alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Tamar JACKSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D17-3655

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[March 15, 2018]

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

*Affirmed.*
Vice Admiral Kelly Aeschbach Commander, Naval Information Forces Vice Adm. Kelly Aeschbach assumed command of Naval Information Forces (NAVIFOR) in May 2021. NAVIFOR is the Type Commander for all Naval Information Warfare Forces.

   Vice Adm. Aeschbach previously served as the Commander, Office of Naval Intelligence and Director, National Maritime Intelligence-Integration Office.  Her other Flag Officer assignments include Director of Intelligence, U.S. Strategic Command, in Omaha, Neb., and Deputy Director of Intelligence at Headquarters, Resolute Support, Afghanistan.  From 2013 to 2015, she was Commanding Officer for Naval Computer and Telecommunications Area Master Station Atlantic in Norfolk, Va.

   Her operational assignments include Patrol Squadron (VP) SIX with deployments to Adak, Alaska and Okinawa, Japan, and Amphibious Squadron ONE where she deployed to the Western Pacific and the Arabian Gulf.  She also served with Carrier Strike Group NINE and took part in Operation *Enduring Freedom*. Vice Adm. Aeschbach’s ashore assignments include Joint Intelligence Center Pacific in Aiea, Hawaii; Tactical Training Group Pacific in San Diego, Calif.; Naval Personnel Command in Millington, Tenn.; U.S. Naval Forces Europe in London; U.S. Special Operations Command in Tampa, Fla.; a Military Fellow at the Office of the Director of National Intelligence in McLean, Va.; the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations Staff at the Pentagon; and Naval Information Forces in Suffolk, Va. Vice Adm. Aeschbach is a 1990 graduate of George Washington University.  She received her commission through the Naval Reserve Officers Training Corps and was designated as a Naval Intelligence Officer.  She holds a Master of Business Administration from San Diego State University.
Mr. Dennis DeVany Chief. Essential Air Service Division • OHice ofAviation Analysis

DepartmentofTransportation 1200NewJerseyAvenue, SE Washington, DC 20590 July24, 2012

Re: Essential Air Service at Adak, Alaska, DOT-OST-2000-8556

- Proposal of Alaska Airlines, Inc·. Dear Mr. DeVany: Alaska Airlines, Inc. ("Alaska") respectfully submits its proposal to continue, for a one year period, providing twice weekly B-737 nonstop combi service between the community of Adak and Anchorage. The days and nature ofthe proposed operation would be the same as Alaska now operates. The compensation level Alaska requests is $1,675,703 the same amount Alaska has been receiving since August 2012 based on Alaska's 2009-10 costs. 1 Alaska proposes that this rate become effective as ofthe date ofthe Department's final carrier selection for Adak essential air service. Alaska's proposal would offer the residents ofAdak the best combination ofpassenger, freight and mail service. Alaska's B-737 combi aircrafthavethe capacityto easily accommodate all three types oftra1Tic including palletized cargo shipments. The arrival and departure ofall tra1Tic on the same aircraH would avoid the operational uncertainties inevitably associated with the operation of separate smaller combination and all-cargo aircraft on different days. The selection ofAlaska would also offer the residents ofAdak single carrier access to virtually the entire U.S. as well as mileage benefits on the extensive route systems ofboth Alaska and its many global marketing partners. Alaska's operational performance at Adak has also been exemplary in spite of the challenges posed by the Aleutian weather conditions. And, perhaps most importantly, Alaska has maintained strong community relations with the Adak community which in the past has supported Alaska in each successive Adak essential air service proceeding. Alaska is hopeful that the Adakcommunity will again do so.

1 This amount is less than the $2.023 million hold-in rate approved by the Department. The reduction results tram Alaska's lowerthan earlier anticipated fuel costs.

