alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### UNITED FOOD AND COMMERCIAL WORKERS INTERNATIONAL UNION, AFL-CIO, LOCAL UNION 50N, Appellee, v. SIPCO, doing business as Monfort Pork, Inc., Appellant.

No. 93-1285.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted Sept. 17, 1993.

Decided Oct. 26, 1993.

Kenneth Carr, El Paso, TX, argued, for appellant.

Irving King, Chicago, IL, argued, for ap-pellee.

Before McMILLIAN, WOLLMAN and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges.

McMILLIAN, Circuit Judge.

At issue on appeal is whether the district court1 erred in setting aside an arbitration award. *United Food and Commercial Workers International Union v. SIPCO, Inc.,*No. 4-90-CV-70250, 1992 WL 455167 (S.D.Iowa Dec. 30, 1992) (memorandum and order). We agree with the district court that the arbitrator engaged in various instances of prejudicial misconduct sufficient to taint the arbitration award and justify its vacatur.

The United Food and Commercial Workers International Union, AFL-CIO, and its affiliated Local Union 50N (the Unions) represent the production and maintenance employees at SIPCO. SIPCO entered into a contract with MSP, Resources, Inc. (MSP), to have MSP employees conduct a portion of SIPCO’s operations. The MSP employees were represented by the Teamsters Union (Teamsters). The Unions filed a grievance arguing that the SIPCO-MSP contract constituted subcontracting in violation of the collective bargaining agreement governing the terms and conditions of employment of Union employees at SIPCO. The parties were unable to resolve their grievance, and the matter was submitted to an arbitrator selected from a list of arbitrators provided by the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Services. The arbitration hearing commenced in February 1990 and resulted in an award in favor of SIPCO. The Unions argued below that the arbitrator’s decision to allow an interested, non-party to be present throughout the duration of the hearing in combination with the arbitrator’s active solicitation of ex parte evidence and ex parte consultations precluded the Unions from having a fair hearing. The district court agreed with the Unions.

On appeal, SIPCO contends that the district court erred in holding that the arbitrator engaged in misconduct sufficient to prejudice the rights of the Unions to a fair hearing. We agree with the conclusions of the district court and affirm on the basis of the well-reasoned Memorandum and Order of the district court. *See*8th Cir.R. 47B.

1

. The Honorable Harold D. Vietor, United States District Judge for the Southern District of Iowa.
EXHIBIT 32.1
                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                                 18 U.S.C. 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


In connection with the Quarterly  Report of MASTER  DISTRIBUTION  SYSTEMS,  INC.
(the  "Company")  on Form 10-QSB for the period ended March 31,  2005,  as filed
with the Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),
I, Harry P.  Beugelink,  Principal  Executive  Officer of the Company,  certify,
pursuant  to 18  U.S.C.  1350,  as  adopted  pursuant  to  Section  906  of  the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

The  information  contained  in the  Report  fairly  presents,  in all  material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.


                                                 /s/ Harry P. Beugelink
                                                  ---------------------------
Date: May 18, 2005                                   Harry P. Beugelink
                                                     Principal Executive Officer
Termination of Key Executive Deferred Compensation Agreement



 Exhibit 10.1 
  
 TERMINATION OF KEY EXECUTIVE 
 DEFERRED COMPENSATION AGREEMENT 
  
 This Termination of Key Executive Deferred Compensation Agreement is made and entered into on this 4th day
of April, 2005, between WATSCO, INC., a Florida corporation (the “Company”) and ALBERT H. NAHMAD (the “Executive”). 
  
 WHEREAS, effective as of June 1, 1981, the Company and the Executive entered into a Key Executive Deferred Compensation Agreement (the
“Agreement”), pursuant to which the Company was required to provide certain retirement and death benefits to the Executive; and 
  
 WHEREAS, the Company and the Employee now agree that the Agreement no longer serves the purposes of either the Company or the Employee and now wish
to terminate the Agreement in its entirety. 
  
