alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### SCHENK v. STATE.

(No. 12537.)

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

May 8, 1929.

O. M. Wylie, of Archer City, for appellant.

A. A. Dawson, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

LATTIMORE, J.

Conviction for manufacturing intoxicating liquor; punishment, one year in the penitentiary.

The appellant pleaded guilty and made application for suspended sentence. The jury returned a verdict in accordance with his plea, fixing the penalty at one year’s confinement in the penitentiary, but declined to suspend the sentence. Appellant’s motion for new trial set up that, after their retirement, the jury received other testimony. /The court heard testimony at the time the motion for new trial was presented. Same is preserved in a statement of facts. Erom same we learn that, while some of the witnesses swore on the trial of the main case that appellant lived at home with and helped his mother, other witnesses swore that his mother was well fixed and did not need his help. Though seemingly not relevant to the issue of appellant’s good reputation or prior freedom from crime or criminal conviction, this testimony put into the case the issue of .the need of appellant’s help by his mother, and this matter became properly debatable in the jury room.

Some of the jurors said it was mentioned in the jury room that appellant’s brothers were law violators; a greater number of the jurors, however, affirmed that such fact was not mentioned nor discussed. The question as to whether there was other testimony received by the jury in their retirement thus became an issue for the decision of the trial court. What was he to do? The two points presented, viz. that it was improper for the jury to discuss the question of appellant’s mother’s financial condition- and her need of his help, and of the alleged discussion of the character of appellant’s brothers and their troubles, were for the court’s decision. The first of these questions being germane to evidence before the court on the main trial, the discussion was not improper. In regard to-the second of said questions, the preponderance of the testimony was against the contention that such testimony was received, or such discussion had by the jury while in their -retirement. We are unable to- believe .the-court abused his discretion in deciding the motion for new trial against appellant.

No error appearing, the’judgment will be-affirmed.
*Pursuant to 5

TH CIR. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that this opinion should not

be published and is not precedent except underthe limited circumstancessetforth in 5

TH

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

 

1

 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-60532

Summary Calendar

LARRY NORWOOD,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

INGALLS SHIPBUILDING, INC.,

Defendant-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Mississippi

(1:97-CV-177)

March 8, 1999

Before POLITZ, BARKSDALE, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Larry Norwood appealsthe adverse grant ofsummary judgment in his action

claiming violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act1 and various state law

claims. 

The district court granted summary judgment to Ingalls Shipbuilding, Inc.,

finding that Norwood was not “substantially limited in a major life activity”

because he could perform welding for other employers and that Norwood was not
 

2

 International Shortstop, Inc. v. Rally’s, Inc., 939 F.2d 1257 (5th Cir. 1991).

 

3

 Dorsett v. Board of Trustees for State Colleges & Univs., 940 F.2d 121 (5th Cir.

1991).

 

4

 Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242 (1986).

2

a “qualified individual with a disability” because he could not perform the essential

duties of a welder for Ingalls. The district court also found that Ingalls did not

regard Norwood as being disabled and that Norwood’s state law claims were

preempted by federal law.

On appeal of a summary judgment our review of the record is plenary2 and

we apply the same standard as that used by the district court.3 We view the

evidence in the light most favorable to the non-movant and if we find no genuine

dispute of a material fact, deem summary judgment appropriate.4

Our review of the record and briefs discloses no reversible error in the grant

ofsummary judgment to Ingalls. Accordingly, on the facts as found, the authorities

cited, and analysis made by the district court in its Memorandum Opinion granting

