 611/2003

Nimetus: Mitut valdkonda hõlmava Raamistiku alusel 1998. aastal suurtele investeerimisprojektidele suunatud piirkondlikust abist antav ulatuslik investeeringutoetus e-glass AG toetuseks

Eesmärk: Suur investeerimisprojekt lihvimata floatklaasi tehase rajamiseks

Õiguslik alus: Heakskiidetud abikavad: Gemeinschaftsaufgabe “Verbesserung der regionalen Wirtschafts-struktur”; Investitionszulagengesetz 1999 või järelkava: (kuivõrd on heaks kiidetud);Programm für unmittelbare Bürgschaften des Bundes und der Länder in den neuen Bundesländern und Berlin Ost

Toetuskõlblike kulude kogusumma: 121 miljonit eurot

Abi osatähtsus või summa: Brutoosatähtsus: 35 %

Kestus: 15. aprill 2003 — 31. detsember 2005

Muu teave: Saksamaa on kohustunud täitma järelkontrollikohustust vastavalt suurtele investeerimisprojektidele suunatud piirkondliku abi mitut valdkonda hõlmava Raamistiku punktile 6.

Otsuse autentne tekst (autentsed tekstid), millest on eemaldatud kogu konfidentsiaalne teave, on kättesaadav(ad) aadressil:

http://europa.eu.int/comm/secretariat_general/sgb/state_aids

----

II Ettevalmistavad aktid

Komisjon

----

Komisjoni poolt vastu võetud seadusandlikud ettepanekud

(2005/C 64/04)

Need tekstid on kättesaadavad EUR-Lexist: http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/lex/

----
**Consent
      of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**







Board
      of
      Directors


Smith-Midland
      Corporation





We
      hereby
      consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on
      Form
      S-8 (No. 333-124233, 333-102892 and 333-88200) of our report dated April 14,
      2008, relating to the consolidated financial statements of Smith-Midland
      Corporation appearing in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year
      ended December 31, 2007.










BDO
      Seidman, LLP





Richmond,
      Virginia


April
      14,
      2008
#### James FERGUSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 6926.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Second District.

March 8, 1967.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
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 Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

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 on Aging Initial Review Group; Neuroscience of Aging Review Committee NIA-N.                    

*Date:*                         September 27-28, 2018.                    

*Time:*                         8:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         Bethesda Marriott, 5151 Pooks Hill Road, Bethesda, MD 20814.                    

*Contact Person:*                         Greg Bissonette, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Scientific Review Branch, National Institute on Aging, 7201 Wisconsin Avenue, Gateway Building, Suite 2W200, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-402-1622,                         *bissonettegb@mail.nih.gov*.                    

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.866, Aging Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

Dated: August 27, 2018.

David D. Clary, 

Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 2018-18903 Filed 8-30-18; 8:45 am]

 BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

SHARIFF L. LAYTON,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 101 MM 2021

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 29 th day of December , 2021, the Petition for Leave to File Petition

for Allowance of Appeal Nunc Pro Tunc is GRANTED. Petitioner has 30 days in which to

file a Petition for Allowance of Appeal.
252 La. 832

#### K. O. BAILEY, Individually, etc., et al. v. TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY et al.

No. 49347.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Oct. 3, 1968.

In re: Carolyn Linda Lee Bailey Havard applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, Parish of East Baton Rouge, 210 So.2d 93.

The application is denied. According to the facts of the case, as found to be by the Court of Appeal, the judgment complained of is correct.
----

Appeal brought on 29 September 2004 by Regione Siciliana against the order made on 8 July 2004 by the Court of First Instance of the European Communities (Third Chamber) in Case T-341/02 Regione Siciliana v Commission of the European Communities

(Case C-417/04 P)

(2004/C 300/56)

An appeal was brought before the Court of Justice of the European Communities on 29 September 2004 by Regione Siciliana, represented by the Avvocatura dello Stato, against the order made on 8 July 2004 by the Court of First Instance of the European Communities (Third Chamber) in Case T-341/02 Regione Siciliana v Commission of the European Communities.

