alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### State Bank of Kissimmee and W. B. Makinson, *Appellants,*v. W. Reese Parker, *Appellee.*

Opinion Filed February 24, 1915.

A party who deposits money in escrow with a bank, pending the delivery of a conveyance of property, has no equity to require the deposit to be repaid to him on the ground that the contract of conveyance has- been abandoned by both parties, the remedy at law being adequate, even though the escrow holder refuses to deliver on the ground that the other party claims a right in the deposit.

Appeal from Circuit Court for Osceola County; J. W. Perkins, Judge.

Order reversed.

*Vans Agnew*& *Crawford*and *Johnston*& *Garrett,*for Appellants; ■

*259*O. B. Robinson,*for Appellee.

Whitfield, J.

This appeal is from an order overruling a demurrer to a bill of complaint. It is in effect alleged that Parker and Makinson agreed upon a sale of land's and personal property, Reese to deposit $1,000.00 in escrow with the bank pending the delivery by Makinson of a conveyance of the property; that Makinson failed to make the conveyance, and the contract has been abandoned by both parties; but the bank refuses to return the $1,000.00 to Parker without an order of court, upon the ground that Makinson had given notice to the bank not to deliver the deposit to Parker as he claimed a right to it. The prayer is that Makinson’s claim be barred, and that the bank be required to pay the $1,000.00 to Parker, and for general relief.

Under certain circumstances the bank as a mere stakeholder may have relief in equity; but on the facts alleged by the complainant Parker, he had an adequate remedy at law if his deposit of money is unlawfully withheld from him, and the demurrer to the bill of complaint should have been sustained. v

Order reversed.

Taylor, C. J., and Shackleford, Cockrell and Ellis, JJ., coueur.
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT 

September 18, 2012 

No. 11-1697 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

v. 

RYAN JAMES CRAIG, 

 Appellant 

(M.D. Pa. No. 1-06-cr-00219-001) 

Present: FUENTES, HARDIMAN and ROTH, Circuit Judges

 Motion to Modify and/or Clarify Opinion 

 

Respectfully, 

 Clerk/JK 

_________________________________ORDER________________________________

The foregoing Motion is GRANTED. Footnote 2 shall be removed from the Opinion 

filed on September 17, 2012. 

 By the Court, 

 

 /s/ Thomas M. Hardiman

 Circuit Judge 

Dated: October 5, 2012 

JK/cc: Stephen R. Cerutti, II, Esq. 

 Tina Schneider, Esq.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                   Exhibit 15.1

                    REPORT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS


To Education Management Corporation and Subsidiaries:

We have reviewed the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Education
Management Corporation (a Pennsylvania corporation) and Subsidiaries as of
September 30, 1996, and the related consolidated statements of income and cash
flows for the three-month period then ended. These financial statements are the
responsibility of the Company's management.

We conducted our review in accordance with standards established by the
American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. A review of interim
financial information consists principally of applying analytical procedures to
financial data making inquiries of persons responsible for financial and
accounting matters. It is substantially less in scope than an audit conducted
in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards, the objective of
which is the expression of an opinion regarding the financial statements taken
as a whole.  Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion.

Based on our review, we are not aware of any material modifications that should
be made to the financial statements referred to above for them to be in
conformity with generally accepted accounting principles.

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
October 31, 1996
July 9, 2004

24977

#### State v. Galdones

Affirmed
# C_2020215EN.01003202.xml

| 29.6.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 215/32 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.6.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 215/32

---

Judgment of the General Court of 13 May 2020 — Peek & Cloppenburg v EUIPO — Peek & Cloppenburg (Peek)

(Case T-534/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU word mark Peek - Earlier national commercial designation Peek & Cloppenburg - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(4) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Coexistence of the national commercial designation and the mark applied for - Demarcation agreement - Application of national law by EUIPO - Suspension of the administrative proceedings - Article 70 of Regulation 2017/1001 - Rule 20(7)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 (now Article 71(1) of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625) - Manifest error of assessment)

(2020/C 215/39)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Peek & Cloppenburg KG (Düsseldorf, Germany) (represented by: P. Lange, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: D. Hanf, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Peek & Cloppenburg KG (Hamburg, Germany) (represented by: A. Renck, M. Petersenn and C. Stöber, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 31 May 2018 (Case R 115/2005-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Peek & Cloppenburg (Hamburg) and Peek & Cloppenburg (Düsseldorf).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Peek & Cloppenburg KG (Düsseldorf) to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Peek & Cloppenburg KG (Düsseldorf) to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 392, 29.10.2018.

