alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Argued and submitted April 28,

affirmed June 16,

reconsideration denied September 15,

petition for review denied November 30, 1993 (318 Or 98)

#### STATE OF OREGON, *Respondent, v.*GEORGE SCOTT TANNER, *Appellant.*

(90C-21505, 90C-21506, 90C-21507; CA A74936 (Control), A74937, A74938) (Cases Consolidated)

854 P2d 941

Mary M. Reese, Deputy Public Defender, Salem, argued the cause for appellant. With her on the brief was Sally L. Avera, Public Defender, Salem.

Timothy A. Sylwester, Assistant Attorney General, Salem, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief were Theodore R. Kulongoski, Attorney General, and Virginia L. Linder, Solicitor General, Salem.

Before Deits, Presiding Judge, and Riggs and Durham, Judges.

DEITS, P. J.

*106DEITS, P. J.

Defendant was convicted of three counts of burglary in the first degree. ORS 164.225. He appeals from the consecutive sentences imposed and the sentencing court’s determination of the length of his sentences using a criminal history score of “E” and not “I,” in violation of OAR 253-12-020(2)(a)(b). We conclude that we lack authority to review the claim of error and affirm.

Through negotiations with the state, defendant agreed to a stipulated facts trial on the three counts of burglary in the first degree, and the state agreed not to indict defendant on other uncharged burglaries. As part of the agreement, defendant also agreed to admit liability for both the charged and uncharged burglaries at sentencing for purposes of setting restitution. There were no other sentencing recommendations in the plea agreement.

In *State v. Adams,*315 Or 359, 847 P2d 397 (1993), the Supreme Court held that ORS 138.222(2)(d) precludes appellate review of a sentence resulting from a plea agreement. We have since held, based on *Adams,*that when a defendant and the state agree that the defendant will plead guilty and that the state will make a recommendation as to the length of incarceration, the sentence “results from” the plea agreement, and ORS 138.222(2)(d) precludes our review of the sentence. *State v. Johnston,*120 Or App 165, 851 P2d 1156 (1993). We have also held that when the state and a defendant agree that the defendant will plead guilty and the state will make no recommendation as to the length of the sentence, the sentence also “results from” the plea agreement, and we are precluded from reviewing the sentence. *State v. Kilborn,*120 Or App 462, 852 P2d 935 (1993).

This case presents yet another form of a plea agreement. Here, in exchange for the state’s agreement not to indict defendant on other uncharged burglaries, he agreed to the stipulated facts trial and agreed to admit to liability for the charged and uncharged burglaries at sentencing for purposes of setting restitution. Following the reasoning of *State v. Adams, supra, State v. Johnston, supra,*and *State v'. Kilborn, supra,*defendant’s sentence “resulted from” the *107negotiated agreement with the state, and we are precluded from reviewing it under ORS 138.222(2)(d).

Affirmed.
```

[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 161 (Friday, October 3, 2008)]
[House]
[Page H10701]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                      ANNOUNCEMENT BY THE SPEAKER

  The Chair will entertain up to five requests for 1-minute speeches on 
each side of the aisle.

                          ____________________
```
S. 439

One Hundred Sixth Congress

of the

United States of America

AT THE SECOND SESSION

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Monday,

the twenty-fourth day of January, two thousand

An Act

To amend the National Forest and Public Lands of Nevada Enhancement Act

of 1988 to adjust the boundary of the Toiyabe National Forest, Nevada, and

to amend chapter 55 of title 5, United States Code, to authorize equal overtime

pay provisions for all Federal employees engaged in wildland fire suppression

operations.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of

the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. ADJUSTMENT OF BOUNDARY OF THE TOIYABE NATIONAL

FOREST, NEVADA.

