alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Leonard Sues, Plaintiff, *v.*Martha S. Sues, Defendant.

Supreme Court, Special and Trial Term, New York County,

February 24, 1959.

*4
      *Walsh, Aarons, Salonger &Fleishaker (Matthew L. Salonger*of counsel), for plaintiff.

*Irwin Klein*for defendant.

Edgar J. Nathan, Jr., J.

This is an action for divorce on the alleged ground of adultery brought by the husband.

The complaint is dismissed. Not only has plaintiff failed to adduce any proof that the Nevada divorce decree, dissolving the marriage between the parties, is invalid but the evidence presented supports its validity.

Defendant’s second and third counterclaims have been withdrawn and there remains for determination only the first counterclaim. This counterclaim, seeking judgment under section 1170-b of the Civil Practice Act for maintenance and support for a period subsequent to the Nevada divorce, and prior both to the remarriage of the defendant and to the commencement of this action, is dismissed. The Nevada divorce decree was granted on September 28, 1955, and the defendant remarried on June 25, 1957. Defendant took no action seeking support or maintenance until she interposed a counterclaim therefor in this action, which was commenced on February 27, 1958. There is no evidence that she ever questioned the validity of the Nevada divorce; in fact, she now asserts its validity. During all this period, and presumably for sometime prior to her marriage to the plaintiff, she had been, and still is, receiving a weekly allowance for the support of her child by a prior marriage.

While section 1170-b is otherwise applicable to this case, justice does not require that the wife be reimbursed for moneys expended by her for necessaries under these circumstances. Moreover, the court does not construe that section to permit claims in the nature of a common-law action for necessaries for periods antedating the commencement of the action.

Findings of fact, conclusions of law, judgment and order awarding counsel fees have been signed.
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
    Homecommentreply2386Add new comment
Add new comment
        
                  Randi Simon (not verified)PermalinkJanuary 16, 2021 - 2:35amThank you thank you thank you to everyone at the capitol who cleaned up after the horrible events on January 6th!  Thank you for everything else that you do on an ongoing basis
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
----

| (1) | The      Report fully complies with 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 results of operations of the      Company. |
|-----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Dated:      March 30, 2009 | /S/ ALAN ROSSKAMM                    |
|----------------------------|--------------------------------------|
|                       | Alan      Rosskamm                   |
|                       | Chairman      of the Board           |
|                       | Interim      Chief Executive Officer |
|                       |                                 |
| Dated:      March 30, 2009 | /S/ ERIC M. SPECTER                  |
|                       | Eric      M. Specter                 |
|                       | Executive      Vice President        |
|                       | Chief      Financial Officer         |

----
#### State v. Wright

17415

5/30/96

Affirmed
June 17, 2005

26214

#### State v. Gabriel

Affirmed
# C_2016203EN.01002001.xml

| 7.6.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 203/20 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.6.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 203/20

---

Article 38

The Commission shall make recommendations to the Member States with regard to the level of radioactivity in the air, water and soil.

In cases of urgency, the Commission shall issue a directive requiring the Member State concerned to take, within a period laid down by the Commission, all necessary measures to prevent infringement of the basic standards and to ensure compliance with regulations.

Should the State in question fail to comply with the Commission directive within the period laid down, the Commission or any Member State concerned may forthwith, by way of derogation from Articles 258 and 259 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, bring the matter before the Court of Justice of the European Union.

---
20952

#### State v. Le

Affirmed
27204

#### Ludwig v. Verizon Hawaii, Inc.

Vacated and Remanded
Exhibit 12.4

West Texas Utilities Company
Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges
For Years Ended December 31,

                              1998      1997      1996       1995      1994
                            ---------------------------------------------------
                                        (thousands, except ratios)

Operating income            $59,365    $44,567    $51,734   $59,486   $54,763
Adjustments
  Income taxes               28,088     11,294      6,547     6,456     7,900
  Provision for deferred
     income taxes            (6,578)      (954)     5,718     1,971     8,377
Deferred investment tax     
     credits                 (1,321)    (1,321)    (1,321)   (1,321)   (1,321)
Charges for investments
     and plant development                 
      costs, net of tax         --        --      (10,946)      --        --
Other income and deductions   2,034      1,237        601      (463)    4,210
Allowance for borrowed and
     equity funds used        
      during construction     1,347        920      1,276     1,031       474
                            ---------------------------------------------------
     Earnings               $82,935    $55,743    $53,609   $67,160   $74,403
                            ===================================================

Fixed charges:
  Interest on long-term     
     debt                   $20,352    $20,352    $21,169   $21,413   $18,547
  Interest on short-term    
     debt & other             4,580      4,911      4,925     4,111     3,534
                            ===================================================
     Fixed Charges          $24,932    $25,263    $26,094   $25,524   $22,081
                            ===================================================


Ratio of earnings to fixed    
charges                        3.33       2.21       2.05      2.63      3.37


                                      4-17
February 15, 2005

24052

#### Foytik v. Department of Human Services

Vacated and Remanded
126 P.3d 1109

SUPREME COURT OF HAWAI'I

#### Casumpang v. ILWU Local 142

24508

12/09/2005

Denied

108 Hawai'i 411, 121 P.3d 391
#### COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Petitioner, v. H. L. HUNT, Respondent.