---
Exhibit
21.1. Subsidiaries of the Registrant

The
Company has seven wholly-owned subsidiaries. All others listed are either direct or
indirect subsidiaries of the Bank.

|SUBSIDIARIES OF THE COMPANY      | STATE OF INCORPORATION
|-------------------------------- | ----------------------
|Mid America Bank, fsb            |                       
|MAF Bancorp Capital Trust I      |                       
|MAF Bancorp Capital Trust II     |                       
|MAF Developments, Inc.           |                       
|Mid Town Development Corporation |                       
|Equitable Finance Corp.          |                       
|Computer Dynamics Group, Inc.    |                       

|SUBSIDIARIES OF THE BANK              | STATE OF INCORPORATION
|------------------------------------- | ----------------------
|Mid America Investment Services, Inc. |                       
|Mid America Insurance Agency, Inc.    |                       
|N.W. Financial Corporation            |                       
|Randall Road Development Corporation  |                       
|Centre Point Title Services, Inc.     |                       
|Reigate Woods Development Corporation |                       
|MAF Realty Co., L.L.C. - III          |                       
|MAF Realty Co., L.L.C. - IV           |                       
|Mid America Re, Inc.                  |                       
|EFS Service Corporation               |                       
|EFS Financial Services, Inc.          |                       
|SF Investment Corporation             |                       
|SF Insurance Services Corporation     |                       
|St. Francis Equity Properties, Inc.   |                       
|Center Point Mortgage, Inc.           |                       

---

|(1) | St. Francis Equity Properties, Inc. is a 98% or 99% partner or member in 13 individual limited liability
partnerships or limited liability companies, each of which invest in an affordable housing property within the State of Wisconsin.
|--- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FILED U.S. COURT OF AP P E A LS E LE V EN T HC IRC U IT NOVEMB ER 3, 2006 THOMAS K. KAH

N CLERK [ DO NO T P UB L I S H] I N THE UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT

________________________ N os . 05- 14686 & 06- 12082

________________________ D. C . Do c k e tNo . 0 3 - 0 0 8 9 6 - C V- T - 2 4 - T GW P R O F E S S I O N A L E M P L O Y E R P L A N S , I N C ., P l ai nt i ff C o u n te r - D e f

e n d a n t A p p e lle e ,

v ersu s L E A D I N G E D G E I N S U R A N C E G R O U P , I N C ., D ef endant C o u n te r - C la im a n t C r o s s - C la im a n t A p p e lla n t.

_______________________ A pp ea l s f

rom the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f orthe M i ddl e D i s tr i c tof F l or i da

_________________________ ( N ove m b e r 3, 2006)Honora ble Kenneth L . Ryskamp, United States District Judg e for the Southern District * of F lorida, sitting by

designation. 2 B ef ore B L A C K and H U L L , C i rc ui tJudg es , and R Y S K A M P , D i stri ctJudg e. * P E R C U R I A M: A p p ellan t, L ea d in g E d g e I n su ra n ce G ro u p , In c., ap p ea ls th e d istrict co u rt’s deni al of i t s m ot i on for j ud gm entas a m att erof l aw fol l ow i ng a j ury ver di ct ho l di ng L ea di ng E dg e l i abl e f or fr aud and vi ol at i ng the N ew Je rs ey C on sum er F r a ud A c t( N J C F A ) . L e a di ng E dge a l s o appe a l s the di s tr i c tc our t ’ s a w a r d of a tt or ne y s ’ f

e e s t o A ppe l l e e , P r of

e s s i ona l E m pl oy e rP l a ns , I nc . ( P E P ) , the de ni a l of i t s r e que s tf

ora tt or ne y s ’ f

e e s f orthe c i vi l the f

tc l a i m , a nd the de ni a l of i t s m ot i on for r em i tt i tur. I n i t s opi ni on da t e d A ugus t2, 2005, the di s tr i c tc our tc ons i de r e d the ev id en ce in th e lig h t m o st fa v o ra b le to th e P lain ti ff an d d en ied L ea d in g E d g e’s m ot i on f orj udgm e nta s a m a tt e rof l a w f orthe f r a ud c l a i m a nd N J C F A c l a i m a nd m o tio n f o rr e m ittitu r . T h e d is tr ic t c o u r t a w a r d e d P E P a tto r n e y s ’ f e e s a n d c o s ts un der the N JC F A because the j ury f ou nd L ea di ng E dg e c om m i tt ed an un consci on abl e c om m er ci al prac t i ce . T he courtal so foun d thatP rofe ss i on al E m pl oyerP l ans pre se nt ed subst ant i al supp ortfor i t s c i vi l theftcl ai m and t here fore r e f u s e d to a w a r d a tto r n e y s ’ f e e s o rc o s ts to L e a d in g E d g e f o rth a t c la im . W e ha ve he a r d or a l a r gum e nt , thor oughl y r e vi e w e d the R e c or d, a nd3

concl ud ed the di stri ctcourtcom m i tt ed no error. AF F I RME D.
51 P.3d 380

INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS OF HAWAI'I

June 3, 2002

23506, 23210

#### Williamson v. Telfer

Affirmed
USDA APHIS PPQ

USDA APHIS PPQ EAB Trapping Materials 

Emerald Ash Borer Survey

Items required:

