alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Joy Builders, Inc., Appellant-Respondent, *v.*Travelers Insurance Company et al., Respondents-Appellants.

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department,

October 2, 1959.

*Gerard I. Nierenberg*and *Saul 1. Weinstein*for appellant-respondent.

*Richard J. Rélyea, II,*for respondents-appellants.

*Per Curiam.*

There are triable issues of fact. The insured’s failure to obtain or seek the prior consent of the disclaiming insurers is not, as a matter of law, a bar to recovery of the sum expended in settlement of the claim. Plaintiff would be entitled to reimbursement upon showing that the amount paid was reasonable under the circumstances and that the insurers had breached their contract by improperly withdrawing from the defense of the action *(Mayor, Lane & Co.*v. *Commercial Cas. Ins. Co.,*169 App. Div. 772; *Empire Mut. Ins. Co.*v. *Bogart,*13 Misc 2d 1094; see, also, *Berger Bros. Elec. Motors*v. *New Amsterdam Cas. Co.,*267 App. Div. 333, 340, revd. on other grounds 293 N. Y. 523).

The order denying plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment should be unanimously affirmed, without costs. Order granting defendants’ cross motion for summary judgment in part unanimously should be reversed, without costs, and motion denied.

Concur — Pette, Hart and Brown, JJ.

Order affirmed, etc.
# C_2021163EN.01000701.xml

| 3.5.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 163/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.5.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 163/7

---

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 4 March 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Arbitral Tributário (Centro de Arbitragem Administrativa — CAAD) — Portugal) — Frenetikexito — Unipessoal Lda v Autoridade Tributária e Aduaneira

(Case C-581/19) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Taxation - Value added tax (VAT) - Directive 2006/112/EC - Article 2(1)(c) - Supplies subject to VAT - Exemptions - Article 132(1)(c) - Provision of medical care in the exercise of the medical and paramedical professions - Nutrition monitoring and advice - Sports, physical well-being and fitness activities - Concepts of a single complex supply, a supply ancillary to the main supply, and independent supplies - Criteria)

(2021/C 163/08)

Language of the case: Portuguese

Referring court

Tribunal Arbitral Tributário (Centro de Arbitragem Administrativa — CAAD)

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Frenetikexito — Unipessoal Lda

Defendant: Autoridade Tributária e Aduaneira

Operative part of the judgment

Council Directive 2006/112 of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax must be interpreted as meaning that, subject to verification by the referring court, a nutrition monitoring service provided by a certified and authorised professional in sports facilities, potentially in the context of programmes that also include physical well-being and fitness services, constitutes a separate and independent supply of services and is not capable of falling under the exemption laid down in Article 132(1)(c) of that directive.

---

(1)  OJ C 383, 11.11.2019.

---
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 113 (Thursday, July 26, 2012)]
[Senate]
[Page S5628]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

           ADJOURNMENT UNTIL MONDAY, JULY 30, 2012, AT 2 P.M.

  Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, if there is no further business to come 
before the Senate, I ask unanimous consent that it adjourn under the 
previous order.
  There being no objection, the Senate, at 7 p.m., adjourned until 
Monday, July 30, 2012, at 2 p.m.

