alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

January 30, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor,
Chief Justice

135098 Michael F. Cavanagh
Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan Robert P. Young, Jr. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL Stephen J. Markman, QUALITY and DIRECTOR OF THE Justices DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY, Plaintiffs-Appellees,

v SC: 135098 COA: 265964 Ingham CC: 04-000818-CE SOUTH HURON VALLEY UTILITY AUTHORITY, Defendant-Appellee,

and

CITY OF FLAT ROCK, Intervening Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the July 24 , 2007 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented s hould be reviewed by this Court.

s0123 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

January 30, 2008

Clerk
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 24 (Friday, February 4, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 5717]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-2549]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

Office of Visa Services

[Public Notice 3211]


30-Day Notice of Information Collection; Petition to Classify 
Special Immigrant Under INA 203(b)(4) as an Employee Or Former Employee 
of the U.S. Government Abroad, Form DS-1884

SUMMARY:  The Department of State has submitted the following 
information to the Office of Management and Budget(OMB) in accordance 
with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. Comments should be submitted 
to OMB within 30 days of the publication of this notice.
    The following summarizes the information collection proposal 
submitted to OMB:
    Type of Request: Reinstatement of Form.
    Originating Office: CA/VO/F/P.
    Title of Information Collection: Petition to ClassifySpecial 
Immigrants Under INA 203(b)(4) as an Employee or Former Employee of the 
U.S. Government Abroad.
    Frequency: 500.
    Form Number: DS-1884.
    Respondents: Foreign Applicants.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 500.
    Average Hours Per Response: .5 hours.
    Total Estimated Burden: 250 hours.
    Public comments are being solicited to permit the agency to:
    <bullet> Evaluate whether the proposed information collection is 
necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, 
including whether the information will have practical utility.
    <bullet> Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the 
burden of the proposed collection, including the validity of the 
methodology and assumptions used.
    <bullet> Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the 
information to be collected.
    <bullet> Minimize the reporting burden on those who are to respond, 
including through the use of automated collection techniques or other 
forms of technology.

FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Copies of the proposed information 
collection and supporting documents may be obtained from Daria Darnell, 
U.S. Department of State, 2401E ST NW, RM L-703, Washington, DC 20520, 
Tel: 202-663-1253.Public comments and questions should be directed to 
the State Department Desk Officer, Office of Information and Regulatory 
Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB),Washington, DC 20530, 
(202) 395-5871.

    Dated: January 12, 2000.
Nancy H. Sambaiew,
Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Visa Services.
[FR Doc. 00-2549 Filed 2-3-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-06-U
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5047 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5047

  To extend the temporary suspension of duty on certain manufacturing 
                               equipment.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 27, 2012

 Mr. Duncan of South Carolina introduced the following bill; which was 
              referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To extend the temporary suspension of duty on certain manufacturing 
                               equipment.

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

SECTION 1. CERTAIN MANUFACTURING EQUIPMENT.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.84.83 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to certain manufacturing 
equipment) is amended by striking the date in the effective period 
column and inserting ``12/31/2015''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit  32.2





CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C.
SECTION 1350,


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In
connection with the Annual Report of Brampton Crest International Inc. on Form
10-K/A for the year ended December 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Brad Hacker, Chief
Financial Officer of the Company,  certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that, to the best of my knowledge and belief:





(1)  the
Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 5(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.





/s/ "Brad
      Hacker"Brad
      HackerChief
      Financial Officer





Date:
October 6, 2009
PAGE 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE 

WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AUSTIN DIVISION

_______________________________

)

DGG GROUP, LLC )

)

)

Plaintiff, )

)

vs. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:20-cv-00330-RP

)

)

LOCKHART FINE FOODS, LLC, )

and SINBAD FOODS, LLC, )

)

)

)

Defendants. )

_______________________________ )

AGREED MOTION TO DISMISS WITH PREJUDICE

TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF THIS COURT:

COMES NOW Plaintiff DGG Group, LLC and Defendants Lockhart Fine Foods, LLC and 

Sinbad Foods, LLC (collectively hereinafter “Parties”) and file this Agreed Motion to Dismiss 

with Prejudice in the above-numbered and styled cause, and would respectfully show the Court 

the following:

Plaintiff and Defendants no longer desire to prosecute their claims. The Parties now ask 

that the Court dismiss all claims that the Parties asserted or could have asserted against each other 

with prejudice to the re-filing of the same. 

WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, the Parties respectfully request that the 

Court enter the Order Granting Agreed Motion to Dismiss with Prejudice, and order that all taxable 

costs, expenses, and attorney’s fees be borne by the party incurring the same.

