alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
J

- A32013

- 17

*Retired Senior Judge assigned to the Superior Court. NON

- PRECEDENTIAL DECISION

– SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37

SHERRILYN D. WASHINGTON

Appellant

v.

HARRY E. HAMILTON :

:

:

:

:

:

: IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF

PENNSYLVANIA

No. 124 MDA 2017

Appeal from the Order Entered December 1 , 2016

in the Court of Common Pleas of Centre County

Civil Division at No(s): 04

- 2534

BEFORE: OTT, DUBOW, and STRASSBURGER, J.*

CONCURRIN G MEMORANDUM BY STRASSBURGER, J .:

FILED SEPTEMBER 12, 2018

I join the Majority memorandum except for its analysis of the parties’

date of separation

.

With respect to that issue , the Divorce Code provides that “[i] n the

event a complaint in divorce is filed and served, it shall be presumed that

the parties commenced t o live separate and apart not later than the date

that the complaint was served .” 23 Pa.C.S. § 3103 (emphasis added)

. Here,

neither party is arguing that the date of separation was later than the

service of the complaint; instead, the parties are arguing that it was either

the date of service (Wife) or earlier (Husband) . Accordingly, use of a

presumption, as applied b y the Majority, is not appropriate

.

However, I agree with the Majority’s conclusion that there was no error

or abuse of discretion by the trial court. The t rial court considered theJ

- A32013

- 17

- 2

-

testimony of both Husband and Wife and credited Wife’s testimony that

marital relations ceased in November 2001 , shortly after both of Husband’s

sons were born

. It also credited Husband’s testimony that after that date the

parties led separate lives, even though they were sometimes under the same

roof. Such a conclusion was neither error nor abuse of discretion, and

therefore Wife is not entitled to relief on this issue.
My questions are:

Will there be a simple and clear outline of how research can be conducted and how much involvement and control (the ability to restrict or prohibit) the counties have in this process?

Will all native American tribes be offered the option to file a plan for cultivation with the USDA or only federally recognized sovereign nation tribes (vs state recognized tribes)?

Thanks!

Josh SchneiderCultivaris 

San Diego CA
TO: All Court of Appeals Judges, Professor Bacigal, Professor Swisher and John Tucker

FROM: Marty Ring

DATE: April 7, 2015

 

 The following cases in which the Court of Appeals issued published opinions have been 

appealed to the Supreme Court:

 

1. Julie A. Rubino

 v. Justin Rubino

 Record No. 0595-14-1

 Opinion rendered by Judge Humphreys on

 January 20, 2015

2. James Edward Williams

 v. Commonwealth of Virginia

 Record No. 0700-14-2

 Opinion rendered by Judge Petty on

 January 20, 2015

3. Loren Anthony Mason, Jr.

 v. Commonwealth of Virginia

 Record No. 1542-13-2

 En Banc Opinion rendered by Judge Kelsey on

 February 3, 2015

4. Morgan Sinclair Goodwin

 v. Commonwealth of Virginia

 Record No. 0190-14-3

 Opinion rendered by Judge Decker on

 February 3, 2015

5. Antwain Maurice Jones

 v. Commonwealth of Virginia

 Record No. 0087-14-4

 Opinion rendered by Judge Beales on

 February 18, 2015
April 14, 2015

JUDGMENT

The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

ARREINIUS JARLYN WATSON, Appellant

NO. 14-14-00469-CR V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

________________________________

This cause was heard on the transcript of the record of the court below. 

Having considered the record, this Court holds that there was no error in the 

judgment. The Court orders the judgment AFFIRMED.

