alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Noonan vs. Orton and another.

(Motion to dismiss Appeal.)

*Provisional Remedies*— Appealable *Orders.*

*1. The*remedy formerly procured by an ancillary suit in equity for a discovery, is now granted by an order in the principal cause.

2. Such an order is a *provisional*remedy, and is appealable under sec. 10, cli. 264, Laws of 1860.

APPEAL from the County Court of *Milwaukee*County.

*Jason*Downer, for plaintiff and respondent.

*John J.*Orton, for defendants and appellants.

Lyon, J.

This is a motion made on behalf oi the respondent (the plaintiff) to dismiss the appeal in this action, which appeal is from an order requiring the appellants (defendants) to give him an inspection and copies of certain papers and documents in their possession. The ground of the motion is that such order is not appealable.

Formerly the remedy given by this order was the proper subject-matter of a suit in equity for a discovery. But that method of obtaining a discovery has been abolished, and the one pursued in this case adopted in its place. R. S., ch. 137, secs. 54 and 98. Such discovery is however a *remedy*in a court of justice, the same as it was when decreed in an action therefor brought in a court of equity under the former practice. The change in the mode of obtaining the remedy does not change its character.

Instead of driving a party to his action in equity to obtain the discovery sought, the statute gives him the same relief in a proceeding in the action wherein it is required, and at that stage in the progress of the action where such discovery is needed. The remedy, therefore, is affirmative relief given when the exigencies of the case require it, and it is a remedy outside of and beyond those ordinary proceedings in an action *387which relate merely to matters of practice and procedure, or which rest entirely in the discretion of the court. Such being the character of the remedy given by the order appealed from, it seems very clear that the same is a *provisional*remedy.

It is conceded by counsel for the respondent, and, doubtless, is correctly conceded, that orders for arrest and holding to bail, for the delivery of personal property, for the attachment of property, for injunctions, for the appointment of receivers, and for the payment of money into court, are provisional remedies. We are unable to see any difference in principle between such orders and the order appealed from.

The third sub-division of sec. 10, ch. 264, Laws of 1860, gives an appeal from an order which grants a provisional remedy. We are of the opinion that the order appealed from grants a provisional remedy, and is, therefore, appealable.

In the view of the question which we have taken, it becomes unnecessary to decide whether the order involves the merits of the action, and is appealable for that reason, under the 4th sub-division of the section of the statute above cited. The motion to dismiss the appeal, must be denied.

*By the Court.*— Motion denied.
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

GUSTAVO VALENCIA, 

 Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

 State.

§

§

§

§

§

No. 08-16-00165-CR

Appeal from the

168th District Court

of El Paso County, Texas 

(TC# 20140D05521)

O R D E R

The clerk’s record filed in this appeal does not include a certification of the defendant’s 

right to appeal. Consequently, on October 27, 2016, the Court entered an order for the trial court 

to enter a certification of the Appellant’s right to appeal as required by Rule 25.2(d) of the Texas 

Rules of Appellate Procedure. See Cortez v. State, 420 S.W.3d 803 (Tex.Crim.App. 2013)(when 

a certification of the right to appeal has not been entered, courts of appeals are required to order 

trial court to prepare and file the certification rather than dismiss the appeal). A supplemental 

record containing the certification was due to be filed in this Court by November 26, 2016. The 

El Paso County District Clerk has informed the Court that the supplemental record could not be 

filed because the certification has not been filed. 

The trial court’s certification of the Appellant’s right to appeal is required in order for this 

appeal to continue. Further, this Court is required to ensure that the trial courts comply with the 

requirements of Rule 25.2(d). Accordingly, the Court, on its own motion, extends the time for 

filing the certification to December 30, 2016. Further, we abate the appeal and remand the cause 

to the trial court for preparation and filing of the certification. The trial court is ORDERED to 

prepare and file a certification of the Appellant’s right to appeal with the El Paso County District 

1
Clerk. The certification form is included as Appendix D to the Texas Rules of Appellate 

Procedure and the form is available on the Eighth Court of Appeals’ website for the convenience 

of the parties and the trial court. In the event the trial court is unable to obtain the signature of the 

Appellant on the certification, the trial court is directed to prepare and file the certification without 

the Appellant’s signature. The Court will take steps to ensure that Appellant is informed of his 

right to file a pro se petition for discretionary review.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 30th day of November, 2016.