Case 1:20-cv-00330-RP Document 67 Filed 11/24/21 Page 1 of 2
PAGE 2

Respectfully submitted, 

CAGLE PUGH

/s/ Adam Pugh

Adam Pugh

State Bar No.24044341 

Kevin Slater

State Bar No. 24094950

4301 Westbank Dr., Bldg. A, Ste. 150 

Austin, Texas 78746

Tel.: (737) 261-0600

Fax: (737) 261-0637

Adam.Pugh@caglepugh.com

Kevin.Slater@caglepugh.com

ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF

AND

WITTLIFF CUTTER, PLLC

/s/ Katherine P. Chiarello (by permission)

Katherine P. Chiarello 

Texas Bar No. 24006994

katherine@wittliffcutter.com

John D. Saba, Jr.

Texas Bar No. 24037415

john@wittliffcutter.com

1209 Nueces St.

Austin, TX 78701

Telephone (512) 960-4438

Telecopier: (512) 960-4869

ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on November 24, 2021, a true and correct copy of the foregoing was 

served via the Court’s electronic filing service on all counsel of record.

/s/ Adam Pugh

Adam Pugh

Case 1:20-cv-00330-RP Document 67 Filed 11/24/21 Page 2 of 2
## COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH

NO. 02

- 12

- 00403

- CV

Michael J. Boyzuick and Garda Security Inc.

v.

Brink's Incorporated §

§

§

§ From t he 393rd District Court o f

Denton County ( 2012

- 60975

- 393 )

December 6, 2012

P er C uriam



### JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that

the appeal should be dismissed . It is ordered that the appeal is dismissed for

want of jurisdiction.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

PER CURIAM

## COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH

NO. 02

- 1 2

- 00 403

- CV

MICHAEL J. BOYZUICK AND GARDA SECURITY INC. APPELLANT S AND APPELLEES

V.

BRINK’S INCORPORATED APPELLEE AND APPELLANT

------------

FROM THE 393 RD DISTRICT COURT O F DENTON COUNTY

------------



### MEMORANDUM OPINION 1

------------
Appellants Michael J. Boyzuick and Garda Security Inc. filed a notice of

accelerated appeal from the trial court’s September 20, 2012 order granting a

temporary injunction for Appellee Brink’s Incorporated. See Tex. Civ. Prac. &

Rem. Code Ann. § 51.014(a)(4) (West 2008 & Supp. 2012 ). Subsequently,

1 See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.3

Boyzuick and Garda filed a motion for partial summary judgment, and the trial

court granted it, modifying the temporary injunction order . On November 13,

2012, Brink’s filed a motion for review of the modified temporary injunction order

in this court , arguing that because the order that had been the basis of Boyzuick

and Garda’s appeal had been changed, the appeal was moot. Boyzuick and

Garda did not file a response to the motion, but Brink’s amended certificate of

conference indicated t hat Boyzuick and Garda were unopposed to the motion.

“Appeals of some interlocutory orders become moot because the orders

have been rendered moot by subsequent orders.” Hernandez v. Ebrom , 289

S.W.3d 316, 319 (Tex. 2009). And, a s here, if the controversy at issue ceases to

exist, the case becomes moot. See Clawson v. Crosby ISD , No. 14

- 11

- 00532

-
CV, 2012 WL 4757927, at *1, 3 (Tex. App.

— Houston [14th Dist.] Oct. 4, 2012, no

pet. h.) (mem. op.) (dismissing appeal for want of jurisdiction when there were no

issues in controversy in the appeal). We therefore dismiss the appeal of the

original temporary injunction order only, without prejudice to the appeal, if any, of

the subsequently modified temporary injunction order. See Richards v. Mena

,
820 S.W.2d 372, 372 (Tex. 1991); see also Tex. R. App. P. 43.2(f).

PER CURIAM

PANEL: MCCOY

, MEIER, and GABRIEL

, JJ.