Ingalls’ motion for summary judgment signed July 27, 1998 and filed July 28,

1998, the judgment appealed is AFFIRMED. Ingalls’ motion to strike plaintiff’s

brief or to dismiss the appeal is DENIED.
EX-35.1


(logo)Deutsche Bank

1761 East St. Andrew Place
Santa Ana, CA 92705-4934

Tel 714 247 6000
Fax 714 247 6009

ANNUAL STATEMENT AS TO COMPLIANCE

The undersigned, David Co, a Director of Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas,
as the Certificate Administrator (a "Certifying Servicer") under the Pooling
and Servicing Agreement, dated as of October 1, 2012 (the "Agreement"), by and
among, Deutsche Mortgage & Asset Receiving Corporation, as Depositor, Wells
Fargo Bank, National Association, as Master Servicer, Midland Loan Services, a
Division of PNC Bank, National Association, as Special Servicer, U.S. Bank
National Association, as Trustee, Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as
Certificate Administrator, Paying Agent and Custodian, and Situs Holdings, LLC,
as Operating Advisor, here by certifies in accordance with Section 10.11 of the
Agreement:

A)  A review of such Certifying Servicer's activities during the preceding
calendar year (the "Reporting Period") and of such Certifying Servicer's
performance under the Agreement has been made under such officer's supervision
and

B) That, as to the best of such officer's knowledge, based on such review, such
Certifying Servicer has fulfilled all its obligations under the Agreement, in
all material respects during the Reporting Period.

DEUTSCHE BANK TRUST COMPANY AMERICAS
as Certificate Administrator

/s/ David Co
BY: David Co
Title: Director
Date: March 1, 2014
# Official Journal L 279/2020

| | ISSN 1977-0677 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 279 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 6327 August 2020 |

ISSN 1977-0677

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 279

English edition

Legislation

Volume 6327 August 2020

---

| Contents | | II   Non-legislative acts | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | REGULATIONS |
| | * | Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/1221 of 26 August 2020 fixing the import duties in the cereals sector applicable from 27 August 2020 | 1 |
| | | DECISIONS |
| | * | Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2020/1222 of 24 August 2020 on the approval of efficient vehicle exterior lighting using light emitting diodes as an innovative technology for reducing CO2 emissions from internal combustion engine powered light commercial vehicles with regard to NEDC conditions pursuant to Regulation (EU) 2019/631 of the European Parliament and of the Council (
  1
  ) | 5 |
| | | RULES OF PROCEDURE |
| | * | Decision No 64 of the Management Board of the European Asylum Support Office of 6 July 2020 on internal rules concerning restrictions of certain rights of data subjects in relation to the processing of personal data in the framework of the functioning of EASO | 15 |

Contents

II   Non-legislative acts

page

REGULATIONS

*

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/1221 of 26 August 2020 fixing the import duties in the cereals sector applicable from 27 August 2020

1

DECISIONS

*

Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2020/1222 of 24 August 2020 on the approval of efficient vehicle exterior lighting using light emitting diodes as an innovative technology for reducing CO2 emissions from internal combustion engine powered light commercial vehicles with regard to NEDC conditions pursuant to Regulation (EU) 2019/631 of the European Parliament and of the Council (
  1
  )

2

1

5

RULES OF PROCEDURE

*

Decision No 64 of the Management Board of the European Asylum Support Office of 6 July 2020 on internal rules concerning restrictions of certain rights of data subjects in relation to the processing of personal data in the framework of the functioning of EASO

15

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance. |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance.

| EN | Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.
  The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
| --- | --- |

EN

Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.

The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk.
I 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3516 

To amend the Social Security Act relating to the use of determinations 

made by the Commissioner. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

SEPTEMBER 16, 2015 

Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas (for himself, Mr. BRADY of Texas, Ms. JENKINS

of Kansas, Mr. SMITH of Missouri, Mr. COLE, Mr. TIBERI, Mrs. BLACK, 

Mr. KELLY of Pennsylvania, Mr. YOUNG of Indiana, Mr. ROSKAM, Mr. 