                          ____________________
```
# C_2009205EN.01003501.xml

| 29.8.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 205/35 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.8.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 205/35

---

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 8 July 2009 — Commission v Atlantic Energy

(Case T-182/08) (1)

1

(Arbitration clause - Contract for financial assistance concluded under a specific programme in the field of non-nuclear energy - Failure to comply with the contract - Reimbursement of sums advanced - Statutory set-off - Procedure for judgment by default)

2009/C 205/63

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: initially A.-M. Rouchaud-Joët and S. Lejeune, and subsequently A.-M. Rouchaud-Joët and F. Mirza, Agents, and M. Jarvis, Barrister)

Applicant:

Defendant: Atlantic Energy Ltd (Truro, Cornwall, United Kingdom)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Action brought by the Commission under Article 238 EC for reimbursement of an advance paid by the European Community, together with interest, under contract BU 183/95 UK/AT.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Orders Atlantic Energy Ltd to reimburse to the Commission of the European Communities the principal sum of EUR 226 010, together with the interest provided for under Article 23.1 of the general conditions of contract BU 183/95 UK/AT in respect of the periods between 1 June 1996 and 28 February 2002 and between 16 July 2002 and 31 May 2008, less the sum of EUR 3 610,53, the final sum being increased by the interest provided for under the abovementioned Article 23.1 of the general conditions as from 1 June 2008 until the debt is discharged in full. |
| --- | --- |

1.

Orders Atlantic Energy Ltd to reimburse to the Commission of the European Communities the principal sum of EUR 226 010, together with the interest provided for under Article 23.1 of the general conditions of contract BU 183/95 UK/AT in respect of the periods between 1 June 1996 and 28 February 2002 and between 16 July 2002 and 31 May 2008, less the sum of EUR 3 610,53, the final sum being increased by the interest provided for under the abovementioned Article 23.1 of the general conditions as from 1 June 2008 until the debt is discharged in full.

| 2. | Orders Atlantic Energy to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Atlantic Energy to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 171, 5.7.2008.

1

---
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 116 (Wednesday, August 1, 2012)]
[Senate]
[Page S5805]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                              S E N A T E

Vol. 158

WASHINGTON, WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 1, 2012

No. 116
```
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED MAY 31, 2023

NO. 03-22-00780-CV

M. Y., Appellant

v.

Texas Department of Family and Protective Services, Appellee

APPEAL FROM THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW OF BASTROP COUNTY

BEFORE JUSTICES BAKER, SMITH, AND JONES

AFFIRMED -- OPINION BY JUSTICE JONES

This is an appeal from the order terminating parental rights signed by the trial court on 

December 2, 2022. Having reviewed the record and the parties’ arguments, the Court holds 

that there was no reversible error in the order. Therefore, the Court affirms the trial court’s

termination order. Because appellant is indigent and unable to pay costs, no adjudication of 

costs is made.
2005 Executive Management Incentive Compensation Plan Summary.



 Exhibit 10.17 
  
 Aames Investment Corporation 
 2005 Executive Management Incentive Compensation Plan Summary 
  
 The following is a summary of the 2005 Aames Investment Corporation Executive Management Incentive Compensation Plan (the “Incentive Compensation Plan”). On March 23, 2005, the Compensation Committee
recommended, and the Board approved, the Incentive Compensation Plan. Under the Incentive Compensation Plan, executive officers will be eligible to receive an annual cash bonus based upon the following three components: 
  

	 	•	 	plan operating income; 


	 	•	 	assessment of shareholder value added; and 


	 	•	 	achievement of individual objectives and performance of job duties. 

  
 Actual awards cannot exceed the plan operating income, which is based on Aames Investment’s profitability. The Compensation Committee is responsible
for assessment of shareholder value added. Individual awards are based on an evaluation of the individual executive’s performance of his duties, including all responsibilities associated with his position, and achievement of each
executive’s individual personal performance objectives. In general, each executive may receive up to 175% of his base salary as a bonus under the Incentive Compensation Plan, although individual amounts may vary. 
  
 If Aames fails to achieve at least 80% of its projected Plan Operating
Income, bonuses will be paid on a discretionary bonus as approved by the Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer and the Compensation Committee.
# C_2008260EN.01000902.xml

| 11.10.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 260/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.10.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 260/9

---

Action brought on 25 July 2008 — Commission of the European Communities v United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

(Case C-346/08)

(2008/C 260/16)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: P. Oliver and A. Alcover San Pedro, Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

Defendant:

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | declare that, by refusing to apply Directive 2001/80/EC (1) on the limitation of emissions of certain pollutants into the air from large combustion plants to the Lynemouth Power Plant, the United Kingdom has failed to fulfil its obligations under that Directive; |
| --- | --- |

—

declare that, by refusing to apply Directive 2001/80/EC (1) on the limitation of emissions of certain pollutants into the air from large combustion plants to the Lynemouth Power Plant, the United Kingdom has failed to fulfil its obligations under that Directive;

1

| — | order United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The Commission submits that the coal-fired power plant at Lynemouth in Northumberland constitutes a combustion plant within the meaning of the directive. Initially, the United Kingdom shared this view but, following a radical change of position, now vigorously contests it.

