alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
(June 20, 1991)

#### In the Matter of Toni Scott, Respondent, v John P. Falck, Appellant. (And Another Related Proceeding.)

—Appeal from an order of the Family Court of Ulster County (Peters, J.), entered April 20, 1989, which, *inter alia,*granted petitioner’s application, in a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, for custody of the parties’ child.

Order affirmed, without costs, upon the opinion of Judge Karen K. Peters.

Mahoney, P. J., Yesawich Jr., Levine, Mercure and Crew III, JJ., concur. Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs, upon the opinion of Judge Karen K. Peters.
Burnet County Public Defender's Office

1008 N. Water St. Burnet, Texas 78611 (512)234-3061 FAX (512) 234-3579

15 April 2015

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRD DISTRICT OF TEXAS

POBOX 12547

AUSTIN, TX 78711-2547

RE: 03-15-00212-CR

Michael Jude Pirie v. The State ofTexas

Dear Office ofthe Clerk:

Thank you again for your previous assistance this past week. Since I last wrote we have filed and the District

Court has granted a motion withdrawing us from representation and allowing Mr. Pirie to proceed pro se. I have

included a copy ofthis order. Please feel free to reach me at 512 234 3077 (office) or 214 566 5635 (cell).

Sincerely,

Nathan KigHt

c/c

Michael Pirie

TDCJ No. 0198 2650

Holliday Unit

295 IH-45 North

Huntsville, TX 77320-8443

RECEIVED^

APR 1 7 2015

THIRD COURT OF APPEALS

\_1EF_FREY D.KYLE
CAUSE NO. 40555

THE STATE OF TEXAS IN THE 33r7 424th JUDICIAL

V. DISTRICT COURT

MICHAEL JUDE PIRIE BURNET COUNTY, TEXAS

ORDER

BE IT REMEMBERED, that on the H day of Marehr 2015, came on to be considered

the above and foregoing Motion to Withdraw by Defendant's Attorney. After consideration of

the same, it is the opinion of the Court that the same be:

( ) DENIED.

"

(/<) GRANTED, IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED, that the said

Attorney, NATHAN KIGHT, BURNET COUNTY PUBLIC DEFENDER'S OFFICE, shall

be allowed to withdraw as counsel, and is hereby relieved of any further duty, obligation or

responsibility to Defendant herein: —MICHAEL JUDE PIRIE—--and,

Attorneyr- ,—be—appointed—to—represent—the

Defendani_who-has-previOTSl7~brerr~determ MICHAEL JUDE PIRIE is

allowed to proceed pro se. <0 Gv<A&**{l ^-j fore rcce^J- K/.'-g o£/\l*h^<i of 4ffc*<ou>A pW«/.

SIGNED: /U7 °l ,2015.

Judge-Presiding
Buvvi&t Cowrvty

PufcLOc Vefevufar'y Office/

Burnet County

1008 N. Water • Burnet, TX 78611

P& g^y /Zs V7

/^37/V T-x

-?$>-? // - ^^V7

"J a ^V -^——'PITNEY BOWES

$ 000.48°

J-Wrf: 00031 53866 APR 152015

£2Sl1 MAILED FROM ZIP CODE 78611

''S' :•" X 1 %'.?Sz:<--t f j.lijiljiiinidlj.ipii.nj.ilji.j.l.iii,,),,)!,,,).)!],,!!):
QuickLinks
 -- Click here to rapidly navigate through this document

 
 

EXHIBIT (10)(c)    
  


FIRST AMENDMENT TO  


 THE EMPIRE DISTRICT ELECTRIC COMPANY  


 EMPLOYEES' DISABILITY BENEFIT POLICY  


        WHEREAS, The Board of Directors of The Empire District Electric Company adopted an amended Employees' Disability
Benefit Policy (the"Policy") at its meeting held on January 1, 1983; and 


        WHEREAS, the Employer reserved the right to amend the Policy in Section 1.2; and 



        WHEREAS, The Board of Directors desire to amend the Policy and give oversight of determining the eligibility of any Employee and the
amount of disability benefits payable to such employee to the Retirement Committee of the Board of Directors; 