Section 4(a) of the National Forest and Public Lands of Nevada

Enhancement Act of 1988 (102 Stat. 2750) is amended—

(1) by striking ‘‘Effective’’ and inserting ‘‘(1) Effective’’;

and

(2) by adding at the end the following:

‘‘(2) Effective on the date of enactment of this paragraph, the

portion of the land transferred to the Secretary of Agriculture

under paragraph (1) situated between the lines marked ‘Old Forest

Boundary’ and ‘Revised National Forest Boundary’ on the map

entitled ‘Nevada Interchange ‘‘A’’, Change 1’, and dated September

16, 1998, is transferred to the Secretary of the Interior.’’.

SEC. 2. OVERTIME PAY FOR CERTAIN FIREFIGHTERS.

(a) IN GENERAL.—Section 5542(a) of title 5, United States Code,

is amended by adding at the end the following:

‘‘(5) Notwithstanding paragraphs (1) and (2), for an

employee of the Department of the Interior or the United

States Forest Service in the Department of Agriculture engaged

in emergency wildland fire suppression activities, the overtime

hourly rate of pay is an amount equal to one and one-half

times the hourly rate of basic pay of the employee, and all

that amount is premium pay.’’.
S. 439—2

(b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by this section

shall take effect on the first day of the first applicable pay period

beginning on or after the end of the 30-day period beginning on

the date of the enactment of this Act, and shall apply only to

funds appropriated after the date of the enactment of this Act.

Speaker of the House of Representatives.

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
EXHIBIT 32(a)


CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
 AS ADDED BY
 SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In connection with the Quarterly Report of Provident Community Bancshares, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Dwight V. Neese, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as added by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





(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 Company as of and for the period covered by the Report.





/s/ Dwight V. NeeseDwight V. NeesePresident and Chief Executive Officer


Date: November 10, 2010
UNITED STAT ES DIS TRICT COURT F OR THE DIS TRICT OF COLUM BIA

____________________________________) DANTE MORRIS, ) ) P etitioner , ) ) v. ) Civ. Ac tion No. 11-0549 (ESH) ) F EDERAL ACQUISITI ON ) P OLICY DIVISION, ) ) Respondent. ) ____________________________________) MEMORAN DUM Petitioner, a prisoner

at the F eder al Corre ctional Institut ion in Fort Dix, New J erse y , seeks a writ of habeas corpus , but he has na med the wr ongresponde nt and has filed in the wrong court. “ The writ[ ] or order to show c ause [why the writ should not be grante d] shall be directed to the person having c ustody of the pe rson detaine d.” 28 U.S.C. § 2243. Furthe rmore, " a district court may not enterta in a habe as petition involving pre sent phy sical custody unless the responde nt custodian is within it s territorial jurisdiction.” Stokes v . U.S. Parole Comm’n , 374 F.3d 1235, 1239 ( D.C. Cir. 2004); see Roone y v. Se c’y of Army , 405 F.3d 1029, 1032 ( D.C. Cir. 2005) (ha beas “ jurisdiction is proper only in the district in which the immediate . . . custodian is located" ) (inter

nal citations and quotation marks omitted). The F eder al Acquisition Poli cy Division is nota prope r habe as re spondent, and petitioner’s re course lies, if at all, in the United States District Court for the District of Ne w J erse y . Acc ording ly , this action will be dismis sed. A sepa rate order acc ompanies this Memorandum. /s/ EL L EN SEGAL

HUVELL E DATE: Mar ch 21, 2011 United States District J udg e
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> UT
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM FORM 10-K
FOR SEPTEMBER 30, 2000 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000003146
<NAME> ALABAMA GAS CORPORATION
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<BOOK-VALUE>                                  PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                      355,007
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                        241
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                         111,488
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                         4,546
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 471,282
<COMMON>                                            20
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                       34,484
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                            164,767
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>                 199,271
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                           115,000
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                              20,500
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                            0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                       0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                    4,650
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                            0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                          0
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                     0
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>                 131,861
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>                  471,282
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                      366,161
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                            14,324
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                     317,098
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                     331,422
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                         34,739
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                               1,453
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                  36,192
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                         9,870
<NET-INCOME>                                    26,322
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                          0
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                   26,322
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                         5,057
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                        8,542
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                          28,745
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0<F1>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0<F1>
<FN>
<F1>EARNINGS PER SHARE IS CALCULATED FOR ENERGEN CORPORATION (PARENT COMPANY OF
ALABAMA GAS CORPORATION) AND IS NOT CALCULATED FOR ALABAMA GAS CORPORATION AS
AMOUNT WOULD NOT BE MEANINGFUL
</FN>