If the Lynemouth power plant is covered by the directive, as the Commission claims, then it is plainly an ‘existing plant’ within the meaning of Article 2(10) of the directive. It is common ground between the parties that the original operating licence was granted before 1 July 1987. It follows that, in the Commission's view, emissions from the plant should have been significantly reduced by 1 January 2008 in accordance with Article 4(3).

The Commission submits that, by failing to apply the directive to the Lynemouth power plant, the United Kingdom has acted in breach of that directive. The failure to significantly reduce emissions from the plant by 1 January 2008 constitutes a continuing breach of Community law.

---

(1)  JO L 309, p. 1.

1

---
# Magoffin - Appalachian Regional Commission

- Big Sandy Area Development District Executive Director Eric Ratliff Email &#x65;&#114;i&#x63;&#x2e;&#114;a&#x74;&#x6c;&#105;f&#x66;&#64;B&#x69;&#x67;&#83;a&#x6e;&#x64;&#121;&#46;&#x6f;&#114;&#103;The post Big Sandy Area Development District appeared first on Appalachian Regional Commission.
# C_2010148EN.01005104.xml

| 5.6.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 148/51 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.6.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 148/51

---

Order of the General Court of 19 March 2010 — Telekomunikacja Polska v Commission

(Case T-533/08) (1)

1

2010/C 148/86

Language of the case: Polish

Language of the case: Polish

The President of the Third Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 44, 21.2.2009

1

---
**EXHIBIT 23**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS**

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registrationstatements on Form S-8, previously filed by NB&T Financial Group, Inc. on March 23, 1995 and April 19, 2006, of our report dated January 30, 2007 on our audit of the consolidated financial statements of NB&T Financial Group,Inc., as of December 31, 2006 and 2005 and for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2006 which report and financial statements are contained in the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31,2006, and 2005. 

 

Cincinnati, Ohio 

March 19, 2007 

 

63
% Residential exposure, 30 days, daily shower, 10% dissipation daily
% Getting peak chlorpyrifos concentration at 60 pg/g in blood on the 14th day
% February 4, 2016
% Cecilia Tan


% Setting model parameters
use human_parameters_MRP
use preg_female_parameters
BWSW=1;	% Set BW to a fixed value
BWST=75;	% Set BW to 75 kg	
PREG=0;		% Not pregnant
DZONE = 1;	% Turn on dermal exposure
KDIS = 0.1;	% 10% daily dissipation
TSTOP=1000;	%Simulation time in hours


% Dermal exposure
SAF= 0.5;	 	% Fraction of skin in contact with chlorpyrifos.
FAD=1;     	% Fraction of dose available to be absorbed. Values of <1 could be used if pesticide is encapsulated. 
DERM = 64;		% dose in ug/kg for 8 h/day exposure
%DERM = 107;		% dose in ug/kg for 2 h/day exposure
D3=7;  %DAYS/WEEK
P2 = 8;	% hours/day
%P2 = 2;	%HRS/DAY
S2=0 ;%OFFSET FROM 0 START TIME (EG IF YOU WANT TO MODEL FROM MIDNIGHT, BUT DOSE AT 8 AM)
W2=30; %30 day exposure

prepare @clear@all
start @NoCallback
simall = [_time _rbcce _urinetcpy _cv*350.6*1000 _cvo*334.5*1000];	%conc unit = pg/g

save simall @file='residential_30day_02042016_8h' @format=ascii
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     This schedule  contains summary  financial  information  extracted from the
Consolidated  Statement  of  Financial  Condition  at December  31, 1996 and the
Consolidated Statement of Operations for the Year Ended December 31, 1996 and is
qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0000908535
<MULTIPLIER>                  1,000