':l T 

## ..

- '

### Mr.**Denni~D~Yanx..**



### .July24, 2012

-

Page 2 

### '.,. \ ',:...._,_ .


### Alaska is submitting its proposal on a one year basis because it continues to believe that overthe long term the capacityprovided by its existing schedulepatternwith B-737aircraft may not be the best option for Adak, Alaska, however, wants to make quite clear that it remains committed to evaluatingvarious air service solutions that

- again over the long term
- will both favorably address the community's needs while also further lowering the amount of needed essential air service compensation. Alaska also shortly intends to separately submit the nondiscnmination, lobbying compliance and drug-free workplace certifications addressed in the Department's resolicitation. Finally,Alaska'would'be pleasedto answerany questions the Departmentma)r"have
...

cc: Mr. Kevin Adams 

### Re

Mar all S. Sinick AlaskaAirlinesInc. Washington Counsel marshall.sinick@squiresanders.com
Amendment to Severance Agreement between the Registrant and Michael Zuckerman



 Exhibit 10.19 
 AMENDMENT TO SEVERANCE AGREEMENT 
 This AMENDMENT TO SEVERANCE AGREEMENT, dated as of March 4,
2009, modifies the terms and conditions of the SEVERANCE AGREEMENT between I-many, Inc. (the “Company”) and Michael Zuckerman (“Executive”), dated as of March 8, 2007 (the “Agreement”). Capitalized terms used but
not otherwise defined herein shall have the respective meanings ascribed to such terms in the Agreement. Any term or condition of the Agreement in conflict with the terms or conditions of this Amendment shall be deemed to be specifically and
expressly superseded by the provisions hereof. 
 A. In Section 2.1(b)(ii) of the Agreement (“Termination by the Company following
Change in Control—Severance”), the phrase “... severance equal to twelve (12) months ...” is hereby deleted and replaced with “... severance equal to six (6) months ....” 
 B. Change of Control Bonus. 
 1. For all purposes of this Agreement, a “Change in Control” is defined as the consummation of any of the following transactions: (i) any merger or consolidation which results in the voting securities of the Company
outstanding immediately prior thereto representing immediately thereafter (either by remaining outstanding or by being converted into voting securities of the surviving or acquiring entity) less than a majority of the combined voting power of the
voting securities of the Company or such surviving or acquiring entity outstanding immediately after such merger or consolidation; (ii) any sale of all or substantially all of the assets of the Company; or (iii) the complete liquidation of
the Company. 
 2. No later than 60 days following a Change in Control of the Company, the Company shall pay Executive a
lump-sum amount equal to six (6) months of Executive’s annualized base salary (excluding bonuses) in effect as of the date of the Change in Control, less applicable deductions and withholdings (the “Change in Control Bonus”). In
the event the Company has terminated Executive’s employment pursuant to subsection 2.1(a)(1), 2.1(a)(2), 2.1(a)(3) or 2.1(a)(4) above within 90 days before the consummation of a Change in Control, Executive shall be entitled to the Change in
Control Bonus notwithstanding such employment termination, provided Executive has signed a general release of claims against the Company substantially in the form of the agreement and general release attached at Exhibit A (except that Executive
shall not be required to release the Company from claims for payment of the Change in Control Bonus before it has been paid). 
 C. All other
terms of the Agreement shall remain unmodified by this Amendment. 
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, each of the parties has caused this Amendment to be
executed in duplicate originals. 
  

							
	 I-MANY, INC.
	 		  	EXECUTIVE
				
	By:	 	 /s/    JOHN A.
RADE        
	 		  	 /s/    MICHAEL
ZUCKERMAN        

		 	John A. Rade	 		  	Michael Zuckerman
		 	Chief Executive Officer
**Exhibit 23.1**

 

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTEREDPUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

** **

The Board of Directors

Marten Transport, Ltd.:

 

We consent to incorporation by reference in theregistration statements (No. 333-81494, 33-75648 and 333-128168) on Form S-8of Marten Transport, Ltd. of our report dated March 15, 2010, with respectto the consolidated balance sheets of Marten Transport, Ltd. and subsidiariesas of December 31, 2009 and 2008, and the related consolidated statementsof operations, cash flows, and changes in stockholders’ equity for each of theyears in the three-year period ended December 31, 2009, the relatedfinancial statement schedule, and the effectiveness of internal control overfinancial reporting as of December 31, 2009, which appears in the December 31,2009 annual report on Form 10-K of Marten Transport, Ltd.