PER CURIAM

Before McClure, C.J., Rodriguez and Hughes, JJ.

2
# C_2016089EN.01000501.xml

| 5.3.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 89/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.3.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 89/5

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

4 March 2016

(2016/C 89/06)

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,0970 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 124,77 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4609 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,77483 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,3345 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,0898 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 9,3830 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 27,058 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 309,31 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,3313 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,4663 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 3,2027 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,4859 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,4717 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 8,5192 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,6223 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,5150 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 319,78 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 17,1275 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 7,1480 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,5940 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 14 409,10 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,5100 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 51,325 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 80,1674 |
| THB | Thai baht | 38,823 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 4,0834 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 19,5613 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 73,5910 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,0970

JPY

Japanese yen

124,77

DKK

Danish krone

7,4609

GBP

Pound sterling

0,77483

SEK

Swedish krona

9,3345

CHF

Swiss franc

1,0898

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

9,3830

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

27,058

HUF

Hungarian forint

309,31

PLN

Polish zloty

4,3313

RON

Romanian leu

4,4663

TRY

Turkish lira

3,2027

AUD

Australian dollar

1,4859

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,4717

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

8,5192

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,6223

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,5150

KRW

South Korean won

1 319,78

ZAR

South African rand

17,1275

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

7,1480

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,5940

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

14 409,10

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,5100

PHP

Philippine peso

51,325

RUB

Russian rouble

80,1674

THB

Thai baht

38,823

BRL

Brazilian real

4,0834

MXN

Mexican peso

19,5613

INR

Indian rupee

73,5910

---

(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

1

Source

---
ex10-1.htm


Exhibit 10.1










Digital Angel Corporation


490 Villaume Avenue


South St. Paul, MN 55075-2443 U.S.A


651-445-1621 Facsimile: 651-455-0217


www.digitalangel.com


 

 


July 14, 2011







Ms. Lorraine Breece







Dear Lorraine:







As we have discussed, with the impending sale of the Destron Fearing subsidiary, Digital Angel will enter a period of final divestment of its remaining subsidiaries and ultimately enter a wind-down stage.  We will continue to be public company during this period with all business actions intended to maximize the value we can return to our shareholders.  With concurrence of our Board of Directors and subject to closing of the Destron Fearing sale, I am pleased to offer you the position of Chief Financial Officer (CFO) of the company


 


Your start date would be as mutually agreed between us, but we have tentatively agreed that August 1, 2011 would be agreeable.  Your position will be fulfilled on a virtual basis, with your primary location being your home office.  Travel may be required from time to time.


 


Your annual salary will be $140,000 per year.  You will be eligible for a bonus based on achievement of specific goals and objectives.   We agree that the specific bonus parameters will be determined between us, subject to Board approval, during the first quarter of 2012.







As a full time employee, you will participate in all other benefit plans that may be generally available to Company employees, including health and medical insurance benefits, and two-weeks of annual paid vacation.  We will also reimburse to you usual business expenses in accordance with company policies.







This offer is not a contract or guarantee of employment or employment terms.  At present, we anticipate that the company will require your services for approximately 18 months, but this is an estimate only.  You will not be eligible for severance benefits upon termination of your employment, but we agree that we will provide you not less than 90 days prior notice of termination in the event we desire to terminate your employment for any reason.







Finally, to avoid any confusion – in light of your prior employment history with the company – all terms of your employment are set forth in this letter.  No prior employment conditions that may have been specifically applicable to you in your former role are carried forward, and your employment, as outlined in this letter, has no impact on any amounts still owed to you for bonuses and severance payments under the terms of your previous employment with the company.


