alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
* After examining appellant’s brief and the appellate record, this panel has

determined unanimously that oral argument would notmaterially assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(f) and 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore ordered submitted without ora l argument. This Order and Judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court g enerally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order and ju dgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3. 

## F I L E D United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit 

### JAN 14 1999 

### PATRICK FISHER Clerk UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS TENTH CIRCUIT
SCOTT ANTHONY RIVARD, Petitioner-Appellant, v. L.E. BRUCE; CARLA STOVALL, Attorney General, Respondents-Appellees. No. 98-3207 (D.C. No. 95-3313-DES) (District of Kansas)

ORDER AND JUDGMENT *
Before BALDOCK , EBEL and MURPHY , Circuit Judges.

Petitioner-Appellant, Mr. Scott Rivard, was convict ed of possession of cocaine in Kansas state court. After exhausting hi s state remedies, Mr. Rivard filed a petition for habeas corpus, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, in the United States District Court for the District of Kansas. The district court denied Mr.1 Mr. Rivard filed his petition for habeas corpus in July 1995, therefore the

provisions of the Antiterrorism and Effective DeathPenalty Act of 1996 do not apply. - 2 - Rivard’s petition. He now seeks a certificate of p robable cause 1 on the same three issues denied in the district court. First, Mr. Ri vard claims that evidence presented at trial was insufficient to sustain a co nviction. Second, he claims that investigating officers failed to preserve evidence essential to his defense. Third, he contends that the refusal of state authorities t o convert his sentence pursuant to the Kansas Sentencing Guidelines Act constitutes a denial of equal protection. Mr. Rivard has failed to make a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional or federal right, see Barefoot v. Estelle , 463 U.S. 880, 893 (1983), therefore we DENY him a certificate of probable cau se and DISMISS the appeal.

The mandate shall issue forthwith. ENTERED FOR THE COURT

David M. Ebel Circuit Judge
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster , Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

September 6, 2016

s0829 

# Order

Clerk September 6, 2016

152361

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 152361

COA: 327106

Wayne CC: 75

- 008084

LEDURA WATKINS

, Defendant

- Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the August 26 , 2015

order of the Court of Appeals is considered and, pursuant to MCR 7.305(H)(1), in lieu of

granting leave, we VACATE the August 26, 2015 order of the Court of Appeals and

REMAND this case to the Wayne Circuit Court for reconsideration, under MCR

6.508(D), o f Issues I and II of the defendant’s motion for relief from judgment. The

circuit court erred in applying People v Cress , 468 Mich 678 (2003), to an analysis of

whether the defendant’s motion was improperly successive under MCR 6.502(G). See

People v Swa in , 499 Mich 920 (2016). Cress does not apply to the procedural threshold

of MCR 6.502(G)(2), as the plain text of the court rule does not require that a defendant

satisfy all elements of the test. In Issues I and II, the defendant provided “a claim of n ew

evidence that was not discovered before the first” motion for relief from judgment, MCR

6.502(G)(2).
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A19A1652. WESLEY EDINS et al. v. GARY L. PATRICK.

This case began as a dispossessory proceeding in magistrate court between

landlord Gary L. Patrick and tenants Wesley Edins and Stephanie Roland-Edins. 

Following an adverse ruling, the tenants appealed to the superior court, which issued

a writ of possession in favor of the landlord. The tenants then filed this direct appeal.

We, however, lack jurisdiction for two reasons.

First, appealsfromsuperior court decisionsreviewing lower court decisions by

certiorari or de novo proceedings must be initiated by filing an application for

discretionary appeal. OCGA § 5-6-35 (a) (1), (b); Bullock v. Sand, 260 Ga. App. 874,

875 (581 SE2d 333) (2003). “Compliance with the discretionary appeals procedure

is jurisdictional.” Smoak v. Dept. of Human Resources, 221 Ga. App. 257, 257 (471

SE2d 60) (1996). The tenants’ failure to follow the proper procedure deprives us of

jurisdiction over this appeal. 

Second, while a notice of appeal generallymust be filed within 30 days of entry

of the order sought to be appealed under OCGA § 5-6-38 (a), the underlying subject

matter of an appeal controls over the relief sought in determining the proper appellate

procedure. Radio Sandy Springs, Inc. v. Allen Road Joint Venture, 311 Ga. App. 334,

335 (715 SE2d 752) (2011). The underlying subject matter here is a dispossessory

judgment. Under OCGA § 44-7-56, appeals in dispossessory actions must be filed

within seven days of the date the judgment was entered. Ray M. Wright,Inc. v. Jones,

239 Ga. App. 521, 522-523 (521 SE2d 456) (1999). The proper and timely filing of

a notice of appeal is an absolute requirement to confer jurisdiction on this Court. Id. 