DELIVERED: December 6, 2012
This memorandum opinion was not selected for pub lication in the New Mexico Appellate Reports. Please see Rule 12-405 NMRA for restrictions on the citation of unpublished memorandum opinions. Please also note that this electronic memorandum opinion may contain computer-generated errors or other deviations from the official paper version filed by the Court of Appeals and does not include the filing date. IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO 1 GEORGE MENDOZA, 2 Plaintiff-Appellant, 3

v. NO. 33,913 4 LUCINDA HUBER, 5 Defendant-Appellee. 6 APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF DOÑA ANA COUNTY 7 Manuel I. Arrieta, District Judge 8 Kelly O’Connell 9 Las Cruces, NM 10 for Appellant 11 The Pickett Law Firm, LLC 12 Stephen T. Swaim 13 Lawrence M. Pickett 14 Las Cruces, NM 15 for Appellee 16 MEMORANDUM OPINION 17 VANZI, Judge. 182 {1} Plaintiff appeals from a district court judgment resolving Plaintiff’s quiet title 1 complaint in Defendant’s favor. We issueda calendar notice proposing to dismiss for 2 lack of a final order. Defe ndant filed a memorandum in s upport. Plaintiff has not filed 3 a memorandum in opposition, and the time for doing so has expired. SeeRule 12- 4 210(D)(3) NMRA. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal. See Frick v. Veazey , 1993- 5 NMCA-119, ¶ 2, 116 N.M. 246, 861 P.2d 287 (“Failure to file a memorandum in 6 opposition constitutes acceptance of the dispos ition proposed in the calendar notice.”). 7 {2} DISMISSED. 8 {3} IT IS SO ORDERED. 9

__________________________________ 10 LINDA M. VANZI, Judge 11 WE CONCUR: 12

_________________________________ 13 MICHAEL D. BUSTAMANTE, Judge 14

_________________________________ 15 JONATHAN B. SUTIN, Judge 16
|                                                                                          
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                          
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                            
|View History: Annual                                                                      
|View History: Annual                                                                      
|View History:                                                                             
|                                                                                          
|Virginia Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Reserves Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                          
|                                                                                          
|Virginia Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Reserves Adjustments (Billion Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                          

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|1980's                                                                                                                            |        |        | 2      | 1      | -5     | 19     | -17    | 2      | 10     | 0     
|1990's                                                                                                                            | -77    | 99     | 196    | 348    | -7     | -3     | 109    | 344    | -495   | -12   
|2000's                                                                                                                            | -10    | 19     | 1      | 1      | -19    | 18     | 25     | -25    | -6     | 339   
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 59     | -413   | 66     | -9     | 89     | -24    | 12     | -15    | -8     | 30    
|2020's                                                                                                                            | -22    | -4     |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 12/30/2022                                                                                                         
|Next Release Date: 12/29/2023
#### Douglas Manor Association, Inc., Appellant, v Thomas Popovich, Originally Referred to as Victor Popovich, Respondent.

In an action to recover damages for breach of an implied contract, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Dunkin, J.), dated July 11, 1989, which denied its motion for summary judgment.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion is granted, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Queens County, for entry of an appropriate judgment in the principal sum of $1,560.

The plaintiff, Douglas Manor Association, Inc. (hereinafter the DMA), a homeowners’ association, alleges that the defendant, a homeowner within its "private community,” has failed to pay his association dues. The DMA moved for summary judgment, based on the defendant’s actual and constructive knowledge of the existence of and use of the services rendered by the association, on the theories of breach of an implied *500contract and unjust enrichment. The court denied summary judgment, finding that disputed factual issues concerning the defendant’s actual or constructive knowledge of the nature of the community precluded granting the plaintiffs requested relief. We disagree.

The following facts are undisputed. The DMA employs a paid staff to maintain the grounds, the docks and the waterfront, and owns maintenance equipment, playground equipment, a dock and swimming and docking floats. The DMA holds title to the waterfront property surrounding the community, as well as the playing field and playground area which are posted as being closed to the public. The DMA claims title to many streets in Douglas Manor. The DMA provides a variety of community services, including a security patrol, help in snow clearance, maintenance of the sea wall around the community, maintenance of the waterfront and interior parks, and the replacement of trees.

The original 1908 indenture specifically provides for the payment of a deed tax of $1 per lot to the Douglas Manor Association, Inc., impliedly for the purpose of maintaining the community. Under circumstances similar to these, courts have found an implied contract, requiring residents to support the local community association *(see, Seaview Assn. v Williams,*69 NY2d 987; *Tides Prop. Owners Assn. v Paolillo,*56 AD2d 888; *Patchogue Props. v Cirillo,*54 Misc 2d 863, *affd*60 Misc 2d 71; *Sea Gate Assn. v Fleischer,*211 NYS2d 767).

The defendant admits paying his proportionate share of the annual dues to the DMA as part of the closing costs when he purchased the property and does not deny paying dues the following year. The fact that he did pay dues the following year is supported by a 17-year-old ledger entry. The defendant admits seeing signs stating that the development is private and the deed he produced sets forth the requirement of a deed tax payable to DMA.

