alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
SCPW-16-0000636

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I

 

COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, LIMITED, a Hawai#i corporation, Petitioner,

vs.

THE HONORABLE KATHLEEN N.A. WATANABE, JUDGE OF THE CIRCUIT

COURT OF THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, STATE OF HAWAII, Respondent Judge, 

and

SANDY POEHNELT; PUA#A #ILI #OI #OI OHANA LLC, a Hawai#i limited

liability company; and THE RIGHT SLICE LLC, a Hawai#i limited

liability company; STACY MONIZ, TRUSTEE OF THE UNRECORDED TRUST

DATED JANUARY 22, 2013; JO ANNE N. MONIZ, TRUSTEE OF THE

UNRECORDED JO ANNE N. MONIZ TRUST DATED FEBRUARY 12, 1999; ANTONIA

L. MONIZ; JOHN MONIZ; MARY C. WALSH, AS TRUSTEE OF TRUST A, A SUBTRUST OF THE BEATRICE DUARTE LIVING TRUST CREATED UNDER AN

UNRECORDED TRUST AGREEMENT DATED SEPTEMBER 24, 1991, AS AMENDED

AND RESTATED IN AN UNRECORDED DOCUMENT DATED JULY 14, 2008, AND AS

TRUSTEE DATED JANUARY 16, 2002, AS AMENDED AND RESTATED THE 28TH

DAY OF JULY, 2008, AS IT MAY BE FURTHER AMENDED, Respondents. 

 

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

(CIV. NO. 15-1-0087)

ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS

(By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Pollack, and Wilson, JJ.)

Upon consideration of petitioner Commercial Properties,

Limited’s petition for writ of mandamus, filed on September 23,

2016, the documents attached thereto and submitted in support

thereof, and the record, it appears that, based on the facts and

circumstances of the underlying matter, petitioner fails to

demonstrate that it has a clear and indisputable right to the

requested relief and that it lacks alternative means to seek

Electronically Filed

Supreme Court

SCPW-16-0000636

21-OCT-2016

08:33 AM
relief. Petitioner, therefore, is not entitled to the requested

writ of mandamus. See Kema v. Gaddis, 91 Hawai#i 200, 204-05, 982

P.2d 334, 338-39 (1999) (a writ of mandamus is an extraordinary

remedy that will not issue unless the petitioner demonstrates a

clear and indisputable right to relief and a lack of alternative

means to redress adequately the alleged wrong or obtain the

requested action; where a court has discretion to act, mandamus

will not lie to interfere with or control the exercise of that

discretion, even when the judge has acted erroneously, unless the

judge has exceeded his or her jurisdiction, has committed a

flagrant and manifest abuse of discretion, or has refused to act

on a subject properly before the court under circumstances in

which he or she has a legal duty to act). Accordingly, 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition for writ of

mandamus is denied.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, October 21, 2016. 

/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald

/s/ Paula A. Nakayama

/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna

/s/ Richard W. Pollack

/s/ Michael D. Wilson

2
Final Listing of Questionnaire Files for Steam Electric Rulemaking Record

Plant ID 00997

Removed 

from Public 

(Non-CBI) 

Docket1

Copyright 

Flag2

File Name Description

00997\00997_ HardcopyLog_Template.doc EPA log of hardcopy documents submitted

x 00997\00997_Checklist.xls EPA Technical Review Checklist Workbook

00997\00997_Completeness Checklist_.xls EPA Completeness Review Checklist

x 00997\00997_Part A.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 00997\00997_Part B.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 00997\00997_Part C.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 00997\00997_Part D.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 00997\00997_Part E.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 00997\00997_Part F.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 00997\00997_Part G.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 00997\00997_Part H.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 00997\Supporting Documents\D-1_POND-1.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

x 00997\Supporting Documents\D-2_WWT-1.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

x 00997\Supporting Documents\F-1 for Part G_G3-3.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

x 00997\Supporting Documents\F-1_LTS-1.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

00997\Supporting Documents\Map 1_Rives station aerial.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

00997\Supporting Documents\Map 2_Rives disposal site aerial.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

00997\Supporting Documents\Map 3_Rives station topo.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

00997\Supporting Documents\Map 4_Rives disposal site topo.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

00997\Supporting Documents\Map 5_Rives outfalls.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

x 00997\Supporting Documents\Part F Section 5 F5-6 Landfill-1 GW Drawing.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

x 00997\Supporting Documents\WB-1.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

x 00997\Supporting Documents\WB-2.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

00997\00997_Certification Statement.pdf Plant certification statement

1

 Final reviewed survey responses are located in the Steam Electric Technical Questionnaire Database . 