 NOW
THEREFORE, in consideration of the Company’s award to the Executive of 55,000 shares of Class B Common Stock of the Company, pursuant to the terms of a Restricted Stock Agreement of even date hereof, and other valuable consideration, the
receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the Company and the Employee hereby agree that the Agreement is hereby terminated and shall be considered null and void ab initio and that no retirement, death or other benefits shall be paid
thereunder. 
  

			
	WASTCO, INC.
		
	By:	 	         /s/ Paul Manley, Chairman


	 	 	         Paul Manley, Chairman,

	 	 	         Compensation Committee

	
	                 /s/ Albert H. Nahmad


	                 Albert H.
Nahmad
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1

                       REPORT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS
                        ON FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES


To the Board of Directors of Philadelphia Consolidated Holding Corp.:

     Our audits of the consolidated financial statements of Philadelphia
Consolidated Holding Corp. and Subsidiaries appearing in this Form 10-K also
included an audit of the financial statement schedules listed in Item 14(a)(2)
of this Form 10-K.  In our opinion, these financial statement schedules present
fairly, in all material respects, the information set forth therein when read in
conjunction with the related consolidated financial statements.



/s/  PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

Philadelphia, PA
February 8, 2002
#### In the matter of PELLEGRINO JAMES PELLECCHIA, JR., an attorney at law.

Argued December 20, 1948.

For the rule: *Mr. Frederick C. Vonhof.*

For the respondent: No appearance.

December 20, 1948.

Name of respondent ordered stricken from the roll of attorneys,
## I N T H E C O U R T O F C R I M I N A L A P P E A L S

O F T E X A S

NO. WR-92, 688-01

EX P ART E B RANDY HOPE

, Appl icant

ON AP P LI CAT I ON F OR A WRIT OF HAB EA S CORP US

CAUSE NO. 25, 990-A I N THE 258 DI STRI CT COURT T H

F ROM P OLK COUNT Y

P er cur iam

.

O P I N I O N

A ppl i can t was co n v i ct ed o f po s s es s i o n o f co n t ro l l ed s ub s t an ce an d s en

t en ced t o t wen

t y -f i v e

y ears ’ i m pri s o n m en t

. Sh e di d n o t appea l t h i s co n v i ct i o n

. A

ppl i can t f i l ed t h i s appl i cat i o n f

o r a wri t

o f h ab eas co rpus i

n t h e co un

t y o f co n v i ct i o n

, an d t h e di s t ri ct cl erk f o rwarded i

t t o t h i s Co urt

. See

T E X

. C O D E C R I M

. P R O C

. art

. 11. 07.

A ppl i can t co n t en ds t h at pl ea was i

n v o l un t ary b eca us e t h e agreem

en t was t h at s h e was go i

n g

t o recei v e s h o ck pro b at i o n

, b ut t h at agreem en t co ul d n o t b e f

o l l o wed. T h e St at e agrees t h at t h e pl ea

b argai n m ade i n t h i s cas e co ul d n o t b e f

o l l o wed. Ba s ed o n t h e reco rd, t h e t ri al co urt h as det erm i n ed

t h at A ppl i can t ’ s pl ea was i

n v o l un t ary an d reco m

m en ds t h at t h e Co urt gran t rel i ef

.

Re l i ef i s gran

t ed. B r ady v. United States

, 397 U.S

. 742 (1970)

. T h e j u d g m e nt i n caus e2

n um b er 25,990 i

n t h e 258 Di s t ri ct Co urt o f Po l k Co un t y i s s et as i de, an d A

ppl i can t i s rem an ded t o th

t h e cus t o dy o f t h e Sh eri f

f o f Po l k Co un t y t o an s wer t h e ch arges as s et o ut i n t h e i n di ct m en t

. T h e t ri al

co urt s h al l i s s ue an

y n ece s s ary b en ch warran t wi t h i n t en day s f

ro m t h e dat e o f t h i s Co urt ’ s m an dat e.