Provided by USDA APHIS PPQ EAB Program:

Traps

Lures

Spreaders

Limb hangers

Survey Guidelines

Trapping Protocol

Trapping Material List

Provided by USDA APHIS PPQ SPHD or Cooperator:

For purple prism traps:

Cable ties (4 feet long - 2/trap to be fastened to tree)

Parchment or wax paper

Small ground tarp (to avoid trap soiling during examination)

For Lindgren green multi-funnel traps:

Cable ties (4 inches long for lure attachment)

Propylene glycol (RV anti-freeze - ethanol free)

Paper cone paint filters

For both trap types:

Throw rope

Throw bag/weight

Utility knife

Forceps, Bioquip #4750 - rounded end featherweight.

Medium plastic zipper bag

i. quart size bag--available from any grocery store 

Data label -- should be printed on a 2"x 4" shipping label

Permanent magic marker or pencil 

Hand Cleaner – Mechanic’s hand cream cleaner, such as Gojo, baby oil, mineral

 oil (paper towels will also be necessary) 

Examination gloves (vinyl, nitrile, or latex)

Items for the safe handling, transport and storage of the lure
Breadcrumb

1. Home

2. Print 

3. Pdf 

4. Node 

5. Entity Print 

Ordering Reagents and Proficiency

Tests From the NVSL

Last Modified: 

Print

Complete VS Form 4-9 (Request for Reagents), following the instructions included

with the form, and submit by fax, mail, or email:

Fax Mail Email

833-327-0497

National Veterinary Services Laboratories

User Fees

P.O. Box 844

Ames, IA 50010

nvsl_concerns@usda.gov

Orders will not be accepted by telephone.

Payment

When ordering reagents subject to a fee, payment must be included with the order

unless an account is already established with the USDA. See User Fees for Services

at the NVSL for more details.

Shipping Details and Fees

Most reagents are shipped within 10 working days. Some reagents are produced at

the time of order, which may extend the shipping date beyond 10 working days.
Standard shipping fees apply for all non-program reagents:

$15.00 for reagents shipped within the United States  ***Effective June 1,

2016***

$50.00 for reagents shipped to Canada

$150.00 for reagents shipped outside the United States or Canada

$50.00 additional for rush shipping (shipment within 3 days from receipt of

order). Clients must call 515-337-6200 to confirm rush orders.

Additional shipping fees may apply if ordering a quantity requiring more than

one shipping container.

Additional fees may apply for certain check test panels or shipments with

special requirements.

Upon receipt of reagents, check the contents of the shipment against the original

order and information on the packing list. If discrepancies occur, immediately call

the User Fee Help Line at 515-337-6200.

Permits

This is intended to be a basic guideline for transport permits required for

domestic (within the United States) shipment of reagents and proficiency

tests. International shipment of reagents may require additional permits,

and the laboratory should be contacted at nvsl_concerns@usda.gov or 515-

337-7266 for more information.

Shipment of certain reagents, including live agents, requires VS “Permit to Import

Controlled Material or Transport Organisms or Vectors or Animal Products and ByProducts.” These permits can be obtained by filling out VS Form 16-3 found at

Animal Health Permits. If you are unsure whether the reagents or proficiency tests

require a permit, please contact us at nvsl_concerns@usda.gov or 515-337-7266.

Make sure you have the name and reagent code of the reagents available.

Some live agents require additional permits:

Select agents are regulated by the National Select Agent Registry. Please visit

their website at www.selectagents.gov for information about transfer of select

agents.

Certain organisms, including Taylorella equigenitalis, require a VS permit that

specifies the agent.
Material Safety Data Sheets

Click to view Material Safety Data Sheets  for reagents shipped by the NVSL.

Questions?

For questions about the reagent ordering process, call 515-337-6200 or send an

email to nvsl_concerns@usda.gov.
# C_2021490EN.01002701.xml

| 6.12.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 490/27 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.12.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 490/27

---

Judgment of the General Court of 6 October 2021 — OCU v ECB

(Case T-15/18) (1)

(Access to documents - Decision 2004/258/EC - Documents relating to the adoption of a resolution scheme in respect of Banco Popular Español - Refusal to grant access - Exception relating to the protection of the confidentiality of information that is protected as such under EU law - Concept of confidential information - Exemptions from the obligation of professional secrecy - Right to a fair hearing)

(2021/C 490/28)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Organización de Consumidores y Usuarios (OCU) (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: E. Martínez Martínez and C. López-Mélida de Ramón, lawyers)