We further order appellant pay all costs expended in the appeal.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.
ELECTRONIC RECORD

05-12-00095-CR RESISTING ARREST

05-12-00096-CR INDECENT EXPOSURE

COA# 05-12-00097-CR OFFENSE: POSS OF INHALANT

STYLE: nix,thomas lee COUNTY: Collin

COA DISPOSITION: AFFIRM TRIAL COURT: County Court at Law No 3

DATE: 08/05/2014

003-82321-10, 00382323-10 & 003-

Publish:NO TCCASE#: 82324-10

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS t*n/v

STYLE: NIX, THOMAS LEE v. /ait /v

PAO <>£ Petition

FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW IN CCA IS:

DATE: lll/V20t</

JUDGE: /^c Ccui^^~>

&&0 5* PETTITON

FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW

IS 5/^/sX

DATE (W/ito ?:%. xwr

JUDGE

CCA#:

CCA Disposition:

DATE:

JUDGE:

SIGNED:

PUBLISH:

PRO <>£

PC:_

DNP:

MOTION FOR

REHEARING IN CCA IS: Cma/J^J) ~\J^Ui//t^ 2% &?/?

JUDGE: ffiy ^^

P^c^/^t) ELECTRONIC RECORD
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.J. Res. 105 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. J. RES. 105

Redesignating the Robert E. Lee Memorial in Arlington National Cemetery 
                      as the ``Arlington House''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           December 15, 2020

   Mr. Beyer (for himself, Ms. Wexton, Ms. Norton, and Mr. Connolly) 
  submitted the following joint resolution; which was referred to the 
  Committee on Veterans' Affairs, and in addition to the Committee on 
   Armed Services, for a period to be subsequently determined by the 
  Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall 
           within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
Redesignating the Robert E. Lee Memorial in Arlington National Cemetery 
                      as the ``Arlington House''.