</TABLE>
BRIAN QUINN

Chief Justice

PATRICK A. PIRTLE

Justice

JUDY C. PARKER

Justice

Court of Appeals

Seventh District of Texas

Potter County Courts Building

501 S. Fillmore, Suite 2-A

Amarillo, Texas 79101-2449

www.txcourts.gov/7thcoa.aspx

VIVIAN LONG

Clerk

MAILING ADDRESS:

P. O. Box 9540

79105-9540

(806) 342-2650

November 7, 2019

Eric Coats

Attorney at Law

1716 South Polk Street

Amarillo, TX 79102

* DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL *

Jawone O'Neal Lee Riles

TDCJ-ID #02257072

Fort Stockton Unit

1536 IH-10 East

Fort Stockton, TX 79735

Warren L. Clark

Assistant Criminal District Attorney

Randall County Justice Center

2309 Russell Long Boulevard, Suite 120

Canyon, TX 79015

* DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL *

RE: Case Number: 07-19-00153-CR, 07-19-00154-CR;

Trial Court Case Number: 27,687-B, 28,575-B

Style: Jawone ONeal Lee Riles v. The State of Texas

Dear Counsel and Mr. Riles:

The Court this day issued an opinion and judgment in the captioned cause. TEX. R. APP.

P. 48. 

In addition, pursuant to Texas Government Code, Sec. 51.204(b)(2), exhibits on file with

this Court, if any, will be destroyed three years after final disposition of the case or at an earlier

date if ordered by the Court. 

Very truly yours,

Vivian Long

VIVIAN LONG, CLERK

xc: Honorable John B. Board (DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL)

Joel Forbis (DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL)

FILE COPY
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 21.1

                           K-Tron International, Inc.
                              List of Subsidiaries*

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                          State or Jurisdiction
Name of Subsidiary                                                        of Incorporation
------------------                                                        ----------------
<S>                                                                        <C>
K-Tron Investment Co .............................................         Delaware
        K-Tron Sales Corporation .................................         Barbados
        Hurricane Pneumatic Conveying Inc ........................         Canada
        K-Tron America, Inc ......................................         Delaware
                      Colormax Limited ...........................         England
        K-Tron (Schweiz) AG ......................................         Switzerland
                 K-Tron Asia Pacific Holding Pte Ltd .............         Singapore
                           K-Tron Asia Pacific Pte ...............         Singapore
                 K-Tron China Ltd ................................         China
                 K-Tron Deutschland GmbH .........................         Germany
                 K-Tron France S.a.r.l ...........................         France
                 K-Tron Great Britain Ltd. .......................         England
K-Tron Technologies, Inc. ........................................         Delaware
</TABLE>

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

*       Pursuant to applicable Securities and Exchange Commission regulations,
        the Registrant has omitted those subsidiaries which when considered in
        the aggregate as a single subsidiary, would not have been considered a
        significant subsidiary as of the end of fiscal year 2000.
### THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13

- 14

- 00053

- CR

JORGE MARTINEZ

v. THE STATE OF TEXAS

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No 1 of Nueces County , Texas

Trial Cause No. 2013

- 5253

- 2

JUDGMENT THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this ca use on appeal, concludes the appeal should be dismissed. The Court orders the appeal
DISMISSED in accordance with its opinion

. We further order this decision certified below for observance. August 7, 2014
<PAGE>   1


                                EXHIBIT 10(X)

                   AMENDMENT TO 1994 LONG-TERM INCENTIVE PLAN



     RESOLVED, that Section 6.7 of the AM International, Inc. 1994 Long Term
Incentive Plan is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows:

