alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Alberto Dalva MALZONE, et al., Appellants, v. Andres URIBE, et al., Appellees.

No. 3D16-2608

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed November 1, 2017

Law Offices of David S. Harris, and David S. Harris; Jennifer A. Kerr, P.A., and Jennifer A. Kerr, for appellants.

Ronald I. Strauss, P.A., and Ronald I. Strauss, for appellees.

Before LAGOA, EMAS and SCALES, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See Williams v. Miami-Dade Cty. Public Health Tr., 17 So.3d 859, 859 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009) (holding the trial court did not abuse its discretion when its sanctions order was well-supported by the evidence); P.B. v. Dep’t of Children & Family Servs., 709 So.2d 590, 591 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998) (“We do not consider the question of adequate notice because Appellants did not object to the lack of notice in the proceedings below or request a continuance. The first time they raised the issue was on appeal. By failing to object and by proceeding on the matter at the hearing, Appellants waived their objections to the lack of notice.).
2017-0653.

#### Ross v. Cuyahoga Cty. Bd. of Revision.

Board of Tax Appeals, No. 2016-1716. On appellees’ motion to dismiss. Motion denied.

O’Donnell and Fischer, JJ., dissent.
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that this Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2007 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended, and the information contained in such report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Buckhead Community Bancorp, Inc.

This 28th day of March, 2008.



/s/ Dawn KinardDawn KinardChief Financial Officer
1

Participants at the 4-6-2011 conference call on rulemakings affecting EGUs

OAR

Bob Wayland

Mary Johnson

Bill Maxwell

Linda Chappell

Larry Sorrels

Tim Smith

Elyse Steiner

Nick Hutson

Kevin Culligan

OW

Julie Hewitt

OP

Lanelle Wiggins

Paul Balserak

OMB

Cortney Higgins

INDUSTRY

Central Iowa Power Cooperative

Cedar Rapids, IA

Rex Butler

319-366-8011

rex.butler@cipco.net

Holland Board of Public Works

Holland, MI

Daniel Nally

616-355-1641

dnally@hollandbpw.com

Jamestown Board of Public Utilities

Jamestown, NY

Steve Kulig

716-661-1697

skulig@jamestownbpu.com

Mid-Kansas Electric Company (operated under contract by Sunflower Electric)

Hays, KS

Wayne Penrod
2

785-623-3313

WPenrod@sunflower.net

Morgan City

Morgan City, LA

Louisiana Energy & Power Authority (operates Morgan City power plant)

Kevin Bihm

337-269-4046

kbihm@lepa.com

Muscatine Power & Water

Muscatine, IA

Donald Pauken

563-262-3394

dpauken@mpw.org

San Miguel Electric Cooperative, Inc.

Joe Eutizi

Christine, TX

830-784-3411, ext. 226

jeutizi@smeci.net

Southern Illinois Power Cooperative

Marion, IL

Leonard Hopkins

618-964-1448, ext. 268

LHopkins@sipower.org

Texas Municipal Power Agency

Bryan, TX

Ken Babb

936-873-1516

kbabb@texasmpa.org

Bill Wemhoff

Sr. Principal, Environmental Policy

NRECA

Arlington, VA

703-907-5824

bill.wemhoff@nreca.coop

Michael Rossler

Manager Environmental Programs

EEI

Washington, D.C.

202-508-5516

mrossler@eei.org
3

Andrea Field

Attorney at Law

Hunton & Williams

Washington, D.C.

202- 955-1500

afield@hunton.com
No. 12-8614.

#### Fields *v.*United States.

C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.
AFS-11-281-E August 17, 2011

Exemption No. 10330 Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2011-0420

Mr. James Nides SOC Project Manager Atlantic Southeast Airlines, Inc.

17445 JFK Blvd. Houston, TX 77032

Dear Mr. Nides:

This letter is to inform you that we have denied your petition for exemption. It transmits our decision and explains its basis.

The Basis for Our Decision

By letter dated April 19, 2011, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Adm inistration (FAA) on behalf of Atlantic Southeast Airlines, In c. (ASA) for an exemption from § 121.291 of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) to the extent necessary to allow ASA to combine its operating certificate with ExpressJet Airlines’ (ExpressJet) operating certificate without having completed the emergency evacuation procedures demonstrations as prescribed by § 121.291.

The FAA has determined that good cause exists for not publishing a summary of the petition

in the Federal Register because this is not a precedent-setting petition, and any delay in acting on this petition would be detrimental to ASA.