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled, That--
            (1) the house in Arlington National Cemetery dedicated as a 
        memorial to Robert E. Lee pursuant to the joint resolution of 
        June 29, 1955 (Public Law 84-107; 69 Stat. 190), shall after 
        the date of the enactment of this joint resolution be 
        redesignated and known as the ``Arlington House''; and
            (2) any reference in any law, regulation, map, document, 
        paper, or other record of the United States to the house 
        referred to in paragraph (1) shall be considered to be a 
        reference to the Arlington House.
                                 <all>
```
United States Court of Appeals

For the First Circuit

 

No. 09-1330

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Petitioner, Appellee,

v.

JEFFREY SHIELDS,

Respondent, Appellant.

 

ERRATA SHEET

The opinion of this Court issued on July 13, 2011 is amended

as follows:

On page 9, line 2 of footnote 2, replace "note 2" with "note

1"

On page 23, lines 5-6 of the continuation of footnote 12,

replace "note 5" with "note 4"

On page 28, line 1 of footnote 15, replace "note 9" with "note

8"
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

August 11, 2017

No. 04-17-00434-CV

Roger WIATREK,

Appellant

v.

Laura WIATREK,

Appellee

From the 218th Judicial District Court, Wilson County, Texas

Trial Court No. 14-12-0756-CVW

The Honorable Russell Wilson, Judge Presiding

ORDER

On August 2, 2017, we directed appellant to show cause in writing that either the filing 

fee has been paid or that appellant is entitled to appeal without paying the filing fee. The filing 

fee has since been paid. Accordingly, we ORDER that the reporter’s record be filed on or before 

10 days from the date of this order.

_________________________________

Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 11th day of August, 2017.

___________________________________

Luz Estrada

Chief Deputy Clerk
Exhibit 4.1



 


Advisors Asset Management, Inc.

18925 Base Camp Road

Monument, Colorado 80132


June 14, 2022


 


Advisors Disciplined Trust 2116


c/o The Bank of New York Mellon, as Trustee


240 Greenwich Street, 22W Floor


New York, NY 10286


 


Re: Advisors Disciplined Trust 2116 (the “Fund”)


Ladies and Gentlemen:


We have examined the Registration
Statement File No. 333-264631 for the above captioned Fund. We hereby consent to the use in the Registration Statement of the references
to Advisors Asset Management, Inc. as evaluator.


You are hereby authorized
to file a copy of this letter with the Securities and Exchange Commission.


 





	 	Very truly yours,
	 	 	 
	 	Advisors Asset Management, Inc.
	 	 	 
	 	 	 
	 	By	/s/ ALEX R. MEITZNER
	 	 	Alex R. Meitzner
	 	 	Senior Vice President
DISMISS and Opinion Filed April 14, 2015 

S 

In The 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-14-01498-CV 

CARL T. BRANDT AND VICKIE S. BRANDT, Appellants 

V. 

C & S RESOURCES, INC., Appellee 

On Appeal from the 192nd Judicial District Court 

Dallas County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. DC-14-06584 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

Before Justices Francis, Lang-Miers, and Whitehill 

Opinion by Justice Whitehill 

Before the Court is appellants’ unopposed motion to dismiss the appeal. Appellants have 

informed the Court that they no longer wish to pursue the appeal. Accordingly, we grant 

appellants’ motion and dismiss the appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(a)(1). 

141498F.P05 

 

/Bill Whitehill/ 

BILL WHITEHILL 

JUSTICE 
 –2– 

S 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

JUDGMENT 

CARL T. BRANDT AND 

VICKIE S. BRANDT, Appellants 

No. 05-14-01498-CV V. 

C & S RESOURCES, INC., Appellee 

 On Appeal from the 192nd Judicial District 

Court, Dallas County, Texas. 

Trial Court Cause No. DC-14-06584. 

Opinion delivered by Justice Whitehill. 

Justices Francis and Lang-Miers, 

participating. 

 In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, the appeal is DISMISSED. 

 It is ORDERED that the parties bear their own costs of this appeal. 

Judgment entered April 14, 2015.
Sl()-l(H)9()2-()2() 

• ••''•.•X' ) 

BILL HORN 

SUPERVISOR, FIFTH DISTRICT 

SAN DIEGO COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

. r-; ^ QpERAIlONS 

August 24. 2010 

The Honorable Ray La Hood 

Sccrciary, U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, Sl'i 

Washington D.C. 20590 

Dear Secretary LaHood: 

This letter is sent to convey my support for the application and proposal of the County o/'San 

Diego for a grant under the Small Community Air Service Development Program for 

McClcllan-Palomar Airport. 

San Diego County has two commercial airports; San Diego International Airport, owned and 

operated by San Diego County Regional Airport Authority and McClellan-Palomar Airport, 

owned and operated by the County of San Diego. The two airports are approximately 35 

miles apart with San Diego International Airport located in downtown San Diego and 

McClellan-Palomar located in North San Diego County. McClellan-Palomar Airport is 

ideally located for the North County population base of over one million residents. 

Unfortunately, McClellan-Palomar Airport is currently being served by only one airline that 

provides commuter aircraft llights to Los Angeles. McClellan-Palomar Airport has an urgent 

need for air service development and marketing to attract new air service to key hub airports. 