        6.7 Adjustment.  In the event of any stock split, stock dividend,
recapitalization, reorganization, merger, consolidation, combination, exchange
of shares, liquidation, spin-off or other similar change in capitalization or
event, or any distribution to holders of Common Stock other than a regular cash
dividend, the number and class of securities available under this Plan, the
number and class of securities subject  to each outstanding option and the
purchase price per security, the number of securities subject to each option to
be granted to Non-Employee Directors pursuant to Article V, the terms of each
outstanding SAR, the number and class of securities subject to each outstanding
Stock Award, and the terms of each outstanding Performance Share shall be
appropriately  adjusted by the Committee, such adjustments to be made in the
case of outstanding options and SARS without an increase in the aggregate
purchase price or base price.  If any such adjustment would result in a
fractional security being available under this Plan or subject to a grant under
this Plan, such fractional security shall be disregarded.








                                      1
attestationh2491.htm


Back to Form 8-K


Exhibit 10.13


 







Medicare Advantage Attestation of Benefit Plan 


 


WELLCARE HEALTH INSURANCE OF ARIZONA, INC.


 





H2491







 


I attest that I have examined the Plan Benefit Packages (PBPs) identified below and that the benefits identified in the PBPs are those that the above-stated organization will make available to eligible beneficiaries in the approved service area during program year 2011. I further attest that we have reviewed the bid pricing tools (BPTs) with the certifying actuary and have determined them to be consistent with the PBPs being attested to here.







 


I further attest that these benefits will be offered in accordance with all applicable Medicare program authorizing statutes and regulations and program guidance that CMS has issued to date and will issue during the remainder of 2010 and 2011, including but not limited to, the 2011 Call Letter, the 2011 Solicitations for New Contract Applicants, the Medicare Prescription Drug Benefit Manual, the Medicare Managed Care Manual, and the CMS memoranda issued through the Health Plan Management System (HPMS).


 







	
Plan 


ID 

	
  Segment 


ID

	Version	Plan Name	
Plan 


Type

	
Transaction 


Type

	
MA 


Premium

	Part D Premium	CMS Approval Date	
Effective 


Date


	
001

	
0

	
7

	
'Ohana Reserve (HMO-POS)

	
HMOPOS

	
Renewal

	
0.00

	
29.80

	
09/21/2010

	
01/01/2011


	
002

	

0



	
8

	
'Ohana Value (HMO-POS)

	
HMOPOS

	
Renewal

	
0.00

	
0.00

	
09/21/2010

	
 01/01/2011 


	
004

	
0

	
8

	
'Ohana Liberty (HMO-POS SNP)

	
HMOPOS

	
Renewal

	
0.00

	
23.60

	
09/21/2010

	
01/01/2011







 


H2491










  





  











  













 



	Thomas Tran	 	9/2/2010 7:58:15 AM	 
	 	 	 	 
	
 


Contracting Official Name

	 	
 


Date

	 





 




 


 



	
 


 


WELLCARE HEALTH INSURANCE OF ARIZONA , INC.

	 	
8735 Henderson Road


Ren 1


Tampa, FL 33634

	 
	 	 	 	 
	
 


Organization

	 	
 


Address

	 





 


H2491
<PAGE>   1
                                   EXHIBIT 21

                                ALEXANDER'S, INC.

                           SUBSIDIARIES OF REGISTRANT




                  Alexander's of Brooklyn, Inc.
                  Alexander's of Fordham Road, Inc.
                  Alexander's Rego Park Center, Inc.
                  Alexander's of Rego Park, Inc.
                  Alexander's of Rego Park II, Inc.
                  Alexander's of Rego Park III, Inc.
                  Alexander's of Third Avenue, Inc.
                  Alexander's of Flushing, Inc.
                  Alexander's Department Stores of New Jersey, Inc.
                  Alexander's Department Stores of Lexington Avenue, Inc.
                  Alexander's Department Stores of Brooklyn, Inc.
                  U & F Realty Corp.
                  ADMO Realty Corp.
                  Ownreal Inc.
                  Sakraf Wine & Liquor Store, Inc.