The FAA recently issued a denial of exemption in circumstances similar in all material respects to those presented in your petition. In Denial of Exemption No. 10255 (copy enclosed), the FAA noted that the fact that each pre-merger carrier has performed evacuation demonstrations required by § 121.291 is not relevant. The validation of the merged practices and emergency evacuation procedures for the two legacy air carriers will be as a result of the FAA-witnessed partial evacuation demonstration.2

The comprehensive timeline and analysis of changes to programs, policies, and procedures as described in Operations Specification A502, Appendix A – FAA Transition Plan, had not been presented to the United – Continental Joint Transition Team (JTT). Additionally, the flightcrew and cabin crewmembers’ emergency pr ocedures differences had not been reviewed and evaluated to ensure compatibility between flight deck and cabin procedures by the JTT. Finally, the petition did not identify the scheduling controls needed to prevent crewmembers that are operating the pre-merger Continental aircraft from operating pre-merger United aircraft until procedures are published in a single operating manual and transition training is completed.

Having reviewed your reasons for requesting an exemption, I find that—

 they don’t differ materially from those presented by the petitioner in the enclosed Denial of Exemption No. 10255;

 the reasons stated by the FAA for denying the enclosed Denial of Exemption No. 10255 also apply to the situation you present; and

 a grant of exemption wouldn’t be in the public interest.

Our Decision

Under the authority contained in 49 U.S.C. 40113 and 44701, which the FAA Adm inistrator has delegated to me, I hereby deny the petition of Atlantic Southeast Airlines, Inc. for an exemption from 14 CFR § 121.291.

Sincerely,

/s/

John W. McGraw Acting Director, Flight Standards

Service

Enclosure
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.B


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


         In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period
ending March 31, 2004, of ANR Pipeline Company (the "Company") as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Greg G.
Gruber, Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer and Director,
certify (i) that the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and (ii) that
the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.


                                                /s/ Greg G. Gruber
                                           -------------------------------------
                                           Greg G. Gruber
                                           Senior Vice President, Chief
                                           Financial Officer, Treasurer
                                             and Director
                                           (Principal Financial
                                             and Accounting Officer)

                                           May 14, 2004


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to ANR Pipeline Company and will be retained by ANR Pipeline Company
and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 87 (Wednesday, May 6, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 25013]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-11998]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE


Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

    The Department of Commerce (DOC) has submitted to the Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) for clearance the following proposal for 
collection of information under provisions of the Paperwork Reduction 
Act (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35).
    Agency: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).
    Title: Atlantic Bluefin Tuna Mandatory Catch Reporting.
    Agency Form Number: None.
    OMB Approval Number: 0648-0328 and merges 0648-0339 and 0648-0238.
    Type of Request: Revision of a currently approved collection.
    Burden: 723 hours.
    Avg. Hours Per Response: Ranges between 5 and 10 minutes depending 
on the reporting requirement.
    Number of Respondents: 7,735.
    Needs and Uses: The purpose of this collection of information is to 
comply with the United States' obligations under the Atlantic Tunas 
Convention Act of 1975. As a member nation of the International 
Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas, the U.S. is required 
to take part in the collection of biological statistics for research 
purposes. The information collection for the mandatory catch reporting 
program (0648-0328) would be extended to include the reporting of 
trophy-size Atlantic bluefin tuna throughout the recreational fishery 
(currently cleared under 0648-0239). In addition, the North Carolina 
catch card program currently cleared under 0648-0339 would be merged 
into this collection. Anglers reporting under the North Carolina 
program will be exempt from the normal call-in-requirements. The angler 
reports provides essential information for management of the fishery 
and ensures that the U.S. complies with its international obligations.
    Affected Public: Individuals.
    Respondent's Obligation: Mandatory.
    OMB Desk Officer: David Rostker, (202) 395-3897.
    Copies of the above information collection proposal can be obtained 
by calling or writing Linda Engelmeier, DOC Forms Clearance Officer, 
(202) 482-3272, Department of Commerce, Room 5327, 14th and 
Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20230.
    Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information 
collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice 
to David Rostker, OMB Desk Officer, Room 10202, New Executive Office 
Building, Washington, D.C. 20230.

    Dated: April 30, 1998.
Linda Engelmeier,
Departmental Forms Clearance Officer
[FR Doc. 98-11998 Filed 5-5-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
|                                                                                                              
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                                              
|View History:  Monthly  Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                                      
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                                                                
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                                                                
|View History:                                                                                                 
|                                                                                                              
|Price of Cameron (Calcasieu Pass), LA Liquefied Natural Gas Exports to Japan (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                                              
|                                                                                                              
|Price of Cameron (Calcasieu Pass), LA Liquefied Natural Gas Exports to Japan (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                                              

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2020's                                                                                                                            |        |        | 9.25   | 9.13   |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 7/31/2024                                                                                                          
|Next Release Date: 8/30/2024
<PAGE>

                                                                  Exhibit 23.1

                          Independent Auditors' Consent

The Board of Directors
eResearchTechnology, Inc.:

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statement on
Form S-3 (No. 333-88361) and in the registration statements on Form S-8 (Nos.
333-61954, 333-26471, 333-80121 and 333-107272) of eResearchTechnology, Inc. of
our report dated January 29, 2004, with respect to the consolidated balance
sheets of eResearchTechnology, Inc. and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2002 and
2003, and the related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders'
equity, and cash flows for the years then ended, and the related financial
statement schedule, which report appears in the December 31, 2003 annual report
on Form 10-K of eResearchTechnology, Inc.