        NOW THEREFORE, The Policy is hereby amended effective as of April 25, 2002 in the following manner: 



	2.
	The
first paragraph of Subsection 1.2 of the Policy is hereby amended to read as follows: 




        The
Board of Directors of Empire reserves the right to change, amend or terminate this Policy at any time, and its establishment and maintenance shall create no vested right in any
Employee either before or after he becomes eligible for a disability benefit hereunder, and does not affect the tenure of employment of any Employee. The Retirement Committee of the Board of Directors
shall have discretionary authority to interpret the provisions of this Policy and to determine the eligibility of any Employee and the amount of disability benefits payable to such Employee hereunder. 


        IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Employer has caused this First Amendment to The Empire District Electric Company Employees' Disability Benefit
Policy to be executed by its duly authorized representative on this 25th day of April 2002. 



	 	 	THE EMPIRE DISTRICT ELECTRIC COMPANY
	

 	
 	

By:	
 	

 
	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	Its President
	

ATTEST	
 	

 	
 	

 





	

By	
 	

 	
 	

 
	 	 	
	 	 
	Its Secretary

	 	 











QuickLinks



EXHIBIT (10)(c)
# C_2012326EN.01033701.xml

| 26.10.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 326/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.10.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 326/1

---

DECLARATIONS

DECLARATIONS

ANNEXED TO THE FINAL ACT OF THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL CONFERENCE WHICH ADOPTED THE TREATY OF LISBON,

ANNEXED TO THE FINAL ACT OF THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL CONFERENCE WHICH ADOPTED THE TREATY OF LISBON

signed on 13 December 2007

A.   DECLARATIONS CONCERNING PROVISIONS OF THE TREATIES

DECLARATIONS CONCERNING PROVISIONS OF THE TREATIES

23.   Declaration on the second paragraph of Article 48 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union

Declaration on the second paragraph of Article 48 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union

The Conference recalls that in that case, in accordance with Article 15(4) of the Treaty on European Union, the European Council acts by consensus.

---
<PAGE>
                                                                   EXHIBIT 99.1

                         GOODY'S FAMILY CLOTHING, INC.
                           CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                            18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                 SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Goody's Family Clothing, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended May 3, 2003, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Robert
M. Goodfriend, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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; and

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



/s/ Robert M. Goodfriend
-------------------------
Robert M. Goodfriend
Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer
May 22, 2003
JUDGMENT

Court of Appeals 

 

First District of Texas 

NO. 01-14-00312-CV

THERESA G. STOWERS, Appellant

V.

TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, Appellee

Appeal from County Criminal Court at Law No. 9 of Harris County. 

(Tr. Ct. No. 1941294-Y).

This case is an appeal from the final judgment signed by the trial court on March 21, 

2014. After submitting the case on the appellate record and the arguments properly raised 

by the parties, the Court holds that the trial court’s judgment contains no reversible error. 

Accordingly, the Court affirms the trial court’s judgment.

The Court orders that the appellant, Theresa G. Stowers, pay all appellate costs.

The Court orders that this decision be certified below for observance.

Judgment rendered April 9, 2015.

Panel consists of Justices Jennings, Higley, and Huddle. Opinion delivered by Justice 

Higley.
#### The STATE of Utah, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Thomas Franklin ANDERSON, Defendant and Appellant.

No. 14020.

Supreme Court of Utah.

Oct. 30, 1975.

Stephen Ray McCaughey, Salt Lake City, for Salt Lake Legal Defenders Association.

Vernon B. Romney, Atty. Gen., Earl N. Dorius, Asst. Atty. Gen., Salt Lake City, for plaintiff and respondent.

HENRIOD, Chief Justice:

Appeal from a forgery conviction. Affirmed.

The only point on appeal was insufficiency of the evidence, which urgence we consider to be without merit.

Anderson lived in an apartment two doors from one Lottie Andreason. Their respective mailboxes were No. 226 and No. 228. Lottie customarily received a monthly check from California. The one for October did not reach her. Anderson said a girl, whom he did not know, but with whom he had slept several nights, and whose name or whereabouts after the alleged offense he also did not know, had asked him to cash the check. He did at his Credit Union, with Lottie Andreason’s unauthorized signature and address forged on the back and with his signature affixed thereunder. His apparently mythical mattress-mate disappeared into the unknown, as did he — conveniently enough, — to Canada.