County of San Diego Airports is developing a program to help recruit new service to meet the 

needs of residents of North San Diego County. 

The County is requesting a $500,000 grant from the Department of Transportation under the 

Small Community Air Service Development Program to properly fund this recruiting project. 

The local-community has expressed supjjort to provide funding for the development, 

marketingi and advertising of new air service. The application being submitted by County of 

San Diego Airports is very detailed and well supported, showing necessary justification for 

this project. 

1 would sinc£ 

San Diet! 

appreciate your consuleration of the proposal being submitted by County of 

Thank you for yjmr assistance. 

Bill Horn 

Supervisor, Fifth District 

County of San Diego 

1600 PACIFIC HIGHWAY. ROOM 335. SAN DIEGO. CALIFORNIA 92101-2470 

« (619) 531-5555 • FAX (619) 685-2555 • Q. bill.horn@sdcounty.ca.gov
FLORIDA TOMATO COMMITTEE

Marketing Order No. 966

Term Ends July 31

MANAGER:

Michael Schadler

Phone: 407-660-1949

Michael@FloridaTomatoExchange.com

CHAIRPERSON:

Kern Carpenter

Phone: 305-342-3428

kcarpenterfarms@bellsouth.net

DISTRICT 1 PRODUCERS

Members Alternates

Kern Carpenter

Homestead, FL

Vacant

Tony DiMare

Homestead, FL

Scott DiMare

Apollo Beach, FL

Jon Esformes

Palmetto, FL

Paul Hoker

Palmetto, FL

Mike Sullivan

Naples, FL

Daniel Subbert

Naples, FL

Toby Purse

Immokalee, FL

Elizabeth Malek

Immokalee, FL

DISTRICT 2 PRODUCERS

Members Alternates

Liz Torres

Wimauma, FL

Ashley Torres

Wimauma, FL

David Wilson

Palmetto, FL

Vacant

Bob Spencer

Palmetto, FL

D.C. McClure

Palmetto, FL

J.M. Procacci, Jr.

Plant City, FL

James Grainger

Palmetto, FL

Frank Diehl

Wimauma, FL

Doug Diehl

Wimauma, FL
928.1011
H. J. Res. 110 

One Hundred Sixteenth 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 twenty 

Joint Resolution 

Making further continuing appropriations for fiscal year 2021, and for other purposes. 

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the

United States of America in Congress assembled, That the Continuing Appropriations Act, 2021 (division A of Public Law 116– 

159) is further amended by striking the date specified in section 

106(3) and inserting ‘‘December 21, 2020’’. 

This joint resolution may be cited as the ‘‘Extension of Continuing Appropriations Act, 2021’’. 

Speaker of the House of Representatives. 

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
Dismissed and Opinion Filed June 15, 2015 

# S

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
No. 05-15-00252-CV IN THE INTEREST OF L.M.J.M., A Child On Appeal from the 417th Judicial District Court Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 417-56378-2013



### MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Chief Justice Wright, Justi ce Lang-Miers, and Justice Stoddart Opinion by Chief Justice Wright The filing fee, docketing statement, and clerk’s record in this case are past due. By postcard dated March 4, 2015, we notified appellan t the $195 filing fee wa s due. We directed appellant to remit the filing fee within ten days and expressly cautioned appellant that failure to do so would result in dismissal of the appeal. Also by postcard dated March 4, 2015, we notified appellant the docketing statement had not been filed in this case. We directed appellant to file the docketing statement within ten days. We cautioned appellant that failure to do so might result in dismissal of this appeal. By letter dated March 30, 2015, we informed appellant the clerk’s record had not been filed because appellant had not paid for or made arrangements to pay for the clerk’s record. We directed appellant to provide verification of payment or arrangements to pay for the clerk’s record or written docum entation that appellant had been found to be entitled to proceed without payment of costs. We cautioned appellant that failure to do so would result in the dismissal of this appeal without fu rther notice. In response, appellant filed letters–2– dated May 5, 2015 and May 11, 2015 in which appell ant explained that sh e was unable to pay the fee for the preparation of the records in this case. Appellant did not file an affidavit of indigency with this Court, and to date, appellan t has not paid the filing fee, filed the docketing statement, or provided written documentation that she has been found entitled to proceed without payment of costs in the trial court. Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 5; 37.3(b); 42.3(b), (c).

150252F.P05 /Carolyn Wright/ CAROLYN WRIGHT CHIEF JUSTICE–3– 

# S

Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT
IN THE INTEREST OF L.M.J.M., A Child

05-15-00252-CV On Appeal from the 417th Judicial District Court, Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 417-56378-2013. Opinion delivered by Chief Justice Wright. Justices Lang-Miers and Stoddart participating. In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, this appeal is DISMISSED

. It is ORDERED that appellee Daniel Stewart Madoni recover his costs of this appeal from appellant Mary Margaret Madoni.
Judgment entered June 15, 2015.
Opinion issued April 8, 2015

In The

Court of Appeals 

For The 

First District of Texas 

————————————

NO. 01-15-00310-CR

———————————

IN RE MIGUEL ANGEL YEPEZ, Relator

Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus1

MEMORANDUM OPINION

By petition for writ of mandamus, Relator Miguel Angel Yepez challenges 