 


If you agree to accept this offer of employment on the terms set forth herein, please sign below and return this letter to me or to Pat Petersen.  Welcome back to Digital Angel!







Yours sincerely,







/s/ Joseph Grillo


Joseph Grillo


President and CEO




 







I accept the terms and conditions set forth in this offer of employment.












Signature: /s/ Lorraine Breece


         Lorraine Breece







Date:  July 14, 2011
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT THERON SPEIGHTS, ) ) Appellant, ) ) v. ) Case No. 2D17-3955 ) STATE OF FLORIDA, ) ) Appellee. ) ___________________________________) Opinion filed February 21, 2018. Appeal pursuant to Fla. R. App. P. 9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for Pinellas County; Frank Quesada, Judge.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See Speights v. State, 202 So. 3d 420 (Fla. 2d DCA 2016) (table decision); McDonald v. State, 133 So. 3d 530 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013); Doby v. State, 25 So. 3d 598 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009); Hughes v. State, 22 So. 3d 132 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009); Speights v. State, 11 So. 3d 953 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009) (table decision); Valdez-Garcia v. State, 965 So. 2d 318 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007); Henry v. State, 933 So. 2d 28 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006); Steward v. State, 931 So. 2d 133 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006); Shortridge v. State, 884 So. 2d 321 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004); Speights v. State, 875 So. 2d 620 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004) (table decision); Brown v. State, 827 So. 2d 1054 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002); Harris v. State,- 2 -

777 So. 2d 994 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000); Harris v. State, 789 So. 2d 1114 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001).

KHOUZAM, BLACK, and ROTHSTEIN-YOUAKIM, JJ., Concur.
(logo)ERNST & YOUNG LLP            One Jackson Place         Phone: 601.948.6600
                                   Suite 400                 Fax:   601.353.7246
                                   188 East Capitol Street
                                   Jackson, Mississippi 39201-2157



         Report of Independent Accountants on Management's Assertion on
          Compliance with Minimum Servicing Standards Set Forth in the
            UNIFORM SINGLE ATTESTATION PROGRAM FOR MORTGAGE BANKERS



The Board of Directors
Cimarron Mortgage Company
and
President
Federal National Mortgage Association



We have examined  management's  assertion that Cimarron  Mortgage  Company ("the
Company")  complied  with  the  minimum  servicing  standards  set  forth in the
Mortgage Bankers Association of America's UNIFORM SINGLE ATTESTATION PROGRAM FOR
MORTGAGE BANKERS (USAP) during the year ended December 31, 1996, included in the
accompanying  report title REPORT OF MANAGEMENT.  Management is responsible  for
Cimarron   Mortgage   Company's   compliance   with  those   requirements.   Our
responsibility  is to express an opinion  on  management's  assertion  about the
Company's compliance based on our examination.


Our  examination  was  made in  accordance  with  standards  established  by the
American  Institute of Certified Public Accountants and,  accordingly,  included
examining,  on a test basis,  evidence about the Company's compliance with those
requirements and performing such other procedures as we considered  necessary in
the circumstances.  We believe that our examination  provides a reasonable basis
for our opinion.  Our examination does not provide a legal  determination on the
Company's compliance with specified requirements.


In our  opinion,  management's  assertion  that the  Company  complied  with the
aforementioned  during the year ended December 31, 1996 is fairly stated, in all
material respects.

                                                            /s/Ernst & Young LLP

March 7, 1997

       Ernst & Young LLP is a member of Ernst & Young International, Ltd.
IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-16-00395-CR

SHAUN FITZPATRICK,

Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee

From the 361st District Court

Brazos County, Texas

Trial Court No. 13-02709-CRF-361

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Shaun Fitzpatrick appeals the trial court’s judgment of conviction which he 

contends was signed on May 4, 2016. Fitzpatrick was required to file a notice of appeal 

within 30 days of the date he was sentenced in open court. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.2(a)(1). 