 

Our report on the consolidated financial statements ofthe Company and the related financial statement schedule refers to the Company’sadoption of FASB Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 160, “NoncontrollingInterests in Consolidated Financial Statements — an amendment of ARB 51,” (FASBASC 810-10-65-1, “Consolidation”) in 2009.

 
|   | /s/ KPMG LLP |
|--------|--------------|

 

Minneapolis,Minnesota

March 15, 2010

 

----
exv10w5







Exhibit 10.5




Annual Compensation of Non-Employee Directors




	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	2009	 	 	2008	 	 	2007	 
	Name/Position	 	Retainer	 	 	Retainer	 	 	Retainer	 
	 
	J. Randolph Babbitt, Non-Employee Director
	 	$	36,000	 	 	$	36,000	 	 	$	36,000	 
	Thomas M. Kody, Non-Employee Director
	 	$	36,000	 	 	$	36,000	 	 	$	36,000	 
	John W. Edgemond IV, Non-Employee Director
	 	$	36,000	 	 	$	36,000	 	 	$	36,000	 
	James L. Jadlos, Non-Employee Director
	 	$	36,000	 	 	$	36,000	 	 	$	36,000	 






The Non-Employee Directors will be paid the 2009 retainer in quarterly installments in the month
following the end of each fiscal quarter.
#### Dent *v.*Adkisson.

4-2847

Opinion delivered February 6, 1933.

*Patterson*i& *Patterson*and *George F. Hartje,*for appellant.

*It. W. Robins,*for appellee.

H'ümphReys, J.

This is a continuation of a foreclosure proceeding brought and tried in the chancery court of Faulkner County, and is the second appeal of the cause by appellant. Eeference is made to the case of *Dent*v. *Adkisson,*184 Ark. 869, 43 S. W. (2d) 739, for a full statement of the cause of action and all the proceedings had and done therein, including the directions of this court to the trial court upon a reversal of the original decree of confirmation of sale. On remand of the cause, the trial court set aside the confirmation of the sale and overruled the demurrer to the petition; whereupon appellee filed an answer to the petition denying each material allegation thereof and tried the cause upon the testimony adduced by the parties responsive to the issues joined, resulting in a denial of the petition and a rendition of a decree confirming the sale, from which is this appeal.

Appellants are not tendering the amount of the judgment, interest and costs but are standing upon the allegations of their petition in an effort to set aside the sale in order that the lands may be sold again, and that too, without any assurance that it will sell for more than it did at the first sale.

*913After a very careful reading of the testimony, we are unable to say that the lands sold for a grossly inadequate sum or that appellants were prevented from paying off the judgment through the fraudulent practices of appellee. In fact, there is no substantial evidence in the record tending to sustain these allegations in the petition. The decided weight- of the testimony is to the contrary. It would extend this opinion to unusual length should we set out herein the substance of the evidence of each witness, and no useful purpose could be served by doing so, as each subsequent case must be governed by its own peculiar facts.

No error appearing, the decree is affirmed.
V OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT .,,, „ ^ 

U • N Y T :::;rARTMM-Of -

State University of New York ;f,hJ0pO®flrdTj^tM • Canton, NY 13617-1096 • www.canton.edu CANTON " :":^ & OPERATIONS " '"" 

September 2, 2010 

iCI ! 3 A q: I 1 

DR. JOSEPH L. KENNEDY, President 

OFFICE: 315-386-7204 

FAX: 315-386-7934 

president@canton.edu 

Ms. Susan L. Kurland 

Assistant Secretary for Aviation and International Affairs 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Ave, SE 

Washington, DC 20590 

Re: Grant Application for Town of Massena Under the DOT Small Community Air Service 

Development Program: DOCKET DOT-OST-2010-0124 

Dear Ms. Kurland: 

I am writing in support of the application filed by the Town of Massena to market Essential 

Air Service at the Massena International Airport. I also wish to confirm the commitment of 

the State University of New York College of Technology at Canton (SUNY Canton) to 

achieving the objectives of the grant application. 