<S>                           <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                 12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                              15,490
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        1,621
<ALLOWANCES>                                           345
<INVENTORY>                                          1,198
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                    20,584
<PP&E>                                             201,855
<DEPRECIATION>                                      28,736
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                     223,718
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                               19,892
<BONDS>                                            181,081
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               16,430
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                                29
<OTHER-SE>                                           6,286
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                       223,718
<SALES>                                            161,707
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   174,234
<CGS>                                               65,941
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                       65,941
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    69,143
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                       194
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  22,170
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      6,208
<INCOME-TAX>                                            69
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  6,139
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                         6,139
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                          .15
<EPS-DILUTED>                                          .15



</TABLE>
##### 



Exhibit 10.13(a)

Amendment to Second Amended and Restated
1998 Stock Option Plan
Manugistics Group, Inc.
Effective: March 1, 2003

FURTHER RESOLVED, That, consistent with the intent of the foregoing, Sections
6(g)(i) and (iii) of the 1998 Second Amended and Restated Stock Option Plan of
the Company are hereby amended and restated as follows:

(i)  On the date of the Annual Meeting of Shareholders, each director who
is not an employee of the Company shall receive a Non-Qualified Stock Option to
purchase shares of the Common Stock at a price per share as determined in
Section 6(c) above in the following amount: 10,000 shares commencing on the
date of the first Annual Meeting to occur after the director is initially
elected or appointed to the Board and 10,000 shares on the date of each Annual
Meeting thereafter, so long as the director remains a member of the Board.
Each Non-Qualified Stock Option received by a director pursuant to this Section
6(g)(i) shall vest quarterly on a calendar year basis over a five year period
and therefore become exercisable in 20 equal quarterly installments on the last
day of each calendar quarter commencing with the last day of the first calendar
quarter after the date the Non-Qualified Stock Option is granted. Any director
leaving the Board prior to the quarterly vesting date of the Non-Qualified
Stock Option grant shall forfeit the unvested portion of any such Non-Qualified
Stock Option grant, unless the exception contained in Section 6(g)(v) applies.

(iii)  Each director who is newly elected or appointed to the Board
following March 1, 2003 and who is not an employee of the Company shall receive
on the date of appointment/election a Non-Qualified Stock Option to purchase
shares of the Common Stock at a price per share as determined in Section 6(c)
above in the following amount: 35,000 shares, pro-rated as follows. Any
director who is elected or appointed to the Board at any time other than an
Annual Meeting will receive a percentage of this grant on the date of his or
her election based on the number of fiscal quarters ending from the date of
appointment or election until the next Annual Meeting of Shareholders. Each
Non-Qualified Stock Option received by a director pursuant to this Section
6(g)(iii) shall vest and become exercisable in 20 equal quarterly installments
on the same date as the date of grant, provided that if the date of grant is
the last day of a month, the option shall vest on the last day of the month of
such quarterly period, whether or not the same date as the date of grant. Any
director leaving the Board prior to the quarterly vesting date of the
Non-Qualified Stock Option grant shall forfeit the unvested portion of any such
Non-Qualified Stock Option grant, unless the exception contained in Section
6(g)(v) applies.
### FOR DOCKET;Fw: Tailoring rule step 3 - Technical Support Documents for review Juan Santiago to: Pam Long 02/24/2012 02:02 PM From: Juan Santiago/RTP/USEPA/US To: Pam Long/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA ----- Forwarded by Juan Santiago/RTP/USEPA/ US on 02/24/2012 02:02 PM ----- From: Juan Santiago/RTP/USEPA/US To: "Frey, Nathan J." <Nathan

_J.

