alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Opinion filed January 31, 2020

In The

Eleventh Court of Appeals __________

No. 11-18-00327-CV

__________

JUSTIN D. PERRYMAN AND KENNETH R. KOEPKE, 

Appellants

V.

CITIZENS NATIONAL BANK AT BROWNWOOD, Appellee

On Appeal from the 35th District Court

Brown County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. CV1611446

O R D E R

Appellant Kenneth R. Koepke has filed in this court a pro se motion to dismiss 

his portion of this appeal. In the motion, Koepke indicates that he does not wish to 

proceed with this appeal, and he requests that his appeal be dismissed. Per this 

court’s request, Appellee has filed a response to Koepke’s motion to dismiss. 

Appellee states in its response that Koepke and Appellee have reached a settlement 
2

agreement in which Koepke agreed to dismiss his appeal. In accordance with 

Koepke’s request, we dismiss his appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(a)(1). 

Koepke’s motion to dismiss is granted, and this appeal is dismissed in part. 

The appeal remains active as to Appellant Justin D. Perryman. 

PER CURIAM

January 31, 2020

Panel consists of: Bailey, C.J., 

Stretcher, J., and Wright, S.C.J.1

Willson, J., not participating. 

1

Jim R. Wright, Senior Chief Justice (Retired), Court of Appeals, 11th District of Texas at Eastland, 

sitting by assignment.
### Proposal: BE061812 Date: 6/19/2012 Phone: 602-272-0911 Fax: 602-242-1580

PETROLEUM MARKETERS ASS OF AMERICA Attn: MR MARK MORGAN To: 

### INSPECT 3 UST AN 4 DISPENSER SUMS Project:

Salesperson BRENT EREKSON Scope of Work COCHISE TO PERFORM THE FOLLOWING WORK INSPECT 4 DISPENSER SUMP, SHEAR VALVES, FILTERS AND UNIONS FOR LEAKS, FUEL, WATER OR TRASH INSPECT 3 STP SUMP, REMOVE LID, CHECK FOR LEAKS, AT UNION, LEAK DETECTOR, CHECK FOR WATER OR FUEL IN SUMPS 

### Exclusions NO PERMITS NO PARTS NO REPAIRS
Reference Description Quantity UOM Extended Price Unit Price 730 TRANSP./LODGING 16.25 0.6500 MI 25.0000 730.60.01 MILEAGE 16.25 Total 730 TRANSP./LODGING 745 PETROLEUM TESTING 225.00 75.0000 EA 3.0000 745.20.01 INSPECT DISPENSERS SUMPS, STP SUMPS & SPILL BUCKETS 75.00 75.0000 EA 1.0000 745.20.13 TRAVEL TIME TO SITE 300.00 Total 745 PETROLEUM TESTING

316.25 

### Proposal Total: Acceptance Accepted by: Title: Date:

Page 1 

# Proposal COCHISE CONTRACTORS, INC 333 N. Black Canyon Highway Phoenix, AZ 85009
Order filed, August 17, 2016.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-16-00515-CR

____________

HENRY LEE BETHUNE, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 232nd District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 511361

ORDER

The reporter’s record in this case was due July 26, 2016. See Tex. R. App. 

P. 35.1. The court has not received a request to extend time for filing the record. 

The record has not been filed with the court. Because the reporter’s record has not 

been filed timely, we issue the following order.

We order Arlene Webb, the official court reporter, to file the record in this 

appeal within 30 days of the date of this order. 

PER CURIAM
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL,

Petitioner 

v.

DOUGLAS B. BREIDENBACH, JR.,

 Respondent 

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 2615 Disciplinary Docket No. 3

No. 89 DB 2019

Attorney Registration No. 29985

(Montgomery County)

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 27th day of June, 2019, upon consideration of the 

Recommendation of the Three-Member Panel of the Disciplinary Board, the Joint Petition 

in Support of Discipline on Consent is granted, and Douglas B. Breidenbach, Jr., is 

suspended on consent from the Bar of this Commonwealth for a period of six months. He 

shall comply with all the provisions of Pa.R.D.E. 217. 