Specifically, we understand and agree to assist the Town of Massena with: 

• Planning and implementing grant-funded "Fly Massena" events/promotions to 

encourage use of the EAS service at the Massena Airport. 

• Providing input into "Fly Massena" marketing materials. 

• Providing guidance and assistance to professionals working on air service data 

collection and market research in support of improving EAS enplanements. 

SUNY Canton applauds the ongoing work of the Town of Massena, and of the St. Lawrence 

Valley Air Task Force from 2004-2009, toward improving air service in the central part of 

the rural. Northern New York-Canadian border region. We concur that increasing 

enplanement numbers in Massena, through the EAS marketing program proposed in its grant 

application, is the next step in the process of attracting a carrier that will work with us to 

move beyond subsidized air service. 

I encourage the U.S. DOT to award the Town of Massena grant fimding to promote their EAS 

service. In return, we will do our best, as a community partner, to assure the success of the 

"Fly Massena" campaign. 

o^ph L; Kennedy 

'sident
Fulton GRIFFITH, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-4172

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed March 21, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
SCPW-13-0000489

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI # I

JOCELYN WANDA UNCIANO, Petitioner,

vs. THE HONORABLE GARY W.B. CHANG, JUDGE OF THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIRST CIRCUIT, HAWAI # I LAND COURT, and

GMAC MORTGAGE, LLC, Respondents.

APPEAL FROM THE LAND COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI # I (CAAP-11-0001080; 1L.D. CASE NO. 11-1-2518; APPLICATION NO. 1069)

ORDER DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS AND/OR PROHIBITION (By : R eck ten wal d, C.J ., Nak ayama, Ac oba , M cKe nna , a nd Pol lac k, JJ. )

Upon consideration of petitioner Joycelyn Wanda Unciano’s petition for a writ of mandamus, filed on April 29, 2013, the documents attached thereto and submitted in support thereof, and the record, it appears that Hawai # i’s land court rules do not provide a specific time frame for the court to enter a final judgment or decree and, therefore, the land court should generally act upon matters timely under the circumstances. Although the land court must enter a final judgment or decree in the present case, the delay in entering such document is not Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCPW-13-0000489 20-MAY-2013 03:22 PMunreasonable considering the specialized nature of land court

matters and the volume of land court cases pending before the respondent judge. Mandamus relief, therefore, is not warranted at this time. See Kema v. Gaddis, 91 Hawai # i 200, 204-05, 982 P.2d 334, 338-39 (1999) (a writ of mandamus is an extraordinary remedy that will not issue unless the petitioner demonstrates a clear and indisputable right to relief and a lack of alternative means to redress adequately the alleged wrong or obtain the requested action; where a court has discretion to act, mandamus will not lie to interfere with or control the exercise of that discretion, even when the judge has acted erroneously, unless the judge has exceeded his or her jurisdiction, has committed a flagrant and manifest abuse of discretion, or has refused to act on a subject properly before the court under circumstances in which he or she has a legal duty to act); State ex rel. Marsland v. Ames, 71 Haw. 304, 307, 788 P.2d 1281, 1283 (1990) (“[T]he mere fact that other remedies are not available has never in itself been sufficient justification for mandamus.”). Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition for a writ of mandamus is denied without prejudice.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai # i, May 20, 2013. /s/ Mark E. Recktenwald /s/ Paula A. Nakayama /s/ Simeon R. Acoba, Jr. /s/ Sabrina S. McKenna /s/ Richard W. Pollack
Donating Stock or Other Securities

Donating appreciated securities to the National Park Foundation is a wonderful way to help the 

National Parks. Before making such a gift, please discuss your particular situation, including tax 

benefits, with your financial advisor. 

In order to reap the maximum value from a gift of appreciated securities, the security should be 

transferred to the National Park Foundation. Following the transaction, the Foundation will sell 

the security and put the proceeds right to work for the Parks. 

For internal purposes, NPF follows IRS guidance that establishes the value of the stock by 

calculating the mean average price on the date ownership is transferred. Many donors also 

choose to calculate their tax deduction this way using a receipt from NPF that notes the name 

and number of shares, the date they were received into NPF’s account, and the high and low 

values per share on the date the securities were transferred.

