alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
## SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 

## Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

1391 CA 12-01134 PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., PERADOTTO, LINDLEY, VALENTINO, AND WHALEN, JJ.

CALVIN BAKER, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,

V ORDER
FRANK MURANO AND DONNA MURANO, DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS.

---------------------------------------- FRANK MURANO AND DONNA MURANO, THIRD-PARTY PLAINTIFFS,

V
WILLIAM PATTON, DOING BUSINESS AS PATTON HOME IMPROVEMENT, THIRD-PARTY DEFENDANT.

SEGAR & SCIORTINO PLLC, ROCHESTER (STEPHEN A. SEGAR OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT.
HISCOCK & BARCLAY, LLP, ROCHESTER (ROBERT M. SHADDOCK OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS.

Appeal from a judgment and order (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Monroe County (John J. Ark, J.), entered December 9, 2011. The judgment and order, insofar as appealed from, denied plaintiff’s motion for partial summary judgment.
Now, upon the stipulation of settlement and discontinuance of action signed by the attorneys for the parties and filed in the Monroe County Clerk’s Office on September 17, 2012,
It is hereby ORDERED that said appeal is unanimously dismissed without costs upon stipulation.

Entered: February 1, 2013 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court
# ZIGINAL

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MOrLOA„„.; AF 06-0216 

### AUG 2 9 2023 Bowen Greenwood Clerk of Supf : rne Court State of Montana IN THE MAITER OF APPOINTMENTS TO THE SUPREME COURT COMMISSION ON TECHNOLOGY ORDER

The terms ofthe Honorable James Jeremiah Shea, Beth McLaughlin, and Bowen Greenwood expired on March 31, 2023. The Court thanks each ofthem for their service tothe Commission,to this Court, and to the people ofMontana. IT IS ORDERED that the Honorable James Jeremiah Shea, Beth McLaughlin, and Bowen Greenwood are hereby reappointed to the Commission for terms expiring March 31, 2026. The Clerk is directed to provide copies of this Order to each member of the Commission on Technology, and to the State Bar ofMontana. `1•7^- DATED this
. t day ofAugust, 2023.
ChiefJustice Vl ( g4- ,0 11 4 4 1 L 

# 2 1"m--Justices 08/30/2023

Case Number: AF 06-0216
ex10a.htm
















Exhibit (10)(a)

















Consent of Ernst & Young LLP, Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm












We consent to the reference to our firm under the caption “Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm” in Post-Effective Amendment No. 48 to the 1933 Act Registration Statement (Form N-4 No. 333-35784) pertaining to Lincoln National Variable Annuity Account H, which is incorporated by reference into Post-Effective Amendment No. 49 to the 1933 Act Registration Statement (Form N-4 No. 333-35784) and Amendment No. 369 to the 1940 Act Registration Statement (Form N-4 No. 811-05721), and to the use therein of our reports dated (a) April 1, 2014, with respect to the consolidated financial statements of The Lincoln National Life Insurance Company and (b) April 1, 2014, with respect to the financial statements of Lincoln National Variable Annuity Account H for the registration of interests in a separate account under individual flexible payment deferred variable annuity contracts.












/s/ Ernst & Young LLP











Philadelphia, Pennsylvania


August 22, 2014
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

 OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY 

 WASHINGTON, DC 

 Served: March 3, 2010

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

APPLICATION OF CSI AVIATION SERVICES, INC. 

FOR AN EMERGENCY EXEMPTION 

DOCKET DOT-OST-2009-0311

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

NOTICE 

On February 12, 2010, the Department requested additional information from the General 

Services Administration (GSA) regarding the application of CSI Aviation Services, Inc. for an 

exemption to conduct certain broker services for GSA. On March 1, 2010, GSA responded to 

the Department’s letter. 

To ensure a complete record, we are providing an opportunity for interested parties to submit 

comments to GSA’s submission. Such comments shall be submitted no later than Friday, 

March 5, 2010. Given the extensive record already present and the public interest in resolution, 

we would not be favorably disposed to receiving additional pleadings beyond that date. 

We will serve this notice by electronic mail on all parties to this proceeding, and hereby 

authorize service of documents by facsimile and by electronic mail. 

This action was effective when taken and the filing of a petition for review will not alter such 

effectiveness. 