His notice of appeal filed by the trial court on November 21, 2016 is untimely. We have 

no jurisdiction of an untimely appeal, and this appeal must be dismissed. Olivo v. State, 

918 S.W.2d 519, 522 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996) (no appellate jurisdiction where notice of 
Fitzpatrick v. State Page 2

appeal is untimely).1 

Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed. 2

TOM GRAY

Chief Justice

Before Chief Justice Gray,

Justice Davis, and

Justice Scoggins

Appeal dismissed

Opinion delivered and filed November 30, 2016

Do not publish

[CR25]

 

1 Another notice of appeal of the same conviction sent to us by Fitzpatrick in October of 2016 was also 

dismissed as untimely. See Fitzpatrick v. State, No. 10-16-00341-CR, 2016 Tex. App. LEXIS 11578 (Tex. 

App.—Waco Oct. 26, 2016, no pet.). Because the first notice of appeal, received directly from Fitzpatrick, 

stated the crime was indecency with a “minor” and because the second notice of appeal, received from the 

district clerk, stated the crime was indecency with a “child” and because the second notice of appeal was 

received after the Court’s opinion issued, it initially appeared the second notice of appeal was prepared 

and filed in response to the earlier issued opinion. Upon further review, it may be that the notice of appeal 

initially received by the Court was intended as a manually prepared copy of the notice of appeal sent to 

the district clerk and then forwarded to us. Nevertheless, because the description of the crime in each 

notice of appeal was different, it caused the Court to conclude the notice of appeal should be separately 

docketed. 

2 A motion for rehearing may be filed within 15 days after the judgment of this Court is rendered. See TEX.

R. APP. P. 49.1. If the appellant desires to have the decision of this Court reviewed by filing a petition for 

discretionary review, that petition must be filed with the Court of Criminal Appeals within 30 days after 

either the day this Court’s judgment was rendered or the day the last timely motion for rehearing was 

overruled by this Court. See TEX. R. APP. P. 68.2(a).
##### 



Exhibit 10. 44
 [ * ] denotes confidential information omitted and filed separately with the Securities and
Exchange Commission pursuant to a request for confidential treatment under Rule 24b-2 under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
  M E M O R A N D U M
 To:
    
    Martin SpiessFrom:
    
    David ZuckerDate:
    
    April 20, 2007Re:
    
    Your Personal 2007 Sales Incentive Bonus Plan
  Bonus Calculation
 Net Sales is
    
    
    
    Bonus Percentage is[ * ]
    
    
    
    [ * ]If
    
    [ * ]
    
    then
    
    [ * ][ * ]
    
    
    
    [ * ][ * ]
    
    
    
    [ * ]
        [ * ] denotes confidential information omitted and filed separately with the Securities and
Exchange Commission pursuant to a request for confidential treatment under Rule 24b-2 under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.




---



##### 



Payment of Bonus
 Eligibility
      Entire Agreement
   Accepted and agreed:
    
    /s/ Martin SpiessMartin Spiess
 Dated:
    
    4/23/07
 [ * ] denotes confidential information omitted and filed separately with the Securities and
Exchange Commission pursuant to a request for confidential treatment under Rule 24b-2 under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
/ 

·-

REF ID:A71264 • 

CIGl.f •85 

0..J"P leU Sou,. laeol"poNt.ecl 

'99' Of tiae Box )JS 

9'.-ri.ll• 4.- InclSu1 

OaU-ns 

20 Jam&a17 1948 

Ia replJ t.o ;your 1-t.t.er or 13 JamaaJ7 191.8, t.hia At.ency ha• n.U.ed 

the pl.au of your S-ll TNOk t7pe O.m and. find t.hat t.M7 do not, tulf'!U 

all OU' requi!'e!Mnt•• 

Tour court.taq 1n tonal'ding thi• 1nt4'1"SAt.ion 1• appr.c1:.t.ed .W t.he 

•peeUS.atiou an beiq .... oailable t9 oU.J" Di•l•iona •t \be .Agem7 

h&Yiq •:lllilar pnblma. 