Under familiar principles of appellate review, including affirmance of presumptive, reasonable jury deliberation, there appears to be but one conclusion attendant here. It is to the effect that under the circumstances reflected in the record, a claim of insufficiency of the evidence to sustain the conviction is without merit.

ELLETT, CROCKETT, TUCKETT and MAUGHAN, JJ., concur.
FILED

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

August 23, 2012

Elisabeth A. Shumaker

Clerk of Court

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

TENTH CIRCUIT

ALEX HUAQIANG LEO,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT

COURT, DISTRICT OF KANSAS;

KATHRYN H. VRATIL, Chief Judge;

J. THOMAS MARTEN, U.S. District

Judge,

Defendants - Appellees.

No. 12-3100

(D.C. No. 2:12-CV-02168-CM-JPO)

(D. Kan.)

ORDER AND JUDGMENT*

Before KELLY, TYMKOVICH, and GORSUCH, Circuit Judges.**

Plaintiff-Appellant Alex HuaQiang Leo appeals the dismissal of his

complaint as frivolous and for failure to state a claim pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915(e)(2)(B). The district court determined that Mr. Leo continues to

*

 This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the

doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited,

however, for its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th

Cir. R. 32.1.

** After examining the briefs and the appellate record, this three-judge

panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not be of material

assistance in the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 10th

Cir. R. 34.1(G). The cause is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.
challenge orders in other federal cases concerning his discrimination claims

against Garmin International. See Leo v. Garmin Int’l, Inc., 431 F. App’x. 702

(10th Cir. 2011) (affirming summary judgment in favor of Garmin on age and

race discrimination claims); Leo v. Garmin Int’l, Inc., 464 F. App’x. 737 (10th

Cir. 2012) (affirming dismissal of second suit as barred by res judicata and denial

of post-judgment motions); Leo v. Garmin Int’l, Inc., 464 F. App’x. 740 (10th

Cir. 2012) (affirming denial of Rule 60(b) motion); Leo v. Garmin Int’l, Inc., 464

F. App’x. 744 (10th Cir. 2012) (affirming denial of post-judgment motions and

remanding for district court to determine reasonable attorney’s fees as a sanction).

We agree with the district court’s disposition; Mr. Leo’s amended

complaint is an improper and repetitive attack on prior district court rulings, when

in fact our holdings are the law of the case, McWilliams v. Colorado, 121 F.3d

573, 574 (10th Cir. 1997), and the judicial defendants are protected by absolute

judicial immunity, Hunt v. Bennett, 17 F.3d 1263, 1266 (10th Cir. 1994). 

AFFIRMED.

Entered for the Court

Paul J. Kelly, Jr.

Circuit Judge

- 2 -
IB 

Union Calendar No. 235 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1472 

[Report No. 116–292] 

To rename the Homestead National Monument of America near Beatrice, 

Nebraska, as the Homestead National Historical Park. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 28, 2019 

Mr. SMITH of Nebraska introduced the following bill; which was referred to 

the Committee on Natural Resources 

NOVEMBER 15, 2019 

Additional sponsors: Mr. FORTENBERRY and Mr. BACON

NOVEMBER 15, 2019 

Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union 

and ordered to be printed 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1472 RH

A BILL 

To rename the Homestead National Monument of America 

near Beatrice, Nebraska, as the Homestead National 

Historical Park. 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 1472 RH

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. HOMESTEAD NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—The first section of the Act of 

5 March 19, 1936 (16 U.S.C. 450u), is amended by striking 

6 ‘‘designated’’ and all that follows through the end and in7 serting ‘‘designated the ‘Homestead National Historical 

8 Park’.’’. 

9 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg10 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

11 States to the unit of the National Park System known 

12 as ‘‘The Homestead National Monument of America’’ 