_ Frey@omb.eop.gov>, "Ghorbi, Darian" <Darian

_ E

_ Ghorbi@omb.eop.gov> Cc: Anna Wood/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, "Kymn, Christine J." <Christine

_J.

_ Kymn@omb.eop.gov>, Pam Long/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, MichaelS Brooks/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Lynn Hutchinson/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA Date: 02/16/2012 09:30 AM Subject: Tailoring rule step 3 - Technical Support Documents for review 

### Good morning Darian and Nathan, Per your office's request, attached are the 2 technical support documents presenting the step 3 rulemaking thresholds and emissions coverage analysis. In addition, I will be forwarding you the regulatory text that will be included in the docket for your review around lunch time today. Please don't hesitate to contact me if there are any questions. Thanks! Juan E. Santiago (919) 541-1084 TS3 Threshold Analysis TSD Draft Clean.docx Step 3 Burden TSD Clean Draft.docx
June 7, 2021

Notice Regarding Handling and Disposal Requirements for

Organic Material of Foreign Origin Accompanying

Imported Horses

The United States Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Animal and Plant 

Health Inspection Services (APHIS) requires equine import quarantine facility 

operators to follow the handling and disposal requirements for organic material 

of foreign origin accompanying imported horses. 

Organic material of foreign origin accompanying imported horses on a 

conveyance must satisfy all import requirements of the responsible regulating 

agency(ies) in order to be eligible for entry into the United States (U.S.), and to 

be considered for disposal as domestic waste. Organic materials include, but are 

not limited to, bedding, straw, hay, processed/fresh feed, nutraceuticals, and 

pharmaceuticals.

Organic material of foreign origin accompanying imported horses on a 

conveyance that satisfies all import requirements of the responsible regulating 

agencies must be held at the import quarantine facility with the horse shipment 

until the import quarantine is complete. Once the shipment has been released 

from quarantine, the foreign organic material may be disposed of as domestic 

waste. Waste from horses refused entry due to non-negative test results for 

equine infectious anemia (EIA), equine piroplasmosis, dourine, or glanders must 

be disposed of as regulated waste in an APHIS approved manner, such as 

incineration.

Organic material of foreign origin accompanying live, imported horses on a 

conveyance that does not satisfy all import requirements must be disposed of as 

regulated waste in an APHIS approved manner regardless of the disease status or 

test results of horses.

USDA-APHIS encourages stakeholders to review and share this notice.

For more information, please visit the USDA APHIS VS Live Animal Imports

website or contact Live Animal Imports at (301) 851-3300, option 2, or email 

VS.Live.Animal.Import.Export@usda.gov.

United States 

Department of 

Agriculture

Marketing and 

Regulatory 

Programs

Washington, DC

20250
# C_2021028EN.01000901.xml

| 25.1.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 28/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.1.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 28/9

---

Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 19 November 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht Baden-Württemberg — Germany) — 5th AVENUE Products Trading GmbH v Hauptzollamt Singen

(Case C-775/19) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Customs union - Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 - Community Customs Code - Article 29(1) and (3)(a) - Article 32(1)(c) and (5)(b) - Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 - Article 157(2) - Customs valuation - Transaction value of imported goods - Concept of ‘condition of sale’ - Payment in return for the granting of an exclusive distribution right)

(2021/C 28/12)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Finanzgericht Baden-Württemberg

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: 5th AVENUE Products Trading GmbH

Defendant: Hauptzollamt Singen

Operative part of the judgment

Article 29(1) and (3)(a) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 of 12 October 1992 establishing the Community Customs Code must be interpreted as meaning that a payment made for a limited period of time by the buyer of imported goods to the seller of those goods, in return for the granting by the seller of an exclusive right to distribute those goods in a given territory, calculated on the basis of the turnover achieved in that territory, must be included in the customs value of those goods.

---

(1)  OJ C 27, 27.1.2020.

---