Respondent shall pay costs to the Disciplinary Board pursuant to Pa.R.D.E. 

208(g).
S. 611 

One Hundred Thirteenth Congress 

of the 

United States of America 

AT THE SECOND SESSION 

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Friday, 

the third day of January, two thousand and fourteen 

An Act 

To make a technical amendment to the T’uf Shur Bien Preservation Trust Area 

Act, and for other purposes. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Sandia Pueblo Settlement Technical Amendment Act’’. 

SEC. 2. SANDIA PUEBLO SETTLEMENT TECHNICAL AMENDMENT. 

Section 413(b) of the T’uf Shur Bien Preservation Trust Area 

Act (16 U.S.C. 539m–11(b)) is amended— 

(1) in the first sentence of paragraph (4), by striking 

‘‘conveyance’’ and inserting ‘‘title to be conveyed’’; and 

(2) by adding at the end the following: 

‘‘(6) FAILURE TO EXCHANGE.— 

‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—If the land exchange authorized 

under paragraph (1) is not completed by the date that 

is 30 days after the date of enactment of this paragraph, 

the Secretary, on request of the Pueblo and the Secretary 

of the Interior, shall transfer the National Forest land 

generally depicted as ‘Land to be Held in Trust’ on the 

map entitled ‘Sandia Pueblo Settlement Technical Amendment Act’ and dated October 18, 2013, to the Secretary 

of the Interior to be held in trust by the United States 

for the Pueblo— 

‘‘(i) subject to the restriction enforced by the Secretary of the Interior that the land remain undeveloped, with the natural characteristics of the land to 

be preserved in perpetuity; and 

‘‘(ii) consistent with subsection (c). 

‘‘(B) OTHER TRANSFERS.—After the transfer under 

subparagraph (A) is complete, the Secretary of the Interior, 

with the consent of the Pueblo, shall— 

‘‘(i) transfer to the Secretary, consistent with section 411(c)— 

‘‘(I) the La Luz tract generally depicted on 

the map entitled ‘Sandia Pueblo Settlement Technical Amendment Act’ and dated October 18, 2013; 

and 

‘‘(II) the conservation easement for the Piedra 

Lisa tract generally depicted on the map entitled 

‘Sandia Pueblo Settlement Technical Amendment 

Act’ and dated October 18, 2013; and 
S. 611—2 

‘‘(ii) grant to the Secretary a right-of-way for the 

Piedra Lisa Trail within the Piedra Lisa tract generally 

depicted on the map entitled ‘Sandia Pueblo Settlement 

Technical Amendment Act’ and dated October 18, 

2013.’’. 

Speaker of the House of Representatives. 

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
# Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Opinion filed December 22, 2021

. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________ No. 3D19

- 1252 Lower Tribunal No. 16

- 32717

________________ 

### JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. , Appellant,

vs. 

### Jorge Llovet, et al. , Appellee s

.

An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami

- Dade County, David C. Miller , Judge. Le ó n Cosgrove, LLP, and Derek E. Le ó n, Andrew B. Boese, and John R. Byrne , for appellant. Jacobs Legal, PLLC, and Bruce Jacobs , for appellee Jorge Llovet

.
Before EMAS, LOGUE and HENDON , JJ. PER CURIAM

.2 JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., a non

- party to the litigation bel ow, seeks review of the denial of its motion for a protective order from post

- judgment discovery pursuant to a subpoena

. In a companion proceeding before this Court , stemming from the same case, and involving the same parties , lawyers, and issue, but a dif ferent subpoena, we reversed an order denying JPMorgan Chase’s motion for a protective order since “ Llovet is barred from

re - opening discovery post

- judgment because the discovery he now seeks could have been requested pre

- judgment. ” JPMorgan Chase Bank, N. A. v. Llovet , No. 3D19

- 1118, 2021 WL 5347435, at *3 (Fla. 3d DCA Nov. 17, 2021)

