alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[No. 35425.

*En Banc.*

January 19, 1961.]

#### Thomas A. Reeder *et al., Appellants,*v. King County *et al., Respondents.**1*

*Geo. H. Crandell,*for appellants.

*Charles O. Carroll*and *Derrill T. Bastían,*for respondents.

1

Reported in 358 P. (2d) 810.

Finley, C. J.

— This is an action brought under the Uniform Declaratory Judgments Act, RCW 7.24, seeking a declaration of appellants’ alleged right to have certain real property re-zoned by the Board of Commissioners of Kong County.

Appellants own land that abuts on U. S. Highway No. 10, a few miles east of Lake Washington. In 1958, appellants properly applied to the county commissioners to have their land re-zoned from the use designated as R-A (single residence) to R-3 (multiple residence, trailer court). The application was referred to the Kong County Planning Commission, which recommended that it be granted. In March of 1959, the commissioners re-zoned three nearby lots from *564R-A to R-3, but did not change the classification of appellants’ property.

Appellants thereupon brought this action for a declaratory judgment, alleging that the conduct of the county commissioners was arbitrary, wrongful, capricious, and in violation of appellants’ rights. The county’s demurrer to the complaint was sustained by the trial court.

The declaratory judgment act should be liberally interpreted in order to facilitate its socially desirable objective of providing remedies not previously countenanced by our law. However, a plaintiff is not entitled to relief by way of a declaratory judgment if, otherwise, he has a completely adequate remedy available to him. *Kahin v. Lewis*(1953), 42 Wn. (2d) 897, 259 P. (2d) 420; *Hawk v. Mayer*(1950), 36 Wn. (2d) 858, 220 P. (2d) 885; *Jacobsen v. King County Medical Service Corp.*(1945), 23 Wn. (2d) 324, 160 P. (2d) 1019; *Peoples Park & Amusement Ass’n, v. Anrooney*(1939), 200 Wash. 51, 93 P. (2d) 362.

Although appellants did not have a right to appeal to the superior court, the writ of certiorari was available to them and would have afforded them all relief to which they may be entitled in this case. *State ex rel. Lyon v. Board of County Com’rs*(1948), 31 Wn. (2d) 366, 196 P. (2d) 997; RCW 7.16.040.

Inasmuch as we have concluded that appellants were improperly before the court, we agree with the trial court that the action should be dismissed. This, however, is without prejudice to any other relief, legal or equitable, to which appellants may be entitled. The respondent county should recover its costs. It is so ordered.

All Concur.

April 26, 1961. Petition for rehearing denied.
EXHIBIT 32.1



Certification of Chief Executive Officer



Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as created by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer
of Keystone Automotive Industries, Inc. (the Company) hereby certifies, to such officers knowledge, that:



| | (i) | the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the fiscal quarter ended December 30, 2005 (the Report) fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
| | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (ii) | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | ---- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Dated: February 8, 2006



/s/ RICHARD L. KEISTERRichard L. Keister Chief Executive Officer
**REGULATORY EVALUATION**

**Directorate Identifier:**

____ 2013

______ - NM -

_____ 129

_____ - AD **Executive Order 12866:** Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action”? YES ( ) explain NO (X) **DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:** Is the AD significan t? YES ( ) explain NO (X) **Regulatory Flexibility Act:** Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? YES ( ) explain NO (X) **Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:** This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is it appropriate to include specific requirements for aircraft operated in Alaska, where aviation might be the only mode of transportation? YES ( ) explain NO (X)
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 quarterly report of Energy Transfer Partners, L.P. (the Partnership) on Form 10-Q
for the quarter ended February 28, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, H. Michael Krimbill, President, 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:



| | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Partnership.
| | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                     |  |                                      
|-------------------- |  | -------------------------------------
|Date: April 10, 2006 |  |                                      
|                     | 
|                     |  | /s/ H. Michael Krimbill              
|                     |  | H. Michael Krimbill                  
|                     |  | President and Chief Financial Officer

---

|* | A signed original of this written statement required by 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 has been provided to and will be retained by Energy Transfer Partners, L.P.
|- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ex10_3.htm


     

    Exhibit 10.3

     


    FIRST AMENDMENT

    TO

    ENERGY
PARTNERS, LTD.

    2006
LONG TERM STOCK INCENTIVE PLAN

     

    The
Energy Partners, Ltd. 2006 Long Term Stock Incentive Plan is hereby amended as
follows:

     

    Subsection
(l) of Section 9 is amended by adding the following at the end
thereof:

     