April 03, 2019
at 523. The tenants’ February 28, 2019 notice of appeal is untimely, as it was filed

eight days after entry of the superior court’s February 20, 2019 order.

For each of these reasons, the tenants’ appeal is hereby DISMISSED for lack

of jurisdiction. 

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

04/03/2019
<PAGE>

                                                                      EXHIBIT 24

                               POWER OF ATTORNEY
                               -----------------

     Each of the undersigned Directors and Officers of CHAMPION INTERNATIONAL
CORPORATION (the "Company") hereby constitutes and appoints STEPHEN B. BROWN,
LAWRENCE A. FOX and RICHARD E. OLSON his or her true and lawful attorneys-in-
fact and agents, each of them with full power to act without the others, for him
or her and in his or her name, place and stead, in any and all capacities, to
sign the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December
31, 1999 and any and all amendments and other documents relating thereto, and to
file such Annual Report on Form 10-K and such amendments with all exhibits
thereto, and any and all other information and documents in connection
therewith, with the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, hereby granting unto said
attorneys-in-fact and agents, and each of them, full power and authority to do
and perform any and all acts and things requisite and necessary to be done in
and about the premises, as fully to all intents and purposes as he or she might
or could do in person, hereby ratifying and confirming all that said attorneys-
in-fact and agents, or any of them, may lawfully do or cause to be done by
virtue hereof.

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have hereunto set their hands as of the
13th day of March, 2000.


/s/ RICHARD E. OLSON                         /s/ KENWOOD C. NICHOLS
-------------------------------              -----------------------------------
Richard E. Olson                             Kenwood C. Nichols
Chairman of the Board, Chief                 Vice Chairman and Executive Officer
Executive Officer and Director               and Director
(Principal Executive Officer)                (Principal Accounting Officer)




                                             /s/ THOMAS L. HART
                                             -----------------------------------
                                             Thomas L. Hart
                                             Vice President - Finance and
                                             Treasurer (Principal Financial
                                             Officer)


<PAGE>

/s/ LAWRENCE A. BOSSIDY
----------------------------------
Lawrence A. Bossidy, Director


/s/ ROBERT A. CHARPIE
----------------------------------
Robert A. Charpie, Director


/s/ H. CORBIN DAY
----------------------------------
H. Corbin Day, Director


/s/ ALICE F. EMERSON
----------------------------------
Alice F. Emerson, Director


/s/ ALLAN E. GOTLIEB
----------------------------------
Allan E. Gotlieb, Director


/s/ HENRIQUE C. MEIRELLES
----------------------------------
Henrique C. Meirelles, Director


/s/ WALTER V. SHIPLEY
----------------------------------
Walter V. Shipley, Director


/s/ RICHARD E. WALTON
----------------------------------
Richard E. Walton, Director
Navigate to Homepage
Search
Main navigation
  

        
              Explore the Capitol Campus
                          Art
                            Buildings & Grounds
                            Capitol Hill Facts
                            Visitor Resources
                            Our Blog
                            What We Do
                          Areas of Expertise
                            Programs & Ceremonies
                            Projects
                            Publications
                            Strategic Objectives
                            About Us
                          Who We Are
                            History of the AOC
                            News & Notices
                            Organizational Structure
                            Partnerships & Recognition
                            Work With UsSearch Breadcrumb
    Homecommentreply2426Add new comment
Add new comment
        
                  Ignacio Sosa (not verified)PermalinkMarch 25, 2021 - 9:00pm

              In reply to I live to hear the history... by Julie lause (not verified)Nicely said.
ReplyYour name
Email Address
        The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
Comment
About text formats
Plain text
  
  
      
          No HTML tags allowed.
                      Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
                      Web page addresses and email addresses turn into links automatically. Serve. Preserve. Inspire.

              Contact Us
                            Accountability
                            Hill Staff Resources
                            AOC Staff Resources
Utility
  

        
              Privacy Policy
                            Image Terms of Use
                            Inspector General
                            U.S. Botanic Garden
                            U.S. Capitol Visitor CenterFacebook
	Twitter
	Flickr
	YouTube
	Instagram
	Subscribe
The State of TexasAppellee/s



# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

January 7, 2015

N o. 04

- 14

- 00776

- CR

Bernardo IBARRA

- LOPEZ

, Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee

From the 175th Judicial District Court, Bexar Co unty, Texas

Trial Court No. 2012CR2497

Honorable Mary D. Roman, Judge Presiding



### ORDER

The Appellant ’ s Motion to Withdraw as Counsel is hereby GRANTED.