No. 9102.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Dec. 9, 1939.

Samuel O. Clark, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., J. P. Wenchel, Chief Counsel, Bureau of Internal Revenue, and Ralph F. Staubly, Sp. Atty., Bureau of Internal Revenue, both of Washington, D. C., for petitioner.

J. B. McEntire, of Dallas, Tex., for respondent.

Before SIBLEY, HUTCHESON, and McCORD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

On the authority of Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. F. H. E. Oil Company, 5 Cir., 102 F.2d 596, affirmed by the Supreme Court of the United States November 6, 1939, 60 S.Ct. 26, 84 L.Ed. -, the petition is allowed, the judgment of the Board is reversed and the cause is remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with the opinion of this Court in that case.
2011 CUE MeBr allocation rule

Lee, Amanda I.

t

o

:

Drusilla Hufford, Jeremy Arling 03/29/2011 03:52 PM

Cc: "Mancini, Dominic J."

History: This message has been forwarded.

Drusilla, I just spoke with Katrina Johnson at EPA about the MeBr rule. I don’t expect any comments

from USDA. So let me know when you can upload a clean version into ROCIS, after addressing State

comments. Thanks, Amanda
October 21, 1996

17820

#### State v. Malaeulu

Order No. 96-19

Affirmed
February 25, 2005

25440

#### Doe, In re

Affirmed
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D17-3014

_____________________________

DONALD OSTERBYE, Former 

Husband,

Appellant,

v.

KAREN CROSS f/k/a KAREN 

OSTERBYE, Former Wife,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Leon County.

Dawn Caloca-Johnson, Judge.

October 31, 2018

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

ROBERTS, WETHERELL, and OSTERHAUS, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________
2

William E. Whitlock III of William E. Whitlock III, PLLC, 

Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Linda A. Bailey, Rachel H. Borntreger, and Hunter J. Hendrix of 

Law Office of Linda Bailey, P.A., Tallahassee, for Appellee.
January 31, 2006

26112

#### Doe Children, In re

Affirmed
### THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS

Post Office Box 12248

Austin, Texas 78711

(512) 463-1312

June 29, 2018

Mr. Scott S. Hershman

Lackey Hershman, LLP

3102 Oak Lawn Avenue, Suite 777

Dallas, TX 75219-4241

* DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL *

Mr. Robert Mark Millimet

Brewer, Attorneys & Counselors

1717 Main Street, Suite 5900

Dallas, TX 75201

* DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL * Ms. Deborah G. Hankinson

Hankinson LLP

750 N. St. Paul Street, Suite 1800

Dallas, TX 75201

* DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL *

RE: Case Number: 16-0770

Court of Appeals Number: 05-15-00580-CV

Trial Court Number: DF-15-00596

Style: IN THE MATTER OF THE MARRIAGE OF I.C. AND Q.C. AND IN THE INTEREST

OF S.C. AND K.C., CHILDREN

Dear Counsel:

Today the Supreme Court of Texas issued an opinions and judgment in the abovereferenced cause. You may obtain a copy of the opinions and judgment through Case Search on

our Court’s webpage at: http://www.txcourts.gov/supreme.aspx

. On the Case Search page

simply enter the case number and push the Search button to find the docket page for your case.

Sincerely,

Blake A. Hawthorne, Clerk

by Claudia Jenks, Chief Deputy Clerk

### THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS

Post Office Box 12248

Austin, Texas 78711

(512) 463-1312

cc: District Clerk Dallas County (DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL)

Mr. Bruce E. Bagelman (DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL)

Ms. Lisa Matz (DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL)

Mr. William Richard (Rick) Thompson II (DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL)

Mr. Craig T. Enoch (DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL)

Ms. Shelby L. O'Brien (DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL)

Mr. William A. Brewer III (DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL)

Mr. Jan Michal Zapendowski (DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL)

Mr. Lawrence Lee Budner (DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL)
**CONT AC**  **T S**  **:**

Stacy Kika (News Media Only) ki ka.stacy@epa.gov 202 - 564 - 0906 202 - 564 -4355 Dolores We sson (Public Inquiri es ) wesson.dolores@epa.gov 202 - 564 - 9085 **FOR IMMEDIA**

**TE R ELEASE**  June 1 7 , 2010 

# TODAY **: Advisory Group Releases**  **Report on**  **Addressing Env**  **ironme ntal**  **Challenges Along the**  **U.S. –**  **Mexico Border WA** **SHINGTON** – T he Good Neighbor Environmental Board (GNEB), an independent p residential advisory committee to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA) , is holding a press conference on the release of the report, “A Blueprint for Action on the US - Mexico Border . ” The report develops recommendations to address challenges along the U . S . – Mexico border . Michelle DePass, a ssistant a dm inistrator for EPA’s Office of International and Tribal Affairs , will joi n Nancy Sutle y, c hair of the Council on Environmental Quality , at the press conference to receive the recommendations and discuss ma intaining a strong international relations hip with Mexico as both countries move forward in addressing the human health and environmental challenges along the border . A roundtable discussion on the federal, state, and local stakeholder perspective will be held immediately following the press conference. **WHO:** Nancy Sutley, chair of the Council on Environmental Quality