. For the same reason, we reverse the order under review and remand for further proceedings

. Reversed and remanded

.
Exhibit 8



|                                    |  |                         
|----------------------------------- |  | ------------------------
|Company                             |  | Country of Incorporation
|Nokia Inc.                          |  | United States           
|Nokia GmbH                          |  | Germany                 
|Nokia UK Limited                    |  | England & Wales         
|Nokia TMC Limited                   |  | South Korea             
|Nokia Telecommunications Ltd.       |  | China                   
|Nokia Finance International B.V.    |  | The Netherlands         
|Nokia Komárom Kft.                  |  | Hungary                 
|Nokia India Pvt. Ltd.               |  | India                   
|Nokia Italia S.p.A.                 |  | Italy                   
|Nokia Spain S.A.U.                  |  | Spain                   
|Nokia Romania S.R.L.                |  | Romania                 
|Nokia do Brasil Tecnologia Ltda     |  | Brazil                  
|OOO Nokia                           |  | Russia                  
|NAVTEQ Corporation                  |  | United States           
|Nokia Siemens Networks B.V.         |  | The Netherlands         
|Nokia Siemens Networks Oy           |  | Finland                 
|Nokia Siemens Networks GmbH & Co KG |  | Germany                 
|Nokia Siemens Networks Pvt. Ltd.    |  | India
May 11, 2016

U.S. Department of Transportation

Docket Management System

1200 New Jersey Ave.SE

Washington, DC 20590

Re: Amendment to Exemption 11836 issued pursuant to Section 333 of the FAA

Reform Act and Part 11of the Federal Aviation Regulations in Regulatory Docket

No. FAA-2015-1099

Dear Sir or Madam;

Thomas Hall seeks to amend the original 333 exemption #11836 as follows:

1. Update the current 333 exemption to reflect the current issuance which includes removal of

Closed Set Restrictions

2. Give authorization for all approved UAS/UAV Aircraft

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.

1) Permit closed-set filming for the motion picture and television industry

Thomas Hall was issued an Exemption numbered 11836 (hereinafter the Exemption) without the

purpose of conducting scripted, closed-set filming for the motion picture and television industry.

Thomas Hall hereby requests an amendment to the Exemption to allow operations for the purpose of

conducting scripted,closed-set filming for the motion picture and television industry and additional type

of unmanned aircraft system (UAS) that fully complies with the conditions of the Exemption.

2) Additional aircraft

Thomas Hall wishes to operate at will all aircraft currently listed as approved. All operations of the

additional UAS will be in full compliance with the terms of the Exemption of 11386.

Please contact the undersigned should you have any question concerning this request for an

amendment to the Exemption.

Sincerely yours,

Thomas Hall,
----

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case COMP/M.3720 — BAES/AMS)

(2005/C 38/10)

(Text with EEA relevance)

----

(1)OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

----
EXHIBIT 31.2




CERTIFICATION




I, William T. Nanovsky, certify that:




1.           I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A of Swisher Hygiene Inc.;




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;




3.           Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;




4.           The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:




a)           Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;




c)           Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and




d)           Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and




5.           The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):




a)           All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and




b)           Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting.






Date: February 19, 2013
/s/ William T. NanovskyWilliam T. NanovskySenior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer

(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
I

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 3947

To amend title XIX of the Social Security Act to treat certain clinics operated

by children’s hospitals as Federally-qualified health centers under the

medicaid program.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MARCH 3, 1994

Ms. LAMBERT (for herself, Mr. SLATTERY, Mr. BROWN of Ohio, Mr. BACHUS

of Alabama, and Mr. KENNEDY) introduced the following bill; which was

referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce

A BILL

To amend title XIX of the Social Security Act to treat

certain clinics operated by children’s hospitals as Federally-qualified health centers under the medicaid program.