_________________________________ Marialyn Barnard, Just ice

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

court on this 7th day of January, 2015

.

___________________________________ Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
27217

#### State v. Kalai

Affirmed
# C_2016202EN.01011101.xml

| 7.6.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 202/111 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.6.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 202/111

---

Article 144

(ex Article 120 TEC)

(ex Article 120 TEC)

1.   Where a sudden crisis in the balance of payments occurs and a decision within the meaning of Article 143(2) is not immediately taken, a Member State with a derogation may, as a precaution, take the necessary protective measures. Such measures must cause the least possible disturbance in the functioning of the internal market and must not be wider in scope than is strictly necessary to remedy the sudden difficulties which have arisen.

2.   The Commission and the other Member States shall be informed of such protective measures not later than when they enter into force. The Commission may recommend to the Council the granting of mutual assistance under Article 143.

3.   After the Commission has delivered a recommendation and the Economic and Financial Committee has been consulted, the Council may decide that the Member State concerned shall amend, suspend or abolish the protective measures referred to above.

---
<Page>
                                                             Exhibit 10.19(a)


DYNEGY MIDSTREAM SERVICES, LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
1000 Louisiana, Suite 5800
Houston, Texas 77002
Phone 713.507.6400

December 19, 2000                                                [DYNEGY LOGO]


Mr. Hunter Battle
1000 Louisiana, Suite 5800
Houston, Texas 77002

Dear David:

             Subject:    Letter Amendment to the
                         Product Storage Agreement
                         Dated December 15, 1997

Reference is made to that certain Product Storage Agreement between Dynegy
Midstream Services, Limited Partnership ("Dynegy"), formerly known as Warren
Petroleum Company, Limited Partnership and Cedar Bayou Fractionators, L.P.
("CBF") dated December 15, 1997, (the "Agreement"). The parties desire to amend
the definition of "Day" or "Daily" as defined in the Agreement.

In consideration of the mutual benefits to be derived by each and other good and
valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby
acknowledged, the parties hereto agree to amend the Agreement as follows:

Section 2. DEFINITIONS, the definition of "Day" or "Daily" shall be deleted in
their entirety and replaced with the following:

      "Day" or "Daily" shall mean a twenty-four (24) hour period commencing at
      12:00 a.m. Central Standard or Daylight Savings time, as applicable, and
      extending until 12:00 a.m. Central Standard or Daylight Savings time, as
      applicable on the following calendar day.

This Letter Amendment shall be effective as of January 1, 2001.

Except as herein provided, all other terms and conditions set forth therein
shall remain unchanged and in full force and effect for the term thereof.


<Page>


Please indicate CBF's agreement to the foregoing by executing this Letter
Amendment in the space provided below and return on fully executed original of
same to this office to the attention of Ms. Jane Lavery.

                                                 Sincerely,

                                                 /s/  DAVID PETERSON

                                                 David Peterson
                                                 Manager, Mont Belvieu

Agreed to and Accepted this
4 day of April, 2001.

CEDAR BAYOU FRACTIONATORS, L.P.

By:    /s/ HUNTER BATTLE
   --------------------------

Title:  VP-TEXAS GULF COAST REGION
      ------------------------------




                               Signature Page
                                   To the
                              Letter Amendment
                           Dated December 19, 2000


                                      2
FIRST AMENDMENT TO
WESTWOOD HOMESTEAD FINANCIAL CORPORATION
1997 STOCK OPTION AND INCENTIVE PLAN
  RECITALS
    AMENDMENT
  1.
    
    Section 2(a) of the Plan is amended by substituting Section 424(e) and (f) for Section
424(c) and (f) where it appears in Section 2(a).
 2.
    
    Section 2(j) of the Plan is hereby deleted in its entirety and is replaced with the
following:
  3.
    
    The last sentence of Section 7(b) of the Plan is hereby deleted in its entirety and is
replaced with the followingIf the Common Stock is not readily tradeable on an established securities exchange
(within the meaning of Section 409A of the Code), the Market Value per Share of
Common Stock shall be its fair market value as determined by the Committee, in its
sole and absolute discretion with respect to grants of ISOs and, with respect to
grants of Non-ISOs and SARs, shall be determined by the Committee through the
reasonable application of a reasonable valuation method, taking into account all
information material to the value of the Company, that satisfies the requirements of
Section 409A of the Code.
 4.
    