Co pi es o f t h i s o pi

n i o n s h al l b e s en

t t o t h e T ex as Depa

rt m en t o f Cri m i n al J us t i ce–C o rr ect i o n al

In s t i t ut i o n s Di v i s i o n an d t h e Bo ard o f Pardo n s an d Paro l es

.

Del i v ered: J un e 9, 2021

Do n o t pub l i s h
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4823 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4823

 To amend the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 
        to include certain areas in the Central Texas Corridor.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 18, 2018

 Mr. Conaway introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
             Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 
        to include certain areas in the Central Texas Corridor.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Connecting the Rest to the West''.

SEC. 2. CENTRAL TEXAS CORRIDOR.

    Section 1105(c)(84) of the Intermodal Surface Transportation 
Efficiency Act of 1991 (105 Stat. 2032; 112 Stat. 190; 119 Stat. 1213) 
is amended by adding at the end the following: ``The Corridor also 
shall--
                    ``(A) not include the section of US 190 from I-10 
                in Pecos County to Brady in McCullough County;
                    ``(B) include the following routes in the Central 
                Texas Corridor and the I-14 system in Texas--
                            ``(i) beginning in the vicinity of State 
                        Highway 338 in Odessa, Texas, running eastward 
                        concurrent with Interstate 20, connecting to 
                        State Highway 158 in the vicinity of Midland, 
                        Texas, then following State Highway 158 
                        eastward to US 87 and then following US 87 
                        southeastward, passing in the vicinity of San 
                        Angelo; and
                            ``(ii) connecting to US 190 in the vicinity 
                        of Brady, Texas; and
                    ``(C) include US 83 southward from the vicinity of 
                Eden, Texas, to a logical connection to Interstate 10 
                at Junction, Texas.''.
                                 <all>
```
United States

Appalachian Region

Note: data are for full-time, year-round workers.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010-2014 ACS

Appalachian Regional Commission, August 2016

Median Annual Earnings of Workers Ages 25 and Over, by Educational Attainment, 2010-2014

United States

Appalachian Region

Note: data are for full-time, year-round workers.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010-2014 ACS

Appalachian Regional Commission, August 2016

Median Annual Earnings of Male Workers Ages 25 and Over, by Educational Attainment, 2010-2014

United States

Appalachian Region

Note: data are for full-time, year-round workers.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010-2014 ACS

Appalachian Regional Commission, August 2016

Median Annual Earnings of Female Workers Ages 25 and Over, by Educational Attainment, 2010-2014

United States

Appalachian Region

Note: data are for full-time, year-round workers.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010-2014 ACS

Appalachian Regional Commission, August 2016

Median Annual Earnings of Workers Ages 25 to 64, by Educational Attainment, 2010-2014

United States

Appalachian Region

Note: data are for full-time, year-round workers.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010-2014 ACS

Appalachian Regional Commission, August 2016

Median Annual Earnings of Male Workers Ages 25 to 64, by Educational Attainment, 2010-2014

United States

Appalachian Region

Note: data are for full-time, year-round workers.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010-2014 ACS

Appalachian Regional Commission, August 2016

Median Annual Earnings of Female Workers Ages 25 to 64, by Educational Attainment, 2010-2014

Males in the United States

Females in United States

Note: data are for full-time, year-round workers.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010-2014 ACS

Appalachian Regional Commission, August 2016

Median Annual Earnings of Male & Female Workers Ages 25 to 64, by Educational Attainment, 2010-2014

Males in Appalachia

Females in Appalachia

Note: data are for full-time, year-round workers.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010-2014 ACS

Appalachian Regional Commission, August 2016

8

Median Annual Earnings of Male & Female Workers Ages 25 to 64, by Educational Attainment, 2010-2014

United States

Appalachian Region

Note: data are for the civilian labor force.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010-2014 ACS

Appalachian Regional Commission, August 2016

Percent of Persons Ages 25 to 64 Who Are in the Civilian Labor Force, by Educational Attainment, 2010-2014