Defendant: European Central Bank (represented by: T. Filipova, D. Báez Seara and F. von Lindeiner, acting as Agents, and M. Kottmann, lawyer)

Interveners in support of the defendant: European Commission (represented by: É. Gippini Fournier, J. Rius, C. Ehrbar and A. Steiblytė, acting as Agents), Banco Santander, SA (Santander, Spain) (represented by: J. Rodríguez Cárcamo and A. Rodríguez Conde, lawyers)

Re:

Action pursuant to Article 263 TFEU for partial annulment of Decision LS/MD/17/428 of the ECB of 17 November 2017 refusing access to certain documents relating to the adoption of a resolution scheme in respect of Banco Popular Español, SA.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the application; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the application;

| 2. | Orders the Organización de Consumidores y Usuarios (OCU) to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Central Bank (ECB); |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the Organización de Consumidores y Usuarios (OCU) to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Central Bank (ECB);

| 3. | Orders the European Commission and Banco Santander, SA to bear their own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the European Commission and Banco Santander, SA to bear their own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 83, 5.3.2018.

---
<PAGE>

                                                                  EXHIBIT 21.01


                                 INTERLAND, INC.
                         SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                State (or jurisdiction)           Percentage
                                                                         in which                  Ownership
Name                                                                   Incorporated             by Registrant
----                                                            -----------------------         -------------
<S>                                                             <C>                             <C>
MEI California, Inc.                                                    California                    100%

Micron Electronics (H.K.) Limited                                        Hong Kong                    100%

Micron Electronics  Overseas Trading, Inc.                               Barbados                     100%

SpecTek Products, LLC                                                    Delaware                     100%

Micron Electronics International, Inc.                                   Delaware                     100%

Micron Computer of Canada, Inc.                                           Canada                      100%

HostPro, Inc. (formerly Micron PC Web Services, Inc.)                    Delaware                     100%

Micron Electronics Asia-Pacific Holdings, Inc.                            B.V.I.                      100%

Micron Electronics Asia-Pacific Operations, Inc.                          B.V.I.                      100%

Micron Electronics Asia-Pacific Trading, Ltd.                            Hong Kong                    100%

Interland Georgia, Inc.                                                   Georgia                     100%

Interland B.V                                                           Netherlands                   100%
</TABLE>
Cite as 2015 Ark. 48

SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS

No. CV-14-585

JAMES TREE AND CRANE SERVICE,

INC., AND ROGER WILLIAMS

APPELLANTS

V.

TERRI FOUGHT

APPELLEE

Opinion Delivered February 17, 2015

SPECIAL MASTER APPOINTED.

PER CURIAM

Appellants James Tree and Crane Service, Inc., and Roger Williams filed a petition for

writ of certiorari to complete the record on June 30, 2014. This court granted the petition

on July 31, 2014, and issued the writ for the court reporter to complete the record within ten

days. After granting an additional twenty-day extension of time to lodge the record, on

October 9, 2014, we granted a final sixty-day extension of the writ for the record to be

completed and filed with this court on December 8, 2014. On December 5, 2014, appellant

filed a petition for judicial relief stating that the court reporter, Sheila Russell, had advised

them that the record would not be completed by the December 8, 2014 deadline. In the

petition, appellants requested additional time for the court reporter to prepare the record. 

This court granted the petition and extended the time for filing the record to January 28,

2015. We also ordered the court reporter to appear before this court on January 29, 2015,

to show cause why she should not be held in contempt for her failure to comply with the writ
Cite as 2015 Ark. 48

of certiorari, as previously ordered. 

The record was not completed and filed on January 28, 2015. The court reporter

appeared before this court on January 29, 2015, and entered a plea of not guilty. At that time,

this court advised the court reporter that we would appoint a special master to make findings

of fact concerning this matter. 

We hereby appoint the Honorable John Mauzy Pittman as special master to conduct

a hearing, to make findings of fact, and to file his findings with this court’s clerk. Upon

receipt of the special master’s findings, we will render a decision in this matter.

It is so ordered.

2 CV-14-585
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

REBEKAH WERTH
, Appellant,

v.

FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES
, CIRCUIT 19 MARTIN, UNIT 88510, Appellee

.

No. 4D 17

- 0183

[ February 22, 2018 ]

Appeal from the State of Florida Department of Children and Families, Office of Appeal Hearings ; Pamela B. Vance

, Hearing Officer ; L.T. Case No s

. 16F

- 06674, 16F

- 06675 and 1410846717

.

Rebekah Werth, Stuart, pro se.

Laurel Hopper, Assistant Regional General Counsel, Fort Pierce, for appel lee.

P ER C URIAM

.

Affirmed.

T

AYLOR

, M AY and D AMOORGIAN

, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.