SMITH of Nebraska, Mr. REED, and Mr. BOUSTANY) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To amend the Social Security Act relating to the use of 

determinations made by the Commissioner. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Social Security Bene5 ficiary 2nd Amendment Rights Protection Act’’. 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3516 IH

1 SEC. 2. USE OF DETERMINATIONS MADE BY THE COMMIS2 SIONER. 

3 (a) TITLE II.—Section 205(j) of the Social Security 

4 Act (42 U.S.C. 405(j)) is amended by adding at the end 

5 the following: 

6 ‘‘(11) No determination by the Commissioner of So7 cial Security with respect to an individual, including a de8 termination that benefits under this title to which such 

9 individual is entitled shall be paid to a representative 

10 payee, shall be considered to be a determination that the 

11 individual has been adjudicated as a mental defective for 

12 purposes of subsections (d)(4) and (g)(4) of section 922 

13 of title 18, United States Code.’’. 

14 (b) TITLE XVI.—Section 1631(a)(2) of such Act (42 

15 U.S.C. 1383(a)(2)) is amended by adding at the end the 

16 following: 

17 ‘‘(J) No determination by the Commissioner of Social 

18 Security with respect to an individual, including a deter19 mination that benefits under this title to which such indi20 vidual is entitled shall be paid to a representative payee, 

21 shall be considered to be a determination that the indi22 vidual has been adjudicated as a mental defective for pur23 poses of subsections (d)(4) and (g)(4) of section 922 of 

24 title 18, United States Code.’’. 

Æ 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
**September 20,2013** **NO.04-I3-Q0555-CV DKNVHR** **IfNHRGY HXPI.ORA** **ION. LLC,** **Appellant v.** 

### INTERNATIONAL**SERVICES, INC..** **Appellee From** **the County** **Court at** **Law No.** **5. Bcxar** **Count}-. Texas** 

## Trial**Court No.** **380,714 Honorable** **Irene Rios. Judge** **Presiding ORDER** **After reviewing** **the parties'** **addendums to** **the Civil** **Docketing Statement** **in ilie** **above numbered** **and styled** **appeal, this** **court has** **determined that** **this dispute** **is appropriate** **for referral** **io an** **Alternative Dispute** **Resolution (AI)R)** **procedure. See** **Tex. Civ.** **Prac. Ri.m.** **Codk 154.021** **(Vernon 2005).** **All further** **communications with** **this court** **by the** **parlies regarding** **ADR shall** **be directed** **to the** **Clerk of** **the Court** **for any** **assistance in** **the mediation** **process. All** **parlies are** **ORDERED to** **respond in** **writing by** **slating: (1** **(the name,** **address, and** **fee schedule** **of the** **mediator of** **their choice; or** **(2) that** **they cannot** **agree on** **mediator, in** **which ease** **the court** **will appoint** **one; or** **(3) any** **objection lo** **mediation and** **the reasons** **for such** **objection. See** **id 154.022** **(b). Provided** **the parties** **submit to** **mediation, this** **court will** **issue an** **order suspending** **all appellate** **deadlines for** **forty-five (45)** **days in** **order that** **the parlies** **may concentrate** **on the** **scheduling and** **completion of** **the mediation** **process. Is** **it so** **ORDERED on** **September 20.** **2013.**

# W//yJjJLlt**Sandee Bryan** **M^ion, Justice** **F, have** **hereunto set** **my hand** **and affixed** **the seal** **oi the** **said**
SHARE

# J. Scott Branham

              -  Fact Sheets 
              -  Timeline of ORNL Science 
              -  Leadership Team 
              -  Interactive Map 
              -  Diversity 
              -  Organization 
              -  Who we are, aren't 
              -  Community Engagement 
              -  History 
              -  Honors and Awards 
              -  Environmental Protection 
              -  Quality (ISO9001) 
              -  Research Integrity 
              -  Working at ORNL 

J. Scott Branham

## Director Business Services

As Chief Financial Officer of Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), Mr. Branham leads the Laboratory's Business Services Directorate, with responsibility for directing the ORNL budgeting process and business management functions and delivering relevant and reliable financial analysis and reporting. The directorate's functions include procurement, accounting, business analysis, business systems, pension and savings operations, small business contracting, and prime contract administration. Mr. Branham also serves as Chief Financial Officer for UT-Battelle, LLC.