By: 

 PAUL L. GRETCH 

Director, Office of International Aviation 

(SEAL) 

Dated: March 3, 2010

An electronic version of this notice is available on the World Wide Web at: 

http://www.regulations.gov
**UN PUBLISHED**  UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 13**  **- 1508** 

RONALD SATISH EMRIT; NICOLE ROCIO LEAL

- MENDZ , Plaintiffs

- Appellants ,
v. CHEAP

- O

- AIR; HOTEL ALISIOS BAVARO , Defendants

- Appellees
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland , at Greenbelt
. Paul W. Grimm , District Judge. ( 8:13

- cv - 00803

- PWG )

Submitted : July 18, 2013 Decided: July 22, 2013

Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and SHEDD , Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion
.
Ronald Satish Emrit; Nicole Rocio Leal

- Mendz, Appellants Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Ronald Satish Emrit and Nicole Rocio Leal

- Mendz appeal the dist rict court’s order dismissing their civil complaint . We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district
court. Emrit v. Cheap

- O

- Air , No. 8:13

- cv - 00803

- PWG (D. Md. Apr. 1, 2013) . We di spense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional
process.

AFFIRMED
Exhibit 32.1  Certification (Section 906)

                        CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                         18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                         AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
             SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


I am the Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer of
EZJR, Inc., a Nevada corporation (the "Company").  I am delivering this
certificate in connection with the Form 10-Q/A of the Company for the
quarter ended December 31, 2009 and filed with the U. S. Securities and
Exchange Commission ("Form 10-Q/A").

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I hereby certify that, to the best of my knowledge,
the amended Form 10-Q/A fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the
information contained in the amended Form 10-Q/A fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.


   /s/ T J Jesky
----------------------------------
       T J Jesky
Its:   Principal Executive Officer
       Principal Financial Officer

Date  September 17, 2010
      ------------------
# C_2012288EN.01000101.xml

| 25.9.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 288/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.9.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 288/1

---

COUNCIL DECISION

of 24 September 2012

appointing one member of the Management Board of the European Chemicals Agency

2012/C 288/01

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH), establishing a European Chemicals Agency (1), and in particular Article 79 thereof,

1

Whereas:

| (1) | Article 79 of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 provides that the Council is to appoint as Members of the Management Board of the European Chemicals Agency (‘the Management Board’) one representative from each Member State. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Article 79 of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 provides that the Council is to appoint as Members of the Management Board of the European Chemicals Agency (‘the Management Board’) one representative from each Member State.

| (2) | By Decision of 17 May 2011 (2) the Council appointed 15 members of the Management Board, including one from Belgium. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

By Decision of 17 May 2011 (2) the Council appointed 15 members of the Management Board, including one from Belgium.

2

| (3) | The Belgian Government has informed the Council of its intention to replace the Belgian representative on the Management Board and has submitted a nomination for a new representative, who should be appointed for a period which runs until 31 May 2015, |
| --- | --- |

(3)

The Belgian Government has informed the Council of its intention to replace the Belgian representative on the Management Board and has submitted a nomination for a new representative, who should be appointed for a period which runs until 31 May 2015,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

Mr Jean Roger DRÈZE of Belgian nationality, born on 6 June 1951, shall be appointed member of the Management Board of the European Chemicals Agency in place of Mr Helmut DE VOS for the period from 25 September 2012 to 31 May 2015.

Article 2

This Decision shall enter into force on the day of its adoption.

Done at Brussels, 24 September 2012.

For the Council

The President

S. ALETRARIS

---

(1)  OJ L 396, 30.12.2006, p. 1.

1

(2)  OJ C 151, 21.5.2011, p. 1.

2

---
Exhibit
32.1
 
 
 CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO
 SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT 0F 2002
 
 In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Mountain West Business Solutions, Inc.
(the Company") amendment number 2 on Form 10-QSB/A for the period
ended herein as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
"Report"), I. Matthew Milonas, Chief Executive and Chief Financial Officer of
the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to
ss.906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, t hat:
 
 (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 fully presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations or the Company.
 
 
 Date:June 12,
      2008
              By:
              /s/Matthew
      MilonasMatthew
      Milonas
                Chief
      Executive Officer
                Chief
      Financial Officer
Order entered November 19, 2013

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-12-00999-CR

ISAIAH SIMPSON, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 7

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F09-53864-Y

ORDER

Before the Court are Appellant’s Objection to Supplemental Clerk’s Record filed on June 

14, 2013, and Objection to the Third Supplemental Clerk’s Record filed on November 6, 2013. 

We OVERRULE the objections.