    Section 11 of the Plan is hereby amended by adding the following sentence to the end thereof:Any adjustment pursuant to this Section 11 shall be made in accordance with the
requirements of Section 409A of the Code, to the extent applicable.




---



##### 



5.
    
    Section 16 of the Plan is hereby amended by adding the following sentence to the end thereof:Any modification pursuant to this Section 16 shall be made in accordance with the
requirements of Section 409A of the Code, to the extent applicable.
 6.
    
    Section 18(a) of the Plan is hereby amended by adding the following sentence to the end thereof:If the Company cannnot issue the shares of Common Stock due to the application of
this Section 18(a), the Company shall issue the shares at the earliest date on which
the Company reasonably anticipates that the issuance of shares will not cause a
violation of the relevant provisions of law.
  CAMCO FINANCIAL CORPORATIONBy:Its:
 -2-
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Swift Energy
Pension  Partners  1991-c,  Ltd,s  Balance  Sheet and  Statement  of  Operations
contained in its Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 1996.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                         1,243
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  42,642
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               43,885
<PP&E>                                         3,347,646
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (2,323,707)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 1,067,824
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          558,560
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                     509,264
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   1,067,824
<SALES>                                        189,954
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               189,990
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  100,712<F1>
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                62,425
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            62,425
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   62,425
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0
<FN>
<F1>Includes lease operating expenses, production taxes and depretion deple-
tion and amortization expense.  Excludes general and administrative and interest
expense.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
**EXHIBIT 31.3**

 

**CERTIFICATIONS**

 

I, Andrew A. Krakauer, certify that:

 

1.             I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of Cantel Medical Corp.;

 

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;

 

Date:  December 4, 2013

 
| By:                                                                                       | /s/   Andrew A. Krakauer |   |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------|--------|
| Andrew A. Krakauer, President and Chief Executive   Officer (Principal Executive Officer) |

 

1

----
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-2124

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

HOMER W. WALKER,

Defendant - Appellant,

REGINALD HUDSON,

Garnishee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, District

Judge. (CA-96-842-5-BR)

Submitted: November 20, 1997 Decided: December 9, 1997

Before MURNAGHAN, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Homer W. Walker, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Edward Skiver, Assistant

United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's order granting

summary judgment to the United States on its action seeking to

collect a debt from Appellant in the amount of $8530. We have

reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no

reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the

district court. United States v. Walker, No. CA-96-842-5-BR

(E.D.N.C. Aug. 5, 1997). We dispense with oral argument because the

facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional

process.

AFFIRMED
Ferric sulfateINSTRUCTIONS: Please type or print in ink. Please read carefully the attached instructions and supply the information requested on this form.Use additional sheet(s) if necessary.4. GuidelineRequirementNumber5. Study Title1. Company Name and AddressPage 1 of 1OMB Approval 2070-174United States Environmental ProtectionAgency Washington, D.C. 20460REQUIREMENTS STATUS AND REGISTRANT'S RESPONSE3. Date and Type of DCI and NumberID #GENERIC30-Jul-2010RR-034902-299782. Case # and Name4058 Iron salts034902Chemical # and NameLILLY MILLER BRANDSPO Box 1019SALEM, VA 2415310198. TimeFrame(Months)9. RegistrantResponse7. TestSubstance6. UsePatternPROTOCOLProgressReports321Nontarget Plant Protection Data Requirements (ConventionalChemical)(2 ,3 ,8)850.410012TEPTerrestrial plant toxicity, Tier 1 (seeding emergence)CN(4 ,5 ,6 ,7)850.415012TEPTerrestrial plant toxicity, Tier 1 (vegetative vigor)CNProduct Chemistry Data Requirements (ConventionalChemical)830.70508PAI; TGAIUV/Visible absorptionCNTerrestrial and Aquatic Nontarget Organisms DataRequirements (Conventional Chemical)(1)850.302012TGAIHoney bee acute contact toxicityCN12. Name of Company13. Phone NumberSignature and Title of Company'sAuthorized Representative__________________________________10. Certification I certify that the statements made on this form and all attachments are true, accurate, and complete. Iacknowledge that anyknowingly false or misleading statement may be punishable by fine, imprisonment or both under applicable law11. Date