Mr. Branham earned a B.S. in business administration and accounting from Concord College (now Concord University) in Athens, West Virginia, and an M.B.A. in finance from Auburn University in Auburn, Alabama. He is also a Certified Public Accountant. He joined UT-Battelle in 2000 after serving as the chief audit officer for Oak Ridge Associated Universities and as an auditor for the Department of Energy's Office of Inspector General. Until April 2011, he led ORNL's Audit and Oversight Directorate.

Mr. Branham serves on the boards of the East Tennessee Institute of Internal Auditors and the local unit of the American Red Cross. He was previously the communications representative on the DOE Contractor Internal Audit Directors Steering Committee. He has also served on the DOE Steering Committee for Quality Auditing, including a term as co-chair, and on various committees with the Tennessee Society of Certified Public Accountants and the American Cancer Society.
United States 

Office of 

Personnel Management 

The Federal Government’s Human Resources Agency

Benefits Administration Letter 

Number: 06-402 Date: August 7, 2006 

Subject: FEHB Open Season 2006 Rider Information

Attached is the August 2006 FEHB Open Season Rider. Your agency also should receive the 

rider through regular printing officer channels. Agencies may order the publications on the 

attached list by riding the U.S. Office of Personnel Management's requisition. Field and regional 

offices should submit your requirements to your department or agency Washington, DC, area 

headquarters printing office before the September 8, 2006, cutoff date. The headquarters office 

must submit the consolidated requisitions to the U.S. Government Printing Office (GPO) by 

COB September 8, 2006. In order to provide products to our customers on a timely basis, this 

cutoff date will not be extended. Products will be shipped to agency distribution points 

beginning October 16. 

If you are the headquarters agency and you do not know which customer service team at GPO is 

assigned to your agency, please call GPO on (202) 512-0111 or use the following link for 

information: http://www.gpo.gov/customerservices/aps.htm. 

Note: Field and regional offices with questions regarding submitting requisitions to their agency 

printing officer should contact their agency headquarters Benefits Officer. Please follow the link 

for a directory of headquarters level agency benefits officers: http://apps.opm.gov/abo/.

 Robert F. Danbeck 

 Associate Director 

 Human Resources Products and Services Division 

Attachment
This memorandum is uncorrected and subject to revision before

publication in the New York Reports.

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

No. 101 SSM 3

Nancy Cruz,

 Respondent,

 v.

Bronx Lebanon Hospital Center,

 Appellant.

Submitted by Caryn L. Lilling, for appellant.

Submitted by Blake G. Goldfarb, for respondent.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules,

order affirmed, with costs. The Appellate Division correctly

determined that legally sufficient evidence supported the jury's

finding that defendant had constructive notice of the alleged

defect. Chief Judge DiFiore and Judges Pigott, Rivera, Stein,

Fahey and Garcia concur. Judge Abdus-Salaam took no part.

Decided March 24, 2016
| (logo) Prudential

  | Prudential Asset Resources,  Inc.

  

**Prudential Mortgage  Capital Company**

2100 Ross Avenue, Suite 2500  Dallas, TX 75201

Tel 877-937-4500

  |
|---------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

Wells Fargo Bank, NationalAssociation

Commercial Mortgage Servicing

MAC D1086

550 South Tryon Street, 14thFloor

Charlotte, North Carolina28202

Attention: Asset Manager

 

 

RE:**RBS 2012-C9**

Period:**January 1, 2016to December 31, 2016 (the “Reporting Period")**

 

**Annual Compliance Statement**

 

I, Timothy E. Steward, in mycapacity as President and Managing Director of Prudential Asset Resources, Inc.(the "Company") hereby certify with regard to the Company's role asPrimary Servicer under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement, (the"Agreement") dated as of October 1, 2012 pertaining to theabove-referenced certificates, that:

 

(i) a review of the activitiesof the Company under the Agreement during the period noted above, and of theperformance of the Company under the Agreement during the reporting period hasbeen made under my supervision, and

 

(ii) to the best of myknowledge, based on such review, the Company has fulfilled all its obligationsunder the Agreement throughout the reporting period.