Note: data are for the civilian labor force.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010-2014 ACS

Appalachian Regional Commission, August 2016

United States

Appalachian Region

Unemployment Rate of Persons Ages 25 to 64, by Educational Attainment, 2010-2014

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010-2014 ACS

Appalachian Regional Commission, August 2016

United States

Appalachian Region

Poverty Rate of Persons Ages 25 to 64, by Educational Attainment, 2010-2014

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010-2014 ACS

Appalachian Regional Commission, August 2016

United States

Appalachian Region

Percent of Persons Ages 25 to 64 Not Covered by Health Insurance, by Educational Attainment, 2010-2014
# C_2008183EN.01001301.xml

| 19.7.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 183/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.7.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 183/13

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden, lodged on 8 May 2008 — Zuid-Chemie B.V. v Philippo's Mineralenfabriek N.V./S.A., at present PMF Productions

(Case C-189/08)

(2008/C 183/25)

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Hoge Raad der Nederlanden

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: Zuid-Chemie B.V.

Appellant:

Respondent: Philippo's Mineralenfabriek N.V./S.A.

Respondent:

Questions referred

| (a) | Which harm is, in the case of unlawful conduct such as that which forms the basis for Zuid-Chemie's claim, to be treated as the initial harm resulting from that conduct: the harm which arises by virtue of the delivery of the defective product or the harm which arises when normal use is made of the product for the purpose for which it was intended? |
| --- | --- |

(a)

Which harm is, in the case of unlawful conduct such as that which forms the basis for Zuid-Chemie's claim, to be treated as the initial harm resulting from that conduct: the harm which arises by virtue of the delivery of the defective product or the harm which arises when normal use is made of the product for the purpose for which it was intended?

| (b) | If the latter is the case, can then the place where that harm arose be treated as ‘the place where the harmful event occurred’ within the meaning of Article 5(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 (1) of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters only if that harm consists of physical harm to persons or goods, or is this also possible if (initially) only financial harm has been incurred? |
| --- | --- |

(b)

If the latter is the case, can then the place where that harm arose be treated as ‘the place where the harmful event occurred’ within the meaning of Article 5(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 (1) of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters only if that harm consists of physical harm to persons or goods, or is this also possible if (initially) only financial harm has been incurred?

1

---

(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (OJ 2001 L 12, p. 1).

1

---
#### Patricia H. Mangone, Respondent, v Ronald S. Mangone, Appellant.

(Appeal No. 1.)

— Judgment unanimously modified on the law and as modified affirmed without costs, in accordance with the following Memorandum: In this matrimonial action, defendant argues that it was error to order the sale of his business and to order that the net proceeds be distributed equally. He contends that the business was insolvent and that the real property was subject to liens, mortgages and judgments that exceeded its value by almost $200,000, rendering any attempt to sell the business and real property an exercise in futility. The judgment is hereby modified to provide defendant with the option of either selling the business and real property and dividing the net proceeds as directed or transferring title of the business and real property to plaintiff subject to all encumbrances.

We further find that defendant’s motion pursuant to CPLR 4404 (b) to modify the judgment should have been granted to the extent that defendant is entitled to reimbursement of $1,451.50, representing half of the attorneys’ fees incurred because of plaintiff’s default in an action by U.S.F. & G. against plaintiff and defendant. Because the whole fee of $2,903 was paid from the gross proceeds from the sale of the house, half has in effect already been paid by plaintiff. To the extent that defendant’s postjudgment motion sought a revised Qualified Domestic Relations Order, it should have been granted.