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 ‘‘Access to Children’s

5 Health Care Act of 1994’’.
2

•HR 3947 IH

1 SEC. 2. CLINICS OPERATED BY CHILDREN’S HOSPITALS AS

2 FEDERALLY-QUALIFIED HEALTH CENTERS

3 UNDER MEDICAID.

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 1905(l)(2)(B) of the So5 cial Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396d(l)(2)(B)), as amended

6 by section 13606(a) of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation

7 Act of 1993, is amended—

8 (1) by striking ‘‘or’’ at the end of clause (iii);

9 and

10 (2) by redesignating clause (iv) as clause (v)

11 and inserting after clause (iii) the following new

12 clause:

13 ‘‘(iv) is an entity—

14 ‘‘(I) operated by a hospital whose inpa15 tients are predominantly individuals under 18

16 years of age;

17 ‘‘(II) described in clause (iii), or which

18 would be described in clause (iii) but for the en19 tity’s failure to meet the requirements of sec20 tion 330(e)(3)(G) of the Public Health Service

21 Act;

22 ‘‘(III) with a consumer advisory board

23 composed of individuals, a majority of whom

24 are family members of patients served by the

25 entity, who advise the hospital operating the en26 tity on the entity’s annual budget, the selection
3

•HR 3947 IH

1 of the entity’s general director, and other gen2 eral policies for the entity; and

3 ‘‘(IV) with written inpatient and outpatient

4 referral arrangements in effect with each Fed5 erally-qualified health center under this sub6 paragraph that is located or provides services

7 within the service area of the hospital operating

8 the entity, or’’.

9 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by

10 subsection (a) shall apply to calendar quarters beginning

11 on or after January 1, 1995.

Æ
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE

F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER ON M OTION

November 7, 2008 Revision Cause number: 01

- 1 4

- 0 0 3 35

- C R

Style: Damion Gentry v. The State of Texas

Date motion filed * : August 1 8 , 201 4

Type of motion: Motion for E xtension of T ime to F ile Reporter’s Record

Party filing motion: Court reporter

Document to be filed: Reporter’ s Record

Is appeal accelerated? No

If motion to extend time:

Original due date: June 16 , 201 4

Number of extensions granted: 2 Current Due date: August 16 , 2014

Date Requested: September 16 , 2014

Ordered that motion is:

 Granted

If document is to be filed, document due: September 16, 2014

 No further extensions of time will be granted absent extraordinary

circumstances

.

 Denied

 Dismissed ( e.g. , want of jurisdiction, moot )

 Other: _____________________________________

On Ju ne 17 , 2014, the Clerk of this Court granted t he reporter’s motion for

extension of time to file the record due to the appeal being a bout 3,000 pages. The

reporter did not timely file the record by July 16, 2014 or request an extension,

which likely would have been granted until August 16, 2014. Accordingly, the

reporter’s motion, construed as her third motion for extension of time , is granted,

but no further extensions will be granted absent extraordinary circumstances.

Judge’ s signature: /s/ Laura C. Higley



Panel consists of

____________________________________________ Date: August 21, 2014
#### Harold J. GARTNER, Petitioner, v. MARINE SURPLUS, INC., a Florida corporation, Respondent.

No. 67-172.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Third District.

March 6, 1967.

PER CURIAM.