 

 

Effective as of 2/22/2017

 

/s/ Timothy E. Steward

Timothy E. Steward

President and ManagingDirector

Prudential Asset Resources,Inc.
Exhibit 32   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 R New Ventures, Inc.(the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Joseph Nemelka, Chief Executive Officer and Principal 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:  (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 result of operations of the Company.   August 12, 2008/s/ Joseph NemelkaJoseph NemelkaChief Executive OfficerPrincipal Financial Officer
Mr. Dennis DeVany Chief Essential Air Service Division Office ofAviation Analysis Department ofTransportation 1200 NewJerseyAvenue SE, Washington,**D~C.** 205go Reference; DOT-OST-2009-0300, Alpena, MichiganAir Service Dear Mr. DeVany,

I am a native ofAlpena, Michigan and lived there until age 22 when I graduated from college. I moved to Southern California one year later in 

### 1968, married and have lived here ever since. Overthe last 44years, I have had the good fortune to spend summervacations in Alpena
...travelling alone orwith my husband and subsequently with ourthree children. Alpena has much to offerwith its natural beauty, resources and its friendly people. It is a beautiful spot to enjoy water sports, summer activities, clean air and pristine, well-maintained highways, beautiful greenery, but most ofall it has been a haven to enjoy myfamily. When I learned thatthere would no longer be flights into Alpena, I was saddened and angry. While we can fly into Detroit, Saginaw orTraverse City, the drive to Alpena (even though it is scenic) from these

_**citi~s** is no!**~a~y_.** It often means additional time and hassle to rent a car and an added travel expense_. There have been many enticing tv commercials touting the state as PURE Michigan in an attemptto lure people there to visit orto reside. Yet, gettingto northern Michigan destinations will be even more difficult ifthe airlines are notservicing the very places they are touting. As an example, Traverse City, even though it is smallerthan Alpena, has more tourism than Alpena because ofairline service and the Interstate Highway, 75, from the south. Alpena is the largest city in Michigan north of Bay City. It certainly serves a significant population base to warrant a first class commuter airline. Susan Anderson
#### ROBBINS v. ROBBINS.

No. 13680.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. Fort Worth.

May 7, 1937.

Oscar Reed, of Fort Worth, for appellant.

Homer L. Baughman, of Fort Worth, for appellee.

BROWN, Justice.

This is an appeal from an order overruling a motion to dissolve a temporary injunction issued by the trial court, in an action for divorce,- pending.

A hearing was had on such motion, but no statement of facts was brought before us in aid of the appeal.

There arc two assignments of error. The first asserts that the trial court committed fundamental error in refusing to-grant the motion to dissolve, because the material allegations of the petition “are without exception legal conclusions, and wholly fail to show the existence of facts entitling the plaintiff to a temporary injunction.”

With this conclusion, we cannot agree.

As we view the petition, it contains, material allegations of facts which, if true, gave the trial court ample authority to grant the temporary injunction.

There being no statement of facts, before us, we must treat the judgment as. amply supported by the material facts *407alleged. We cannot say that the allegation of material facts .presents ' a mere conclusion of law, because it is possible that the facts cannot be established by evidence.

The second assignment of error asserts that the trial court erred in its ruling because the plaintiff’s petition discloses that she has “an adequate and accessible legal remedy.”

Article 4636, R.C.S., provides that: “Pending suit for a divorce the court, or the judge thereof, may make such temporary orders respecting the property and parties as shall be deemed necessary and equitable.”

That the right to grant a temporary injunction follows this statute will not be denied. 15 Tex.Jur. p. 513, par. 57.

And the right exists even where it is made to appear that the party has an adequate remedy at law. Hunt v. Hunt (Tex.Civ.App.) 215 S.W. 228.

Under the allegations of appellee’s petition, she has no adequate remedy at law, but be that as it may, the trial court’s order granting the injunction comes clearly within the authority vested in the court by the quoted statute.

It follows that the judgment of the trial court must be affirmed, and it is so ordered.