13 shall be considered to be a reference to the ‘‘Homestead 

14 National Historical Park’’. 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with BILLS
Union Calendar No. 235 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1472 

[Report No. 116–292] 

A BILL 

To rename the Homestead National Monument of 

stead National Historical Park. America near Beatrice, Nebraska, as the HomeNOVEMBER 15, 2019 

Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 

State of the Union and ordered to be printed 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with BILLS
EXHIBIT 10.02.5





                           SWANK, INC.
                         90 PARK AVENUE
                    NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10016



                                        December 27, 2001


Mr. John A. Tulin
1196 Elinore Road
Hewlett, New York  11557

Dear Mr. Tulin:

          Reference is made to the Agreement dated as of January
1, 1990 between Swank, Inc. (the "Corporation") and you
concerning your employment by the Corporation, as amended by
letter agreements dated as of January 1, 1992, September 1, 1993,
January 1, 1997 and December 10, 1998 between the Corporation and
you (as amended, the "Existing Employment Agreement").  This
letter will serve to confirm our agreement to amend the Existing
Employment Agreement as of the date hereof as follows:

          The term of the Existing Employment Agreement is hereby
extended for an additional three (3) year period, commencing on
January 1, 2002 and ending on December 31, 2004 (the "Extension
Period").  During the Extension Period, the Corporation shall pay
to you, and you agree to accept, a base salary at the rate of
$400,000, payable in such installments as shall be mutually
agreed upon by you and the Corporation, plus such additional
compensation, if any, as the Board of Directors of the
Corporation shall from time to time determine.

          Except as modified and amended by this letter, the
Existing Employment Agreement shall remain and continue in full
force and effect on and after the date hereof.

          This letter may be executed in any number of
counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original and all
of which taken together shall constitute one and the same
agreement.

          This letter shall be governed by, and construed and
enforced in accordance with, the laws of the State of New York,
without regard to principles of conflicts of law (other than
Section 5-1401 of the New York General Obligations Law).
     If the foregoing correctly sets forth our
understanding and agreement, kindly countersign this letter in
the space provided below.

                                 Very truly yours,

                                 SWANK, INC.

ACCEPTED AND AGREED:
                                 By: /s/ Jerold R. Kassner
/s/ John A. Tulin                Name: Jerold  R. Kassner
John A. Tulin                    Title: Chief Financial Officer


                               -2-
2015 Decisions

Opinions of the United

States Court of Appeals

for the Third Circuit

4-20-2015

In Re: Steven Mensah-Yawson

Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2015

This April is brought to you for free and open access by the Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at Villanova University

School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in 2015 Decisions by an authorized administrator of Villanova University School of

Law Digital Repository. For more information, please contact Benjamin.Carlson@law.villanova.edu.

Recommended Citation

"In Re: Steven Mensah-Yawson" (2015). 2015 Decisions. Paper 395.

http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2015/395
Amended HLD-005 NOT PRECEDENTIAL

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

___________

No. 15-1112

___________

IN RE: STEVEN MENSAH-YAWSON,

 Petitioner

____________________________________

On a Petition for Writ of Mandamus from the

United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania

(Related to W.D. Pa. Crim. No. 2-09-cr-00276-001)

____________________________________

Submitted Pursuant to Rule 21, Fed. R. App. P.

March 19, 2015

Before: MCKEE, Chief Judge, GARTH and BARRY, Circuit Judges

(Filed: April 20, 2015)

___________

OPINION*

___________

PER CURIAM

Before us is Steven Mensah-Yawson’s petition for a writ of mandamus, in which 

he requests an order directing the District Court to rule on his petition for a writ of error 

coram nobis. The District Court ruled on and denied that petition on April 2, 2015. 

 

* This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not 

constitute binding precedent.
2

Thus, Mensah-Yawson’s mandamus petition is moot and we will dismiss it on that basis. 