The appellant claims that the Court should:

Pleas in law and main arguments:

The appellant submits that the order under appeal is defective on the following grounds:

----

(1)OJ L 185 of 15.07.1988, p. 9.

(2)OJ L 374 of 31.12.1988, p. 1.

----
## In The

Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

No. 06

- 14

- 00070

- CR

BRENDA BENNETT, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 2

Hunt County, Texas

Trial Court No. CR1201108

Before Morriss, C.J., Carter and Moseley, JJ.

Memorandum Opinion by Justice Carter2 

### MEMORANDUM OPINION

Brenda Bennett appeals from her convic tion on the charge of bail jumping and failure to

appear. 1 In a consolidated trial, Bennett was also convicted of misdemeanor theft. 2 Bennett has

filed a single brief in which she raises an issue common to each of her appeals. In her sole issue

in this appeal, Bennett argues that the trial court erred in failing to grant her motion for mistrial.

We addressed this issue in detail in o ur opinion of this date on Bennett’s appeal in cause

number 06

- 14

- 00069

- CR. For the reasons stated therein, we likewise conclude that error has not

been shown in this case.

We affirm the trial court’s judgment.

Bailey C. Moseley

Justice

Date Submitted: September 3, 2014

Date Decided: September 26 , 2014

Do Not Publish

1 See T EX

. P ENAL C ODE A NN . § 38.10 (West 2011 ).

2 Bennett’s appeal of her conviction of misdemeanor theft is the subject of a separate opini on in this Court’s cause

number 06

- 14

- 00069

- CR issued of even date herewith.
EX-10.2.10.2



 Exhibit 10.2.10.2 

AMENDMENT TO 
 THE
CONSOLIDATED EDISON COMPANY OF 
 NEW YORK, INC. 

DEFERRED INCOME PLAN 

Effective January 1, 2013 
  

	


  
 1 








 Pursuant to resolutions of the Management Development and Compensation Committee
adopted on February 15, 2013, the Board of Trustees of Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc. adopted on February 16, 2013, and the authority granted to the Plan Administrator pursuant to Section 6.02 of the Consolidated Edison
Company of New York, Inc. Deferred Income Plan, the undersigned hereby approves the amendment to the Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc., Deferred Income Plan as set forth below: 

1. The Preamble is amended by adding the following at the end thereof: 

The Plan was amended effective January 1, 2013, to adopt the recommendation from the Total Rewards Study which, by increasing the
employer matching contribution formula for Participants who are covered under the cash balance formula in the Consolidated Edison Retirement Plan (“Retirement Plan”), increased the Basic Salary Deferral for such Participants. 

2. Article I, DEFINITIONS, is amended by adding the following definition as 1.50 and renumbering the remaining definitions in
this section: 
 1.50 Retirement Plan means The Consolidated Edison Retirement Plan” as amended from time to time. 

3. Article II, PARTICIPATION, Section 2.02 Deferred Compensation Agreements, subsection (c)(i) is amended by adding the
following language after “the Participant’s election to have his or her Compensation reduced by 6%” 
 or, effective
January 1, 2013, if the Participant is covered under the cash balance formula of the Retirement Plan, the Participant’s election to have his or her Compensation reduced by 8% 

  
 2 








 4. Article III, Accounts, Section 3.01 Amount of Contributions to be
Credited, subsection (a) Basic Salary Deferrals, is amended by adding the following sentences at the end: 
 For Plan Years beginning
on or after January 1, 2013, a Participant who is covered under the cash balance pension formula of the Retirement Plan must elect to defer at least 8% of his or her Compensation earned in such Plan Year as a Basic Salary Deferral. Amounts in
excess of 8% may be deferred as Supplemental Salary Deferrals to the extent such Participant is eligible to make Supplemental Salary Deferrals. 
 IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has caused this instrument to be executed this 19 day of December, 2013 
  

	
	/s/ Mary Adamo
	 Mary Adamo
 The Plan Administrator of the
Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc.

	Deferred Income Plan and Vice President of Human Resources Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc.


  
 3