                                     -58-
# Retail PricesforElectric Water Heaters l.i9(l ,Sl X 

# I': i'ier Lff' 

# i 1('I^ l('1' Xf('<eirt 

# l'/'/'aI/', I)uh~ !lt(IN(' 5,~60I1:I1-0.9. 50,gall~n 'al' '/' h~,'/'oTS' 

# in,'r'ha.~'~~ (l./i'~,/ 1I ',*.

- I9'9. . I Northwest 

# • CPower Planning 1 

# S--ilCouncil

# Retail Prices forEF-93 50gallon Capacity byWarranty Period

Year 1996 1997 1998 Average Average Average 

# Number Retail Number Retail Number Retail Warranty Period ofUnits Price ofUnits Price ofUnits Price 5

- year 65 $195 177 $170 549 $169 6-year 655 $201 763 $207 876 $186 10

- year 2 $200 94 $237 128 $258 Total\Weighted Avera 722 $200 1034 $203 1553 $186



# P Northwest 2 Power Planning 

# Council

# Average Retail Sales Pricesfor50 gallon, EF-93 ElectricWater Heaters in Eugene, OR 1996- 1998 $300 $250

- ._ .. $200 -. . . 

# $150 5 -year 6 -year 

# 100

- 1-year $50

$0 1996 1997 1998 15

- year $195.26 $169.85 $169.24



# 6-year $200.51 $207.16 $186.17 10 -year $199.50 $236.91 $258.33

# Average Retail Priceof50 gal. EF-0.93 ElectricWater Heaters Sold in Eugene, OR 1993 - 1998 vs. 

# DOE's Estimated Costfor EF-0.89to EF-0.91 $300 $275 $253 $261 

# $250 $240 $225 $219 14 $22 199 $214 $205 $213 $214 v 

## $225 pN=9a
_ $205 

# $200 ^ ----- $195 Go $200 $175 

# i $150 $125 

# $100

$75 

# $50 $25

$0 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 DOE-EF907 DOE-EF889 DOE-EF898 (N=79) (N=966) (N=770) (N=898) (N=1094) (N=1553) (245) (H20) (H20)Summary of Retail Prices Paid forElectricWater Heaters with50 Gallons rated capacity Purchased in Eugene,OR from 1993through 1998 Source: Eugene Water &Electric Board, Energy Services Department Data Base
1998 Capacity EF -91 EF-92 EF-93 EF-94 EF-95 Total 50 Count 1553 136 1689 Average Retail Price $186 $188 $186 Minimum Retail Price $100 $100 $100 Maximum Retail Price _$795 _$507 $795 1997 Capacity EF -91 EF-92 EF-93 EF-94 EF-95 Total 50 Count 1094 0 80 1174

____ Average Retail Price $203 $0 $221 $204

___ Minimum Retail Price ______$139 $0 $136 $136 Maximum Retail Price _$750 s$0 $490 $750 1996 Capacity

_ EF- 91 EF-92 EF-93 EF-94 EF-95 Total 50 Count ____1 898 1 87 989 Average Retail Price $130 $200 $170 $237 $203 Minimum Retail Price _$130 $141 $170 $120 $120 _Maximum Retail Price I $130 $596 $170 $516 $596 1995 Capacity EF -91 EF-92 EF-93 EF-94 EF-95 Total 50 Count 1 1 770 85 858 Average Retail Price $340 $164 $188 _$240 $193 Minimum Retail Price $340 $164 $150 _$154 $150 Maximum Retail Price $340 $164 $720

_ $525 $720 1994 Capacity _EF -91 EF-92 EF-93 EF-94 EF-95 Total 50 Count 966 1 126 1093 Average Retail Price $191 $325 $233 $196 Minimum Retail Price $128 $325 $143 $128 Maximum Retail Price ___$540 $325 $460 $540 1993 Capacity _____|

__ EF -91 EF-92 EF-93 EF-94 EF-95 Total 50 Count ___79_ 5 84 Average Retail Price ___$191 $176 $190 Minimum Retail Price

___ $166 $163 $163 Maximum Retail Price $292 $188 $292