See Blanciak v. Allegheny Ludlum Corp., 77 F.3d 690, 698-99 (3d Cir. 1996).
# C_2012326EN.01004701.xml

| 26.10.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 326/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.10.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 326/1

---

CONSOLIDATED VERSION OF THE TREATY ON THE FUNCTIONING OF THE EUROPEAN UNION

CONSOLIDATED VERSION OF THE TREATY ON THE FUNCTIONING OF THE EUROPEAN UNION

PART THREE

UNION POLICIES AND INTERNAL ACTIONS

UNION POLICIES AND INTERNAL ACTIONS

TITLE XIX

RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENT AND SPACE

RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENT AND SPACE

Article 186

(ex Article 170 TEC)

(ex Article 170 TEC)

In implementing the multiannual framework programme the Union may make provision for cooperation in Union research, technological development and demonstration with third countries or international organisations.

The detailed arrangements for such cooperation may be the subject of agreements between the Union and the third parties concerned.

---
[ARTICLE] 5
[MULTIPLIER] 1000
<TABLE>
<S>                             <C>
[PERIOD-TYPE]                   12-MOS
[FISCAL-YEAR-END]                          DEC-31-1998
[PERIOD-END]                               DEC-31-1998
[CASH]                                             211
[SECURITIES]                                         0
[RECEIVABLES]                                      614
[ALLOWANCES]                                       100
[INVENTORY]                                        304
[CURRENT-ASSETS]                                  1128
[PP&E]                                            3893
[DEPRECIATION]                                    3585
[TOTAL-ASSETS]                                    1474
[CURRENT-LIABILITIES]                              2703
[BONDS]                                              0
[PREFERRED-MANDATORY]                                0
[PREFERRED]                                          0
[COMMON]                                          1107
[OTHER-SE]                                       (6828)
[TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY]                      1474
[SALES]                                           3749
[TOTAL-REVENUES]                                  3749
[CGS]                                             2967
[TOTAL-COSTS]                                     2967
[OTHER-EXPENSES]                                   107
[LOSS-PROVISION]                                     0
[INTEREST-EXPENSE]                                  70
[INCOME-PRETAX]                                 (2773)
[INCOME-TAX]                                         0
[INCOME-CONTINUING]                             (2773)
[DISCONTINUED]                                       0
[EXTRAORDINARY]                                      0
[CHANGES]                                            0
[NET-INCOME]                                    (2773)
[EPS-PRIMARY]                                   (0.30)
[EPS-DILUTED]                                   (0.30)
</TABLE>
# C_2012326EN.01033701.xml

| 26.10.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 326/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.10.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 326/1

---

DECLARATIONS

DECLARATIONS

ANNEXED TO THE FINAL ACT OF THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL CONFERENCE WHICH ADOPTED THE TREATY OF LISBON,

ANNEXED TO THE FINAL ACT OF THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL CONFERENCE WHICH ADOPTED THE TREATY OF LISBON

signed on 13 December 2007

B.   DECLARATIONS CONCERNING PROTOCOLS ANNEXED TO THE TREATIES

DECLARATIONS CONCERNING PROTOCOLS ANNEXED TO THE TREATIES

46.   Declaration on Article 5(3) of the Protocol on the Schengen acquis integrated into the framework of the European Union

Declaration on Article 5(3) of the Protocol on the Schengen acquis

The Conference recalls that if the Council does not take a decision after a first substantive discussion of the matter, the Commission may present an amended proposal for a further substantive re-examination by the Council within the deadline of 4 months.

---
**Exhibit
      32.1**




**Certification**


**Pursuant
      to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**


**(Subsections
      (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States
      Code)**




Pursuant
      to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of
      section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), each of the
      undersigned officers of Alteon Inc. (the “Company”), does hereby certify, to
      such officer’s knowledge, that:





The
      Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the three months ended March 31, 2006 (the
      “Form 10-Q”) of the Company fully complies with the requirements of Section
      13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the information
      contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the
      financial condition and results of operations of the Company.




Date:
                May 15, 2006
            
            
            
            By:
            
            /s/
                Kenneth I. MochKenneth
                I. Moch
              President
                and Chief Executive Officer
              (principal
                executive officer)







Date:
                May 15, 2006
            
            
            
            By:
            
            /s/
                Mary T. PhelanMary
                T. Phelan
              Director
                of Finance and Financial Reporting
              (principal
                financial and accounting officer)







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