Certiorari dismissed.
p.1 

OAR Box 1384 

Prepped by Charmelle Mathews 

Document Number: 

>J2#) U-E-184 

Docket Number: 

A-94-52 

Printed 7/2/2008 8:42:11 AM Sheet 224 of 264 
P.2 

rYW^* 5 ^ 

Contact Report 

From: Shawn McKee, Pacific Environmental Services, Inc. (PES) 

Date: August 24,1998 

Contact: Mr. Thomas Jones, Production Manager 

Company: Prestigious Accessories 

Telephone Number: (903) 877-2093 

Fax Number: (903) 877-2287 

Contact Summary: 

Mr. Thomas Jones of Prestigious Accessories was contacted on behalf of the U.S. EPA to 

gain information about potential indirect costs associated with changing to non-atomized 

production equipment, and of vapor suppressants. In response to my questions Mr. Thomas 

indicated the following: 

Prestigious Accessories currently uses a vapor suppressed resin for approximately 95% of 

production. Mr. Thomas estimated that the vapor suppressant adds about $0.01 per pound to the 

cost of the resin. 

In an additional effort to further reduce styrene emissions, Prestigious Accessories has 

also switched from using a resin with a hazardous air pollutant (HAP) content of 44% to one 

with a HAP content of 36%. The change in resin did not resulted in any additional costs for 

training or certification. Prestigious Accessories did not have any production problems from the 

change in resins, and actually saw a small reduction in resin usage. [Mr. Thomas, was there a 

change in price when Prestigious Accessories switched resins? Could you also please 

indicate what kind of resin was used previously and what kind is now being used? ] 

INFORMATION IS ACCURATE 
P.3 

U8/^5/» » lUt U8:25 t-AA UUJ8772287 rK-MiblUUS ACCtSSUKitS itiuui 

H 

T o : Shawn-McKee 

Pacifi c Environmental Services, Inc 

From: •Thomas'Jones 

'Prestigiou s Accessories, Inc . 

Re: •'. Qu:est:ionaire Response 

Date : Auigust 2.5, 1998 

M s. McKee',. •.{•;.•_ ;' 

Only some.:.-sl:ight correction is required in your Contact Summary. 

1) w e us©:Vapor Suppressed resin for 100% of our Production, not 

9 5% .. we .ONLY use a Non-Vapor Suppressed resin for the manufacture 

of molds..for/:pur own use. This use constitutes less than 4,000 lbs. 

of resin Annually. 

2) Alth6a:ghi;we .did not experience any problems when we converted to 

a vapor suppressed resin, this action did not effect resin usage. 

Iri"_nswer{>t:b' your two questions, l) YES there was a price 

"reduction"-.when we switched resins, about $0.08 per pound, and 

2) Previously.;.-we used a.straight Ortho resin and now we use an 

Iso / DCPD-.blend. 

If-you 5hav;e..:any additional questions please feel free to call, 

SiT/ceT-e'ly,.lUr 

Kl/w 

0.
Third District Court of Appeal 

State of Florida 

Opinion filed January 10, 2024. 

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D23-1160

Lower Tribunal No. 18-31604

________________

Bernardo de la Peña, 

Appellant,

vs.

SC Mota Associates Limited Partnership, 

Appellee. 

An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Maria de 

Jesus Santovenia, Judge.

Ayala Law, P.A., and Eduardo A. Maura and Luis F. Quesada, for

appellant.

Slusher & Rosenblum, P.A., and Jonathan S. Glickman and Jeremy E.

Slusher (West Palm Beach), for appellee.

Before EMAS, FERNANDEZ and SCALES, JJ. 

PER CURIAM.
2

Affirmed. See La Ley Sports Complex at City of Homestead, LLC v. 

City of Homestead, 255 So. 3d 468, 469 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018) (“In reviewing 

a final judgment rendered from a non-jury trial, the trial court's findings of fact 

are clothed with a presumption of correctness. Fito v. Attorney's Title Ins. 

Fund, Inc., 83 So. 3d 755, 757-58 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011). We apply a clear error 

standard to the findings of fact, and a finding will not be disturbed unless it is 

totally unsupported by competent and substantial evidence, it is clearly 

against the weight of the evidence, or it was induced by an erroneous view 

of the law. Id.; Holland v. Gross, 89 So. 2d 255, 258 (Fla. 1956).”)