the Order for AIDS Testing entered in the trial court on March 5, 2015.

We deny relator’s petition for writ of mandamus. All outstanding motions 

are dismissed as moot.

PER CURIAM

 1 The underlying cause of action is Miguel Angel Yepez v. The State of Texas, in the 

District court of Harris County, Texas, 174th Judicial District, cause no. 1412836.
2

Panel consists of Justices Jennings, Higley, and Huddle.

Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.


## United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

2010-1052

SE-KURE CONTROLS, INC.,

Plaintiff/Cross Claim DefendantAppellant,

v.

DIAM USA, INC.,

Defendant-Appellee, and

POP DISPLAYS USA, LLC (successor in interest to Diam USA, Inc.),

Third Party Plaintiff-Appellee, and

POP DISPLAYS, LLC, POP DISPLAYS, INC., and DIAM INTERNATIONAL, INC.,

Defendants,

v.

TELEFONIX, INC.,

Cross Claim Plaintiff/Third Party Defendant-Appellee.

Richard D. Harris , Greenberg Traurig, LLP, of Ch icago, Illinois, argued for plaintiff/cross claim defendant-appellant. With him on the brief were Herbert H. Finn

, Kevin J. O’Shea , and Cameron M. Nelson

.

Lee F. Grossman , Niro, Scavone, Haller & Niro, of Chicago, Illinois, argued for all appellees. With him on the brief was Mark M. Grossman , Grossman Law Offices, of Arlington, Illinois.

Appealed from: United States District Cour t for the Northern District of Illinois

Judge Ronald A. GuzmanNOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.


## United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

2010-1052

SE-KURE CONTROLS, INC.,

Plaintiff/Cross Claim DefendantAppellant,

v.

DIAM USA, INC.,

Defendant-Appellee,

and

POP DISPLAYS USA, LLC (successor in interest to Diam USA, Inc.),

Third Party Plaintiff-Appellee,

and

POP DISPLAYS, LLC, POP DISPLAYS, INC., and DIAM INTERNATIONAL, INC.,

Defendants,

v.

TELEFONIX, INC.,

Cross Claim Plaintiff/Third Party Defendant-Appellee.



## Judgment

ON APPEAL from the United States Distric t Court for the Northern District of Illinois

In CASE NO(S). 06-CV-4857.This CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is

ORDERED and ADJUDGED:

Per Curiam (RADER, DYK, and PROST, Circuit Judges ).

AFFIRMED

. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.



### ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT

DATED May 5, 2010 /s/ Jan Horbaly_________________________ 

### Jan Horbaly, Clerk
FILED IN

1STCOURT OF APPEALS

HOUSTON, TEXAS

APR - 9 2015

DESCENT M^LLC 0]']5-°O^-<i ^j^T

Xjs CAUSE NO. ZOlVkD^Dk

V\dt\din] TdR A^ EXTENSION OF ~T\N\E ^"o

T\LE ANb~T\CE OF APPEAL

V^Wue^ Z.^ 2.015 V>j FVi^ \WoraUb Me&Avidko Smacks"

NOTICE DF APPEAL y^ noV ^W W^Vm \te>
Cert\cate of SEBAKct

AvAW>y VJ- Kee^ Esq ^TexAs'foor No. ZM-DZ^TS0!

Tw K^wi L<avi Grouty Pllc.

^2.4-5 IVW\n SVre**, ^e» 255-2>4^

Far. 2.It- ^5-1**5+
Exhibit 32.3

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                              U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                       AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906
                        OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

     In connection with the amendment to the Annual Report of Boston Gas Company
(the "Corporation") on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2002 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),
I,  Nickolas  Stavropoulos,   President  and  Chief  Operating  Officer  of  the
Corporation, 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 the  requirements  of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, amended; and

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

                                                    /s/ Nickolas Stavropoulos
                                                    -------------------------
                                             Name:  Nickolas Stavropoulos
                                             Title: President and Chief
                                                    Operating Officer
                                             Date:  August 13, 2003


Note: A signed  original of this written  statement  required by Section 906 has
been  provided  to Boston Gas Company and will be retained by Boston Gas Company
and  furnished  to the  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  or its staff upon
request.
**Exhibit 31.1**

**CERTIFICATION**

**PURSUANT TO 17 CFR 240.13A-14**

**PROMULGATED UNDER**

**SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2003**

I,Jack A. Cuneo, certify that: 

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q/A of CB Richard Ellis Realty Trust; 

2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary tomake the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly report; 

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

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

(a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, 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 quarterly report is beingprepared; and 

(b) [Omitted in reliance on SEC Release No. 33-8238; 34-47986, Section III E.] 

(c) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this quarterly report ourconclusions 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 theregistrant’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 overfinancial reporting; and 

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

(a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which arereasonably 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: April 2, 2007