Mich elle DePass, a ssistant a dm inistrator for EPA’s Office of International and Tribal Affairs Paul Ganster, chair of the Good Neighbor Environmental Board **WHA T:**  Press conference and ro undtable discussion **WHEN :**  Today, June 17, 2010, 3 p.m. to 5:30 p.m. ED T **WHERE:** Woodrow W ilson International Center for Scholars (Fifth -floor conference room)

Ronald Reagan Building and International Trade Center One Wo odrow W ilson Plaza 1300 Penns yl vania Ave., N . W . Wa shington, D . C . 20004 More information on Good Nei ghbor Environmental Board : http://www.epa.gov/ocem/gneb To view the webcast: http://www.wilsoncenter.org/mexico Note: You will not be able to view the webca st until 3 p.m. EDT R215
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 23
- 6829

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v. HARRINGTON CAMPBELL , Defendant

- Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland , at Baltimore

. Catherine C. Blake , Senior District Judge. ( 1:07

- cr - 00232

- CCB

- 1 )

Submitted : December 19 , 2023 Decided: December 27, 2023

Before HARRIS, QUATTLEBAUM , and BENJAMIN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

. Harrington Campbell, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 23-6829 Doc: 16 Filed: 12/27/2023 Pg: 1 of 32 PER CURIAM: Harrington Campbell appeals the district court’s omnibus order denying without prejudice Campbell’s petitions for a writ of error coram nobis, as well as his motions for other forms of relief, and the court’s later order denying Campbell’s Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion to alter or amend judgment. In relevant part, the court denied the coram nobis petitions after acknowledging that Campbell advanced arguments related to his convictions that were more properly brought under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, and that Campbell ’s initial § 2255 motion was dismissed on timeliness grounds. Although Campbell was released from prison in June 2022, he is still serving his supervised

- release term and, as such, is considered “in custody” for the purpose of § 2255. See United States v. Swaby , 855 F.3d 233, 239 (4th Cir. 2017). Because the more usual remedy is available, we agree with the district court that Campbell cannot seek relief from his convictions through a coram nobis petition. See United States v. Lesane , 40 F.4th 191, 195

- 96 (4th Cir. 2022). Finally, because Campbell did not advance any viable bases for his Rule 59(e) motion, we discern no abuse of discretion in the court’s denial of that motion. See United States v. Taylor , 54 F.4th 795, 802 (4th Cir. 2022) (providing standard of review). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s orders. United States v. Campbell , No. 1:07

- cr - 0 0232

- CCB

- 1 (D. Md. filed Apr. 24, 2023 & entered Apr. 25, 2023; May 9, 2023). We deny Campbell’s motion for a certificate of appealability (COA) and supplemental motion for a COA; for transcripts at government expense; and to allow the docket to reflect that the district court denied a COA in this case. We dispense with oral USCA4 Appeal: 23-6829 Doc: 16 Filed: 12/27/2023 Pg: 2 of 33 argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED USCA4 Appeal: 23-6829 Doc: 16 Filed: 12/27/2023 Pg: 3 of 3
Order entered February 7, 2017

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05
- 16
- 01114
- CV PAULA WILLIAMS, Appellant

V. FIDEL MORENO, SR. AN D FIDEL MORENO, JR., Appellee s On App eal from the County Court at Law No. 1

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. CC
- 15
- 06413
- A



### O RDER Before the Court is appellees’ February 3, 2017 second motion for extension of time to file appellees’ brief. We GRANT appellees’ motion.
We ORDER appel lees to file the brief on or before February 10, 2017. We caution appellees that further requests for an extension of time will be disfavored.
/s/ ELIZABETH LANG

- MIERS JUSTICE
----

| 1.  | I      have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of ARI Network Services,      Inc. (the “Company”); |
|----------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 2. | Based      on my knowledge, this quarterly report fully complies with the      requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the      Securities Exchange Act of 1934;and |
|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 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 cash flows of the      Company as of, and for, the periods presented in this    report; |
|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | /s/ Brian E.      Dearing                                       |
|--------|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
|   | Brian      E. Dearing                                           |
|   | Interim      Chief Financial Officer and Chairman of the  Board |

----
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
    Homecommentreply606Add new comment
Add new comment
        
                  Martin Shore (... (not verified)PermalinkJuly 17, 2018 - 12:59pmGreat article. Learned a lot.
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
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
    Homecommentreply2386Add new comment
Add new comment
        
                  Steven Jaffe (not verified)PermalinkJanuary 16, 2021 - 4:46amGod bless the dedicated men and women of the AOC office. I believe there should be a special ceremony honoring you all and a special medal struck by Congress to commemorate your bravery and perseverance in the face of this terrible assault on our government.
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
INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS OF HAWAI'I

May 6, 2008

28111

#### Liu v. State

Affirmed