/s/ JIM MOSELEY

JUSTICE
----

|                                           |   |   |   |   |
|------------------------------------------------|--------|--------|--------|--------|
| July 2010                                      |   | $      | 4,800  |   |
| August 2010                                    |   | $      | 24,600 |   |
| September 2010                                 |   | $      | 39,400 |   |
| October 2010                                   |   | $      | 33,871 |   |
| November 2010                                  |   | $      | 13,162 |   |
| December 2010                                  |   | $      | 38,648 |   |
| January 2011                                   |   | $      | 30,772 |   |
| February 2011                                  |   | $      | 13,882 |   |
| March 2011       |   | $      | 26,798 |   |
| April 2011                      |   | $      | -0-    |   |
#### Mullen, Respondent, vs. City of Madison, Appellant.

*June 8*

July *1, 1948.*

*Harold E. Hanson,*city attorney, *Alton S. Heassler,*assistant city attorney, and *Francis Lamb,*special counsel, for the appellant.

For the respondent there was a brief by *Harris & Brandt*of Madison, and oral argument by *Albert E.*Brandt:,

Per Curiam.*

This case was argued and submitted with the case of *Blooming Grove v. Madison, ante,*p. 215, 33 N. W. (2d) 312, and is ruled by the decision therein.

Judgment affirmed.

* The opinion in this case was prepared by the late Mr. Justice Barlow.
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C.  SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF TEHE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, Tony Harrison, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report of SKREEM Records Corp. on Form 10-QSB for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2007 fully complies with the requirements of Section

13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Form 10-QSB fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of SKREEM Records Corp.



|             |                                      
|------------ | -------------------------------------
|By:          | /s/ Tony Harrison                    
|Name:        | Tony Harrison
Chief Executive Officer
|Title:      
|             |                                      
|May 16, 2008
Order entered October 22, 2014

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-14-00216-CR

NATHAN EARL BURGESS, Appellant

V.

STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 1

Collin County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 001-86625-2012

ORDER

The Court ORDERS the trial court to conduct a hearing to determine why appellant’s 

brief has not been filed. In this regard, the trial court shall make appropriate findings and 

recommendations and determine whether appellant desires to prosecute the appeal, whether 

appellant is indigent, or if not indigent, whether retained counsel has abandoned the appeal. See

TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(b). If the trial court cannot obtain appellant’s presence at the hearing, the 

trial court shall conduct the hearing in appellant’s absence. See Meza v. State, 742 S.W.2d 708 

(Tex. App.–Corpus Christi 1987, no pet.) (per curiam). If appellant is indigent, the trial court is 

ORDERED to take such measures as may be necessary to assure effective representation, which 

may include appointment of new counsel.
We ORDER the trial court to transmit a record of the proceedings, which shall include 

written findings and recommendations, to this Court within THIRTY DAYS of the date of this 

order.

This appeal is ABATED to allow the trial court to comply with the above order. The 

appeal shall be reinstated thirty days from the date of this order or when the findings are 

received, whichever is earlier.

/s/ ADA BROWN 

JUSTICE
<PAGE>   1
                                                                EXHIBIT 10.22(C)


____________________, 2001



Mr. Brock A. Hattox


Dear Brock:

         This letter will confirm several matters relating to your employment
arrangements with National Service Industries, Inc. ("NSI") which were recently
approved by NSI. The additional benefits described below are effective July 24,
2001.

         Supplemental Retirement Plan for Executives (SERP) - Appendix E to the
SERP covering you will be amended to provide that if you terminate employment on
or after attaining age 55 (a) you will be eligible for Early Retirement under
the SERP and your benefits will be determined as if you had completed an
additional 5 years of service (not to exceed 20 years total) and (b) you will be
treated as if you were 5 years older (not to exceed age 65). A revised Appendix
E to reflect such changes is attached.

         Stock Options - The agreements evidencing the Stock Options granted to
you in 1996 for _______ shares ("1996 Options") and granted to you in 2000 for
________ shares in exchange for surrendered aspiration awards ("2000 Options")
will be amended (a) to add provisions for continuing vesting and exercisability
if you terminate employment after age 55 which are similar to the provisions in
the agreements for the regular option grants to executive officers made in 1998
and later years and (b) to amend the 2000 Options to provide that they will be
exercisable until the earlier of 5 years from the date of termination or the end
of the remaining exercise term (rather than the later of seven years from the
grant date or 5 years from termination). The agreements evidencing the
amendments of the options will be forwarded to you shortly.