2

 Copyright documents are available from the docket.
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 584 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  2d Session
S. RES. 584

  Expressing the sense of the Senate against the making available of 
   current and former diplomats, officials, and members of the Armed 
   Forces of the United States for questioning by the government of 
                            Vladimir Putin.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             July 19, 2018

  Mr. Schumer (for himself, Mr. Menendez, Mr. Durbin, Mr. Schatz, Mr. 
   Reed, Mr. Leahy, Mrs. Feinstein, Mrs. Murray, Mr. Whitehouse, Mr. 
    Manchin, Mr. Casey, and Mr. Blumenthal) submitted the following 
             resolution; which was considered and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
  Expressing the sense of the Senate against the making available of 
   current and former diplomats, officials, and members of the Armed 
   Forces of the United States for questioning by the government of 
                            Vladimir Putin.

    Resolved, That it is the sense of the Senate that the United States 
should refuse to make available any current or former diplomat, civil 
servant, political appointee, law enforcement official, or member of 
the Armed Forces of the United States for questioning by the government 
of Vladimir Putin.
                                 <all>
```
IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-13-00040-CR

No. 10-13-00041-CR

DARRYL DEWAYNE WILLIAMS,

Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee

From the 19th District Court

McLennan County, Texas

Trial Court Nos. 2012-0750-C1 and 2012-0835-C1

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Darryl Dewayne Williams’s pro se notices of appeal in the underlying criminal 

actions complaining of the trial court’s rulings on motions to withdraw as attorney of 

record were filed on February 7, 2013. By letter dated February 15, 2013, the Clerk of 

this Court notified Williams that these appeals were subject to dismissal because it 

appeared the Court does not have jurisdiction of an appeal of a ruling on a motion to 

withdraw by counsel. By the same letter, the Clerk warned Williams that, unless any 
Williams v. State Page 2

party filed a response showing grounds for continuing the appeals within 21 days of the 

date of the letter, the appeals would be dismissed. Williams has filed a response for 

both appeals but it does not provide grounds for continuing the appeals.

We do not have jurisdiction of an interlocutory appeal of the grant or denial of a 

motion to withdraw as attorney of record. See Abbott v. State, 271 S.W.3d 694, 696-697 

(Tex. Crim. App. 2008) (standard for determining jurisdiction is whether the appeal is 

authorized by law); Everett v. State, 91 S.W.3d 386 (Tex. App. —Waco 2002, no pet.) 

(Court has jurisdiction over criminal appeals only when expressly granted by law). No 

law authorizes the interlocutory appeal of a denial of these motions.

The appeals are dismissed. 

TOM GRAY

Chief Justice

Before Chief Justice Gray,

Justice Davis, and

Justice Scoggins

Appeal dismissed

Opinion delivered and filed March 7, 2013

Do not publish 

[CR25]
EXHIBIT 31.1
 CERTIFICATIONS
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of IASIS Healthcare LLC;
 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)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules
13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have:
     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):
    /s/ W. Carl Whitmer

W. Carl WhitmerPresident andChief Executive Officer
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**INTERLINEBRANDS, INC.**

 

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C.SECTION 1350,**

**ASADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with theQuarterly Report of Interline Brands, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Qfor the period ended September 25, 2009 as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Michael J. Grebe,Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,that:

 

(1)                                The Report fully complies with therequirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Actof 1934; and

 

(2)                                The information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultsof operations of the Company.

 
| /S/ MICHAEL J. GREBE                                          |   |
|---------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
| Michael J. Grebe                                              |   |
| Chairman of the Board,  Chief Executive Officer and President |   |
| November 2,  2009                                        |   |

 

----
VICTORY INSURANCE CO. 

Plaintiff/Appellant 

v. 

OFFICE OF THE MONTANA STATE 

AUDITOR, 

Defendant/Appellee 

ORDER GRANTING APPELLANT'S 

UNOPPOSED RULE 26 (1) MT. R. 

APP. P. MOTION FOR EXTENSION 

OF TIME TO FILE 

OPENING BRIEF 

The Appellant in this matter has moved this Court for an extension of tirne in 

which to file its Opening Brief. Finding good cause therefore, 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant's Opening Brief in this matter is 

now due on or before Friday, December 30, 2022. 

Dated this 21st day of Novernber, 2022 

1 

C erk of the Supreme Court
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 66 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

  1st Session
H. CON. RES. 66

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             april 5, 2001

   Received and referred to the Committee on Rules and Administration

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
Authorizing the printing of a revised and updated version of the House 
          document entitled ``Women in Congress, 1917-1990''.

    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring),

SECTION 1. PRINTING OF REVISED VERSION OF ``WOMEN IN CONGRESS, 1917-
              1990''.

    An updated version of House Document 101-238, entitled ``Women in 
Congress, 1917-1990'' (as revised by the Library of Congress), shall be 
printed as a House document by the Public Printer, with illustrations 
and suitable binding, under the direction of the Committee on House 
Administration of the House of Representatives.

SEC. 2. NUMBER OF COPIES.

    In addition to the usual number, there shall be printed 30,700 
copies of the document referred to in subsection (a), of which--
            (1) 25,000 shall be for the use of the Committee on House 
        Administration of the House of Representatives; and
            (2) 5,700 shall be for the use of the Committee on Rules 
        and Administration of the Senate.

            Passed the House of Representatives April 4, 2001.

            Attest:

                                                 JEFF TRANDAHL,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
```