We reject defendant’s arguments on appeal that he was entitled to additional findings of fact and conclusions of law with respect to certain personal property, legal fees, and income tax refunds, and that he was entitled to distribution of some items or reimbursement for them. Defendant has failed to show on appeal that he requested distribution of that personal property and reimbursement of those legal fees at *656trial, and the record on appeal does not contain any proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law submitted by him although the court had requested them. We find that, although defendant timely requested reimbursement of payments he made toward the mortgage, home improvement loan, real estate taxes and insurance on the marital residence during the three years that plaintiff had exclusive occupancy, he failed to specify the amount requested and, on the record before us, it appears that he failed to request findings of fact on this issue, and therefore is not entitled to the relief now sought *(see, Ross v Ross,*174 AD2d 1045). We find no error in the judgment with respect to the disposition of the Canandaigua property and the Irondequoit residence. (Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Maas, J.H.O.— Equitable Distribution and Support.) Presents — Callahan, J. P., Doerr, Green, Pine and Lowery, JJ.
# C_2012109EN.01001202.xml

| 14.4.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 109/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.4.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 109/12

---

Order of the General Court of 14 February 2012 — Federcoopesca and Others v Commission

(Case T-366/08) (1)

1

(Action for annulment - Regulation (EC) No 530/2008 - Recovery plan for bluefin tuna - Setting of TACs for 2008 - Act of general application - Lack of individual concern - Inadmissible)

2012/C 109/27

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Parties

Applicants: Federazione Nazionale delle Cooperative della Pesca (Federcoopesca) and eight other applicants whose names are mentioned in the annex to the order (Rome, Italy) (represented by: P. Cavasola, V. Cannizzaro and G. Micucci, lawyers)

Applicants:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: K. Banks and D. Nardi, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Commission Regulation (EC) No 530/2008 of 12 June 2008 establishing emergency measures as regards purse seiners fishing for bluefin tuna in the Atlantic Ocean, east of longitude 45° W, and in the Mediterranean Sea (OJ 2008 L 155, p. 9).

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The action is dismissed as inadmissible. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The action is dismissed as inadmissible.

| 2. | The Federazione Nazionale delle Cooperative della Pesca (Federcoopesca) and eight other applicants whose names are mentioned in the annex are to bear their own costs and pay those incurred by the European Commission. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The Federazione Nazionale delle Cooperative della Pesca (Federcoopesca) and eight other applicants whose names are mentioned in the annex are to bear their own costs and pay those incurred by the European Commission.

---

(1)  OJ C 301, 22.11.2008.

1

---
ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS

Appeal of

- )

)

K

- Belle Consultants, LLC ) ASBCA No. 62587

)

Under Contract Nos. W912P8

- 16

- B

- 0038 )

W912P8

- 16

- C

- 0051 )

APPEARANCES FOR THE APPELLANT : Michael H. Payne, Esq.

Cohen Seglias Pallas Greenhall & Furman PC

Philadelphia, PA

Casey J. McKinnon

, Esq.

Cohen Seglias Pallas Greenhall & Furman P C

Washington, DC

APPEARANCES FOR THE GOVERNMENT: Michael P. Goodman, Esq.

Engineer Chief Trial Attorney

Thomas M. Taff, Jr., Esq.

Engineer Trial Attorney

U.S. Army Engineer District, New Orleans

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

The dispute has been settled. The appeal is dismissed with prejudice.

Dated: November 13 , 2020

I certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the Order of Dismissal of the Armed

Services Board of Contract Appeals in ASBCA No. 62587

, Appeal of K

- Belle

Consultants, LLC , rendered in conformance with the Board’s Charte r.

Dated: November 13, 2020 JOHN J. THRASHER

Administrative Judge

Chairman

Armed Services Board

of Contract Appeals

PAULLA K. GATES

- LEWIS

Recorder, Armed Services

Board of Contract Appeals
EXHIBIT 32








CERTIFICATION


PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





I, Samyak Veera, Chief Executive Officer and I, Tristan R. Farel, Chief Financial Officer of New Frontier Energy, Inc. (the “Company”) certify that:





1.  I have reviewed the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of New Frontier Energy, Inc.;





2.  Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly report; 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 period presented in this quarterly report. 
 Date:   March 4, 2010
 
 /s/ Samyak VeeraSamyak Veera,Chief Executive Officer/s/ Tristan R. FarelTristan R. Farel,Chief Financial Officer