    “In the
case of any Award that is treated as “deferred compensation” subject to Section
409A of the Code, notwithstanding any provision in an Award Agreement to the
contrary, (i) in the case of any payment under the Award that is to be made upon
a termination of employment or other service, (x) such termination of employment
or other service will be deemed to occur upon the Participant’s “separation from
service” with the employer (within the meaning of Section 409A of the Code and
the regulations thereunder), and (y) if the Participant is on the date of his or
her “separation from service” a “specified employee” (within the meaning of
Section 409A of the Code and the regulations thereunder and as determined by the
Company in accordance with said Section 409A), then with regard to any payment
that is required to be delayed pursuant to Section 409A(a)(2)(B) of the Code,
such payment shall not be made prior to the earlier of (A) the expiration of the
six (6)-month period measured from the date of the Participant’s “separation
from service,” or (B) the date of the Participant’s death (the “Delay Period”);
and, upon the expiration of the Delay Period, all payments delayed pursuant
hereto (whether they would have otherwise been payable in a single sum or in
installments in the absence of such delay) shall be paid to the Participant in a
lump sum, and any remaining payments due under the Award shall be paid in
accordance with the normal payment dates specified for them, and (ii) in the
case of any payment under the Award that is to be made upon a Change of Control,
for this purpose Change of Control shall mean a transaction or event that
constitutes a change in the ownership or effective control of the Company, or in
the ownership of a substantial portion of the assets of the Company, within the
meaning of Section 409A of the Code and the regulations
thereunder.”

     

    


    
      
         

        Dated:
November 13, 2008

        
          	 
      	
                  ENERGY
      PARTNERS, LTD.

                   

                   

                  By:  /s/ John H. Peper        

                          John
      H. Peper

                          Executive
      Vice President, General

                          Counsel
      and Corporate Secretary
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the balance
sheets and statements of operations found on pages 3 through 5 of the Company's
Form 10-QSB for the year to date, and is qualified in its entirety by reference
to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-30-2000
<CASH>                                         271,085
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    2,375
<ALLOWANCES>                                     2,375
<INVENTORY>                                    173,569
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               473,109
<PP&E>                                         435,078
<DEPRECIATION>                                  23,246
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,201,626
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          284,573
<BONDS>                                              0
<COMMON>                                         1,200
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                     590,916
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,201,626
<SALES>                                        572,900
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               572,900
<CGS>                                          126,863
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  126,863
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               237,381
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               7,644
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                201,012
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            201,012
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   201,012
<EPS-BASIC>                                     .017
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     .017

</TABLE>
```

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 133 (Wednesday, July 11, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 40937]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-16938]

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

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 7951]

Notice of Receipt of Application for Presidential Permit for the 
Construction of a New International Trade Crossing (NITC)

    The Department of State hereby gives notice that on June 21, 2012, 
it received an application from the State of Michigan for a permit 
authorizing the construction, operation and maintenance of a new 
international road bridge that would connect Detroit, Wayne County, 
Michigan, and Windsor, Essex County, Ontario, Canada. The proposed 
bridge crossing would span approximately 2,800 feet or 0.53 miles. 
Landing in the Delray area of Detroit, it would include a plaza for 
inspection facilities, and a new interchange with Interstate 75. The 
application was filed by the State of Michigan, which would own the 
U.S. portion of the bridge. The bridge would be constructed, operated, 
and maintained by a new Crossing Authority, a Canadian corporation, 
acting through a concessionaire under a Public Private Partnership 
agreement. Michigan would grant a lease or another property interest to 
the Crossing Authority for these purposes.
    The Department's jurisdiction with respect to this application is 
based upon Executive Order 11423, dated August 16, 1968, as amended, 
and the International Bridge Act of 1972 (Pub. L. 92-343, 86 Stat. 731, 
approved September 26, 1972). As required by E.O. 11423, the Department 
will circulate this application to concerned agencies for comment. 
Under E.O. 11423, the Department has the responsibility to determine, 
taking into account input from these agencies and other stakeholders, 
whether issuance of a Presidential permit for this proposed bridge 
would be in the U.S. national interest.
    Interested members of the public are invited to submit written 
comments regarding this application on or before August 9, 2012 via 
email at NITCComments@state.gov. The Presidential permit application 
can be viewed online at http://www.state.gov/p/wha/rt/permit/.

    Dated: July 5, 2012.
Elizabeth L. Martinez,
Director, Office of Canadian Affairs, Bureau of Western Hemisphere 
Affairs, Department of State.
[FR Doc. 2012-16938 Filed 7-10-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-29-P
```
A01A0613.

#### BOWEN v. THE STATE.

(548 SE2d 494)

Decided May 7, 2001.

Arnold F. Bowen, *pro se.*

*Gerald N. Blaney, Jr., Solicitor-General, Emilien O. Loiselle, Jr., Assistant Solicitor-General,*for appellee.

Johnson, Presiding Judge.

Arnold Bowen appeals from his convictions of two counts of discharging a septic tank without a permit. In one of his enumerations of error, he contends that the trial court erred in denying his motion for discharge and acquittal based on speedy trial grounds. We agree and reverse.

Bowen was issued citations in March 1999. He filed a speedy trial demand on June 24, 1999, which was within the state court’s May term. On appeal, the state concedes that the case should have been tried no later than the court’s July term, which ended on September 13, 1999. The case was not tried, however, until September 20, 1999.

OCGA § 17-7-170 provides that when a person makes a demand for speedy trial, he is entitled to be discharged and acquitted of the offenses charged if he is not tried during the term in which his demand for trial is made or at the next regular term, and there were juries impaneled and qualified to try him at each of those terms.