Because the DMA concedes that recovery of the dues for 1981-1982 is barred by the six-year Statute of Limitations, the amount awarded should be limited to the principal sum of $1,560. Harwood, J. P., Balletta, Miller and O’Brien, JJ., concur.
# Amtsblatt C 128A/2006

| | ISSN 1725-2539 |
| --- | --- |
| Amtsblatt
  der Europäischen Union | C 128A |
| | |
| Ausgabe in deutscher Sprache | Mitteilungen und Bekanntmachungen | 49. Jahrgang1. Juni 2006 |

ISSN 1725-2539

Amtsblatt

der Europäischen Union

C 128A

Ausgabe in deutscher Sprache

Mitteilungen und Bekanntmachungen

49. Jahrgang1. Juni 2006

---

| Informationsnummer | Inhalt | Seite |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | III   Bekanntmachungen |
| | CEPOL |
| 2006/C 128A/1 | Stellenausschreibung | 1 |

Informationsnummer

Inhalt

Seite

III   Bekanntmachungen

CEPOL

2006/C 128A/1

Stellenausschreibung

1

| DE | |
| --- | --- |

DE

---

III Bekanntmachungen

CEPOL

| 1.6.2006 | DE | Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union | CA 128/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.6.2006

DE

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union

CA 128/1

---

STELLENAUSSCHREIBUNG

(2006/C 128 A/01)

Es wird ein Fachmann mit umfassender Bildung und Praxis, der über Erfahrung als Führungskraft und Kenntnisse auf dem Bildungs- und Schulungssektor verfügt, als Leiter für das CEPOL-Sekretariat in Bramshill, Hampshire, Vereinigtes Königreich, gesucht.

DIREKTOR (m/w)

Die CEPOL ist eine Einrichtung der Europäischen Gemeinschaften, an der hochrangige Polizeibedienstete (Senior Police Officers) aus der Europäischen Union ausgebildet werden. Das Sekretariat wird von einem/einer Direktor(in) geleitet, es unterstützt die Akademie in Fragen der Ausbildung, der Verwaltung, der Finanzen und der Logistik. Dem Sekretariat gehören 22 Mitarbeiter an.

Der/Die Funktionsträger(in) ist dafür verantwortlich, den Vorsitzenden und die Mitglieder des Verwaltungsrates und der Komitees zu unterstützen und zu beraten. Er/Sie überwacht die Erstellung des Jahresprogramms, des Jahresbudgets und des Jahresberichts. Er/Sie ist mit den Verhandlungen zu den Kooperationsabkommen betraut und vertritt die CEPOL bei den zuständigen EU-Gremien für Polizei- und Ausbildungsbelange.

Seit Inkrafttreten der neuen EU-Personalrichtlinien müssen Bewerber unter anderem Staatsbürger eines EU-Mitgliedstaats sein und über umfassende Kenntnisse in einer der Sprachen der Gemeinschaften und ausreichende Kenntnisse einer zweiten Sprache der Gemeinschaften verfügen. Des Weiteren müssen sich erfolgreiche Bewerber einer lokalen Unbedenklichkeitsüberprüfung stellen.

Weitere Informationen und die Bewerbungsunterlagen findet man auf der CEPOL-Website www.cepol.net. Anfragen sind bitte nur per E-Mail zu richten an: janos.fehervary@bmi.gv.at

| CEPOL Sekretariat |
| --- |
| CEPOL House, Bramshill, Hook, Hampshire, RG27 0JW, Vereinigtes Königreich |
| Telefon: + 44 (0) 12 56 60 26 68, Fax: + 44 (0) 12 56 60 29 96 |
| Homepage: www.cepol.net |

CEPOL Sekretariat

CEPOL House, Bramshill, Hook, Hampshire, RG27 0JW, Vereinigtes Königreich

Telefon: + 44 (0) 12 56 60 26 68, Fax: + 44 (0) 12 56 60 29 96

Homepage: www.cepol.net

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1996
<CASH>                                           26684
<SECURITIES>                                     46283
<RECEIVABLES>                                    17600
<ALLOWANCES>                                      2551
<INVENTORY>                                       2863
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                104935
<PP&E>                                          584772
<DEPRECIATION>                                  197951
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  802331
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            53853
<BONDS>                                         530556
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         16182
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    802331
<SALES>                                         208904
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                211815
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   113826
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 79468
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                  2551
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               14929
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    609
<INCOME-TAX>                                       274
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                335
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       335
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .02
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .02
        

</TABLE>