[House Hearing, 115 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

 

 
                DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 
                    APPROPRIATIONS FOR 2019 
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________

                           HEARINGS 

                           BEFORE A 

                     SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE 

                 COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS 

                   HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

               ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS 

                         SECOND SESSION 

               SUBCOMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY 

              JOHN R. CARTER, Texas, Chairman 

JOHN ABNEY CULBERSON, Texas           LUCILLE ROYBAL-ALLARD, California 
CHARLES J. FLEISCHMANN, Tennessee     HENRY CUELLAR, Texas 
ANDY HARRIS, Maryland                 DAVID E. PRICE, North Carolina 
STEVEN M. PALAZZO, Mississippi        C.A. DUTCH RUPPERSBERGER, Maryland 
DAN NEWHOUSE, Washington 
SCOTT TAYLOR, Virginia 

NOTE: Under committee rules, Mr. Frelinghuysen, as chairman of the full 
committee, and Mrs. Lowey, as ranking minority member of the full committee, 
are authorized to sit as members of all subcommittees. 

                    DONNA SHAHBAZ, KRIS MALLARD, LAURA CYLKE, 
                       CHRISTOPHER ROMIG, and DAVE ROTH 

                         Subcommitte Staff 
                            ____________
                            
                               PART 2A 
                               
                   DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 

            Answers to Submitted Questions for the Record 
                                                                      Page 
                                                                      
Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Border 
  Protection ..................................................          1 
Federal Emergency Management Agency ...........................         29 
United States Coast Guard .....................................         45

               [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                              _________

       Printed for the use of the Committee on Appropriations 
                               _________
 