The state concedes on appeal that the case was impermissibly tried beyond the two-term limit prescribed by the statute. The trial court erred in not discharging and acquitting Bowen. Therefore, the convictions must be reversed.

*Judgments reversed.*

*Ruffin and Ellington, JJ., concur.*
#### TEXAS & N. O. R. CO. v. FORD et al.

No. 3714.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. Beaumont.

Oct. 14, 1940.

K. W. Denman, of Lufkin, and Woodul, Arterbury & Folk, of Houston, for appellant.

*648Collins, Williams, Hatchell & Garrison, of Lufkin, for appellees.

WALKER, Chief Justice.

On the 26th day of September, 1940, this case was regularly submitted on briefs and oral argument. On this the 14th day of October, 1940, the parties, appellant and appellees, have filed an agreement settling all issues in the case and apportioning the damages on the agreed settlement among the minor plaintiffs. All other plaintiffs were denied recovery by the judgment of the lower court, from which they did not perfect their appeal.

The prayer of appellant and appellees that this agreed settlement be approved is hereby granted, and it is ordered that judgment be duly entered as per the agreement on file in this court, duly executed by all parties at interest.
1

VonDemHagen, Rebecca

From: VonDemHagen, Rebecca

Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2014 3:22 PM

To: richardastrust.com

Cc: Sheppard, Margaret; Newberg, Cindy

Subject: RE: EPA email response R443A conference call

Hi Richard,

Your e‐mail has been received.  

Comments on the low‐GWP refrigerants rule must be submitted through regulations.gov to docket EPA‐HQ‐OAR‐2013‐

0748. The comment period is open until Sept. 8. When on the main page for the docket, click “Comment Now!” to

submit comments, as shown below.
2

Regards,

Rebecca von dem Hagen

Stratospheric Protection Division

Office of Atmospheric Programs

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

(202) 343‐9445

vondemhagen.rebecca@epa.gov

From: richardastrust.com [mailto:richardastrust@yahoo.com]  

Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2014 11:18 PM

To: VonDemHagen, Rebecca; Sheppard, Margaret; Newberg, Cindy

Cc: Gary Whitmyre; Pamela Waterman; Andy Tujios; Frank Doyle; ED WUESTHOFF; George Whitmyre; Toshio Endo;

Tazoe Masamoto; Brian Canty; Tim Edwards; Sales; Davis Kert; Steven Mella; Michael Yifeng Chen

Subject: Fw: EPA email response R443A conference call

Rebecca 

During our conference call ( 8/21/14) Margaret had concerns on R443A and the present application we have pending. 

Please see the attached and email me a confirmation that you have received it. 

Thank you 

Richard 

 

Richard Maruya 

phone 808 2351890 fax 808 235 0116 cell 808 5614688 

e mail richard@astrust.com or richard@maruya.net

web site HCR188C http://www.hcr188c.com/

The "CLIMATE FRIENDLY" Refrigerant

 

 

 

 

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE This e-mail may contain confidential or privileged information, if you are not the intended 

recipient, or the person responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, then please notify us by return email immediately. Should you have received this e-mail in error then you should not copy this for any purpose nor disclose 

its contents to any other person.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF IMC MORTGAGE COMPANY FOR THE NINE SIX MONTH PERIOD ENDED
SEPTEMBER 30, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                      11,104,565
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               39,488,914
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                      12,690,598
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,154,887
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                           2,892,116,649
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       303,585
<OTHER-SE>                                 231,774,988
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>             2,892,116,649
<SALES>                                    119,047,738
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           161,922,869
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            98,282,991
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          79,463,382
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             54,118,878
<INCOME-TAX>                                21,000,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         33,118,878
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                33,118,878
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.08
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.08
        

</TABLE>
ex334.htm


    Exhibit
10.4

     

    
 

    
      AMENDMENT TO EXECUTIVE
EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT

       

      This Amendment to Executive Employment
Agreement is executed this 6th day of
November, 2008 by and between Gen2Media Corp. (the Company) and Mary
Spio(Employee).

       

      1.           This
Agreement amends that certain Executive Employment Agreement between the parties
dated May 1, 2008 (the Agreement).

       

      2.           The
Agreement is hereby amended to provide that the base salary of the Employee is
changed to $125,000 per year for the life of the Agreement. This increase shall
be effective as of November 1, 2008, and shall be paid beginning with the
November 15 paycheck.

       

      3.           The
Agreement is further amended to provide that the Incentive Bonus provided in
paragraph 3(b) thereof is eliminated, and there shall no longer be a cash bonus
provision in the Agreement.

       

      4.           In
consideration of this Amendment, Employee hereby forgives any and all past
salaries or other compensation due him from prior services rendered to the
Company.

       

      5.           Other
than as specifically amended hereby, all other terms and provisions of the
Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.

       

      Wherefore, this Agreement is entered
into this 6th day of
November, 2008.

       

       

      
        
          
            
              
                
                  
                    
                      
                        
                          	Gen2Media
      Corp.	 	Employee	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	By:	
                                  /s/

                                	 	By:	
                                  /s/
      

                                	 
	 	
                                  Jim
      Byrd, CEO

                                	 	 	Mary Spio