To make a gift of securities, please provide the following information to your financial advisor,

along with the security name and number of shares. It is very important that you also alert the 

National Park Foundation of your gift so we can identify it when it arrives in our account, and

ensure you receive credit for the donation (the Foundation does not receive donor information 

with the securities). Please fill out the following form, save as a new version, and email or mail 

the Foundation with a copy of the written instructions you provide to your financial advisor. 

NPF’s tax identification number is 52-1086761. 

Stock Transfer Instructions:

To transfer shares to the Vanguard Group on behalf of the National Park Foundation please 

provide the following information to your financial advisor: 

DTC#: 0062 

Vanguard Brokerage Account (VBS) #: 11141183 

For more information regarding gifts of stock, please contact us at (888) GOPARKS 

(888-467-2757) or donorservices@nationalparks.org. 

Thank you for your generosity! 
Stock Notification Form (please send to the Foundation at the email/address below)

Your Name

Your Address 

Your Phone Number

Your Email

Stock Name/Symbol 

Number of Shares 

Transfer Agent 

Date of Transfer 

Additional 

Information/Designation 

Please return this form to: 

Address: Attn: Gift Processing 

National Park Foundation 

1500 K Street NW, Suite 700 

Washington, DC 20005 

Email: donorservices@nationalparks.org

Phone: (888) GOPARKS (888-467-2757)
# United States Court **of Appeals**  **f or the Fifth Circuit** 

**____________** No. 22

- 50330 Summary Calendar

**____________ United States of America,**  Plaintiff

— Appellee **,**

versus **Francesca Jo Ryan,** Defendant

— Appellant

**.**

**______________________________** Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 4:21

- CR

- 997

- 1

**____________________ __________**  Before **Jones ,**  **Haynes ,**  and **Duncan ,**  Circuit Judges

**. Per Curiam**  **:** *****
The attorney appointed to represent Francesca Jo Ryan has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed brief s in accordance with Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores , 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Ryan has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief s and the rele vant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s

**_____________________**

* This opinion is not designated for publication. See **5th Cir**

**. R** 

**.** 47.5. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED August 1, 2023 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 22-50330 Document: 00516842552 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/01/2023No. 22

- 50330

2 assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is **GRANTED** , counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the appeal is **DISMISSED**

. See **5th Cir. R.** 42.2

. Case: 22-50330 Document: 00516842552 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/01/2023
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1422 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1422

 To permit each of the territories of the United States to provide and 
furnish statues honoring their citizens for placement in Statuary Hall 
   in the same manner as statues honoring citizens of the States are 
                provided for placement in Statuary Hall.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 26, 2021

Ms. Plaskett (for herself and Mr. San Nicolas) introduced the following 
   bill; which was referred to the Committee on House Administration

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To permit each of the territories of the United States to provide and 
furnish statues honoring their citizens for placement in Statuary Hall 
   in the same manner as statues honoring citizens of the States are 
                provided for placement in Statuary Hall.

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

SECTION 1. PLACEMENT OF STATUES OF CITIZENS OF TERRITORIES OF THE 
              UNITED STATES IN STATUARY HALL.

    (a) In General.--Section 1814 of the Revised Statutes of the United 
States (2 U.S.C. 2131) is amended by adding at the end the following 
new sentence: ``For purposes of this section, the term `State' includes 
American Samoa, Guam, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, 
the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the United States Virgin Islands, 
and the term `citizen' includes a national of the United States, as 
defined in section 101(a)(22) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 
U.S.C. 1101(a)(22)).''.
    (b) Conforming Amendment Relating to Procedures for Replacement of 
Statues.--Section 311 of the Legislative Branch Appropriations Act, 
2001 (2 U.S.C. 2132) is amended by adding at the end the following new 
subsection:
    ``(f) For purposes of this section, the term `State' includes 
American Samoa, Guam, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, 
the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the United States Virgin 
Islands.''.
                                 <all>
```