                                    ______
 		 
                      U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE 
 		 
 31-359                    WASHINGTON : 2018                 
 
 
 [TEXT NOT AVAILABLE]
```
HUSCHBLACKWELL

Virginia L. Fry

Partner

901 St. Louis Street, Suite 1800

Springfield, MO 65806

Direct: 417.268.4059

Fax: 417.268.4040

virginia.fiy@huschblackwell.com

August 30, 2013

~ :.

~,~ ~_.~~:.

VIA FEDERAL EXPRESS

Ms. Brooke Chapman

Associate Director

Small Community Air Service Development Program

bffice of Aviation Analysis

8th Floor, Room W86-307

United States Department of Transportation

1200 New Jersey Avenue SE

Washington, DC 20590

Re: Branson Regional Airport Transportation Development District Application

Small Community Air Service Development Program

Docket ID: DOT-OST-2013-0120

Dear Ms. Chapman:

I am writing in support of the Small Community Air Service Grant application that has

been submitted by the Branson, Missouri Regional Airport Transportation Development District

in connection with the Branson Regional Airport.

I am a resident of southwest Missouri and serve on the Executive Committee of our firm,

which has offices in many of the cities that the Branson Regional Airport now serves and hopes

to serve in the future. Our attorneys often use the Branson Regional Airport for business and

personal travel and many of our friends and family use the airport in connection with their travel

to and from this part of the State of Missouri.

The opening of the Branson Regional Airport has been a tremendous benefit to the

economy in and around the area and we are fortunate to have such an asset. The Branson

Regional Airport has done an outstanding job attracting Frontier and Southwest Airlines to the

area and we look forward to their continued success.

SPH-2099551-1 Husch Blackwell LLP
.•.•USCHBLACKWELL

August 30, 2013

Page 2

We hope that you will favorably consider the Transportation Development District's

grant application.

Sincerely,

-{/illjUU 0 c7 h;r:-

Virginia 1. Fry

SPH-2099551-1 Husch Blackwell LLP
Nebraska Court of Appeals Memorandum Opinions

NOT Selected for Posting to Court Website

(released the week prior to March 29, 2022)

The following memorandum opinions were filed by the Nebraska Court of 

Appeals and can be viewed using SSCALES:

None Available

The above-listed memorandum opinions can be viewed online through the 

appellate court case search available by subscription through Nebraska.gov:

http://www.nebraska.gov/subscriber/.

Current subscribers to Nebraska.gov can search appellate court cases here:

https://www.nebraska.gov/courts/sccales/.
1

Daniels, Nia (FAA)

From: Daniels, Nia (FAA)

Sent: Thursday, February 05, 2015 12:30 PM

To: 'ctaylor@vikinguas.com'

Cc: Pappas, Rob (FAA); Schandler, Andrea (FAA); Cooper, Thuy (FAA); Pearson, Lakisha 

(FAA)

Subject: Request for Information

February 5, 2015 

Mr. Christopher M. Taylor 

Viking Unmanned Aerial Systems, Inc. 

16 Sanford Drive, Suite 5 

Gorhan, Maine 04038 

Dear Mr. Taylor: 

This letter is to inform you that the following information is missing from your petition (Docket No. FAA2014-0906). This information is necessary for the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to process your 

petition. 

 Describe the aircraft make and model for the proposed UAS operation. The description should include 

the following: size and aircraft type. 

 Provide information regarding the radio frequency spectrum. This information can be located in the 

aircraft manual. 

 Provide description of proximity to airports. 

 Your petition references a pre-flight inspection and/or checklist. Describe the process used to determine 

if the UAS is airworthy and in safe condition for operation in the NAS. 

 Your petition references the materials listed below, however the materials was not submitted for the 

record. Please provide a copy of the following referenced materials: 

o The Manual 

o Flight Manual 

o Operating Handbook 

Please submit the additional information (non-proprietary) to your docket at www.regulations.gov and submit 

any proprietary information to the FAA Headquarters or electronically via e-mail to 

333exemptions@faa.gov. If you want us to process your request any further, we must receive the information 

described above by February 19, 2015. If we do not receive the information, we will close the docket without 

notifying you further. 
2

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (202) 267-9677. 

Sincerely, 

Nia Daniels 

Program Analyst 

Nia Daniels, ARM‐108

Federal Aviation Administration

Office of Rulemaking, Airmen & Airspace Rules Division

800 Independence Avenue, SW

Washington, DC 20591

PH: (202) 267 ‐ 7626

Fax: (202) 267 ‐ 5075

nia.daniels@faa.gov
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 541 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  2d Session
S. RES. 541

Expressing the sense of the Senate that any United States-Saudi Arabia 
  civilian nuclear cooperation agreement must prohibit the Kingdom of 
Saudi Arabia from enriching uranium or separating plutonium on its own 
  territory, in keeping with the strongest possible nonproliferation 
                           ``gold standard''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             June 12, 2018

   Mr. Merkley (for himself, Mr. Paul, and Mr. Markey) submitted the 
 following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign 
                               Relations

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
Expressing the sense of the Senate that any United States-Saudi Arabia 
  civilian nuclear cooperation agreement must prohibit the Kingdom of 
Saudi Arabia from enriching uranium or separating plutonium on its own 
  territory, in keeping with the strongest possible nonproliferation 
                           ``gold standard''.

Whereas the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, done at 
        Washington, London, and Moscow July 1, 1968 (NPT), which is nearing its 
        fiftieth anniversary, obligates non-nuclear weapon states, in Article 
        II, ``not to receive the transfer from any transferor whatsoever of 
        nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices or of control over 
        such weapons or explosive devices directly, or indirectly; not to 
        manufacture or otherwise acquire nuclear weapons or other nuclear 
        explosive devices; and not to seek or receive any assistance in the 
        manufacture of nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices'': 
        Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That it is the sense of the Senate that any United 
States-Saudi Arabia civilian nuclear cooperation agreement under 
section 123 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2153), commonly 
known as a ``123 Agreement'', concluded in the future, must prohibit 
the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia from enriching uranium or separating 
plutonium on its own territory, in keeping with the strongest possible 
nonproliferation ``gold standard''.
                                 <all>
```