         As you are aware, effective _________, 2001, NSI is spinning-off its
lighting and chemicals businesses which are currently held in L&C Spinco, Inc.
("Spinco"), and certain executives of NSI, including yourself, will become
executives of Spinco. Pursuant to an Employee Benefits Agreement between NSI and
Spinco, the obligations set forth in this letter will be transferred to, and
assumed by, Spinco and its plans.

         Please confirm your acceptance of the terms of this letter by signing
and dating the additional enclosed copy of this letter and returning it to the
undersigned.

                                               Sincerely,

                                               NATIONAL SERVICE INDUSTRIES, INC.


                                               By:
                                                  ------------------------------


<PAGE>   2


Mr. Brock A. Hattox
______________, 2001
Page 2



Accepted and Agreed to
this ___ day of _________, 2001




---------------------------
Brock A. Hattox
# L_2012027EN.01001101.xml

| 31.1.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 27/11 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

31.1.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 27/11

---

COUNCIL DECISION 2012/50/CFSP

of 27 January 2012

amending Decision 2011/72/CFSP concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities in view of the situation in Tunisia

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Article 29 thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | On 31 January 2011, the Council adopted Decision 2011/72/CFSP (1). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

On 31 January 2011, the Council adopted Decision 2011/72/CFSP (1).

| (2) | On the basis of a review of Decision 2011/72/CFSP, the restrictive measures should be extended until 31 January 2013. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

On the basis of a review of Decision 2011/72/CFSP, the restrictive measures should be extended until 31 January 2013.

| (3) | Decision 2011/72/CFSP should be amended accordingly, |
| --- | --- |

(3)

Decision 2011/72/CFSP should be amended accordingly,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

Article 5 of Decision 2011/72/CFSP is replaced by the following:

‘Article 5

This Decision shall apply until 31 January 2013. It shall be kept under constant review. It may be renewed or amended, as appropriate, if the Council deems that its objectives have not been met.’.

Article 2

This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.

Done at Brussels, 27 January 2012.

For the Council

The President

N. WAMMEN

---

(1)  
  OJ L 28, 2.2.2011, p. 62.

1

---
# L_2016266EN.01000701.xml

| 30.9.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 266/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.9.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 266/7

---

Corrigendum to Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2011 on the provision of food information to consumers, amending Regulations (EC) No 1924/2006 and (EC) No 1925/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council, and repealing Commission Directive 87/250/EEC, Council Directive 90/496/EEC, Commission Directive 1999/10/EC, Directive 2000/13/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, Commission Directives 2002/67/EC and 2008/5/EC and Commission Regulation (EC) No 608/2004

(
  Official Journal of the European Union L 304 of 22 November 2011
  )

On page 48, Annex VI, Part A, point 7, indication in Spanish:

for:

‘in Spanish: “combinado de piezas de carne” and “combinado de piezas de pescado”;’,

read:

‘in Spanish: “elaborado a partir de piezas de carne” and “elaborado a partir de piezas de pescado”;’;

on page 49, Annex VI, Part A, point 7, indication in Slovak:

for:

‘in Slovak: “spájané alebo formované mäso” and “spájané alebo formované ryby”;’,

read:

‘in Slovak: “zo spájaných kúskov mäsa” and “zo spájaných kúskov ryby”;’.

---
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 21-7497

ARONTE DARNESIO JARVIS,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

HAROLD W. CLARKE, Director of the Virginia Department of Corrections,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at 

Norfolk. Arenda L. Wright Allen, District Judge. (2:20-cv-00424-AWA-LRL)

Submitted: February 17, 2022 Decided: February 23, 2022

Before AGEE and RUSHING, Circuit Judges, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Aronte Darnesio Jarvis, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 21-7497 Doc: 11 Filed: 02/23/2022 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

Aronte Darnesio Jarvis seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the 

recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing as untimely Jarvis’ 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2254 petition. See Gonzalez v. Thaler, 565 U.S. 134, 148 & n.9 (2012) (explaining that 

§ 2254 petitions are subject to one-year statute of limitations, running from latest of four 

commencement dates enumerated in 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1)). The order is not appealable 

unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2253(c)(1)(A). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing 

of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). When, as here, the district 

court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the 

dispositive procedural ruling is debatable and that the petition states a debatable claim of 

the denial of a constitutional right. Gonzalez, 565 U.S. at 140-41 (citing Slack v. McDaniel, 

529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000)).

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Jarvis has not made 

the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the 

appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are 

adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the 

decisional process. 

DISMISSED

USCA4 Appeal: 21-7497 Doc: 11 Filed: 02/23/2022 Pg: 2 of 2