A. SIROY 

Ctde.f 1 leelll'!\f DiYia1on 

@'pp roved for Release bv NSA on 06-03-2014 pursuant to E .0. 1352\3 
REF ID:A71264 

4...,., Seourl\7 Agency CSOAMS 

The Pent.agon 

Waania&toa 2s, "· c. 

Attn1 Mr. A. Sinko'V 

IV AtiSVlLU: 4, D!»IAIA 

Jfll1U&J7 lJ, 19/aB 

Chi.et, SeOUJ"ii1 Divia1on 

Ca.der the dtate of :tove.-:aber lO, 1947 n tonrarded 

a propo•al C01'erin& our S-U TNek '1'1pe O·w.n. 

:lq -.. re~wae"t. that. we be advised what diepoeit.ion 

baa been made ot t.hia proposed mrk. 

/t/ mDlt.li xccu seas, Inc 

~ring .:le;tarl.aent 

---.. ..:L------ -
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 59 (Friday, March 27, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 16512]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-06959]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Transit Administration

[FTA Docket No. FTA-2015-0008]


Special Notice; Correction

AGENCY: Federal Transit Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of Correction.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) published a 30-Day 
Notice of Request for Comments in the Federal Register on March 17, 
2015 entitled; ``49 U.S.C. 5320 Paul S. Sarbanes Transit in Parks 
Program.'' The notice contained an incorrect estimated total annual 
burden on respondents. This document corrects that error.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tia Swain, Office of Administration, 
Office of Management Planning, (202) 366-0354.

Correction

    Estimated Total Annual Burden: 130 hours.

Matthew M. Crouch,
Associate Administrator for Administration.
[FR Doc. 2015-06959 Filed 3-26-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE P
# C_2016342EN.01000102.xml

| 17.9.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 342/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.9.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 342/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.8193 — TEVA/ANDA)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2016/C 342/02)

On 13 September 2016, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in the English language and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

1

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32016M8193. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32016M8193. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

1

---
# C_2015425EN.01001801.xml

| 18.12.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 425/18 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.12.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 425/18

---

New national side of euro coins intended for circulation

(2015/C 425/11)

Image

Euro coins intended for circulation have legal tender status throughout the euro area. For the purpose of informing the public and all parties who handle the coins, the Commission publishes a description of the designs of all new coins (1). In accordance with the Council conclusions of 10 February 2009 (2), euro-area Member States and countries that have concluded a monetary agreement with the European Union providing for the issuing of euro coins are allowed to issue commemorative euro coins intended for circulation, provided that certain conditions are met, particularly that only the 2-euro denomination is used. These coins have the same technical characteristics as other 2-euro coins, but their national face features a commemorative design that is highly symbolic in national or European terms.

1

2

Issuing country
  : Estonia

Issuing country

Subject of commemoration
  : the 100th anniversary of the birth of the famous Estonian chess grandmaster Paul Keres

Subject of commemoration

Description of the design
  : The coin features a portrait of the great Estonian chess player Paul Keres with some chess pieces. At the top left in semi-circle is the inscription ‘PAUL KERES’. At the left side is the name of the issuing country ‘EESTI’ and underneath is the year of issuance ‘2016’.

Description of the design

The coin’s outer ring depicts the 12 stars of the European flag.

Number of coins to be issued
  :

Number of coins to be issued

Date of issue
  : January 2016

Date of issue

---

(1)  See OJ C 373, 28.12.2001, p. 1 for the national faces of all the coins issued in 2002.

1

(2)  See the conclusions of the Economic and Financial Affairs Council of 10 February 2009 and the Commission Recommendation of 19 December 2008 on common guidelines for the national sides and the issuance of euro coins intended for circulation (OJ L 9, 14.1.2009, p. 52).

2

---