Our report refers to our audit of the adjustments that were applied and
disclosures that were added to revise the 2001 consolidated financial
statements, as more fully described in Note 1 to the consolidated financial
statements. However, we were not engaged to audit, review, or apply any
procedures to the 2001 consolidated financial statements other than with respect
to such adjustments and disclosures.

                                            /s/ KPMG LLP

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
March 10, 2004
No. 12-7408.

#### Fleming *v.*United States.

C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>                                                                                                  EXHIBIT 11
                                          CONNECTICUT NATURAL GAS CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
                                         -----------------------------------------------------
                                COMPUTATION OF CONSOLIDATED PRIMARY AND FULLY DILUTED EARNINGS PER SHARE
                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                      (Thousands of Dollars Except for Shares and Per Share Date)
                                                                    
                                                                             Fiscal Year Ended September 30,                     
                                                           --------------------------------------------------------------------  
      <S>                                                 <C>          <C>           <C>          <C>           <C> 
                                                             1997         1996          1995         1994          1993    
                                                          ----------   ----------    ----------   ----------    ---------- 
      Net income applicable to common stock:
          Income                                          $   17,075   $   18,995    $   17,019   $   17,703    $   16,855 
          Less-Preferred stock dividends                          62           63            62           66            67 
                                                          ----------   ----------    ----------   ----------    ---------- 
          Net income applicable to common stock           $   17,013   $   18,932    $   16,957   $   17,637    $   16,788 
                                                          ==========   ==========    ==========   ==========    ========== 

      Weighted average number of shares of common
        stock outstanding during the year (1)             10,632,001   10,146,932     9,926,980    9,539,695     9,527,772 
                                                          ==========   ==========    ==========   ==========    ========== 
      Net income per share of common stock -
        primary and fully diluted (1)                          $1.60        $1.87         $1.71        $1.85         $1.76 
                                                               =====        =====         =====        =====         ===== 
</TABLE>
       [FN]
      NOTE:
       (1)  The Company has no common stock equivalents.  Therefore, no 
            adjustments to the weighted average number of shares of common 
            stock outstanding during any of the years reflected in this 
            exhibit are necessary in order to calculate either primary or 
            fully diluted earnings per share.  For this reason primary and 
            fully diluted earnings per share are the same in each year.
       <PAGE>
exv10w1



 







Exhibit 10.1




AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT




                       THIS AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT, is entered into on                          , 2006, between THE
CLOROX COMPANY, a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), and                           (the “Executive”), and
amends the Employment Agreement effective as of                 between the Company and the Executive (the
“Employment Agreement”).



          The Employment Agreement is hereby modified and amended as follows:




	 	1.	 	Section 6(a)(i) of the Employment Agreement is hereby deleted and replaced in its
entirety with the following:





                    “(i)          Salary Component.




                    Payment, promptly after termination, of a lump sum amount equal to salary, at a
monthly rate equal to the highest monthly base salary rate in effect during the twelve
(12) month period preceding the termination of employment times the number of months in
the remaining term of this Agreement as determined in Sections 1(a)(i) or (iii) had the
termination not occurred, or until the Executive’s death if that occurs first (the
“Severance Payment Period”); provided, however, that in the event the Company
appoints a Chief Executive Officer (other than an Interim Chief Executive Officer) to
succeed Gerald E. Johnston during the term of this Agreement and the Executive’s
termination of employment occurs during the period commencing on May 16, 2006 and ending
eighteen (18) months after the date on which the new Chief Executive Officer commences employment with the Company (the “CEO Window Period”), for purposes of the above formula,
“Severance Payment Period” shall be replaced with the number of months in the remaining
term of this Agreement as determined in Sections 1(a)(i) or (iii) had the termination not
occurred plus twelve (12) months (the “Enhanced Severance Multiple”).”




	 	2.	 	Section 6(a)(ii)(B) of the Employment Agreement is hereby deleted and replaced in
its entirety with the following:






               “(B) In addition, payment, promptly after termination, of a lump sum amount equal to 75%
of the Executive’s Average Annual Bonus times the number of months remaining in the
Severance Payment Period divided by twelve (12); provided, however, that should
the Executive’s termination of employment occur during the CEO Window Period, this payment
shall equal a lump sum amount equal to 75% of the Executive’s Average Annual Bonus times
the Enhanced Severance Multiple divided by twelve (12).”



          Except as expressly modified herein, the Employment Agreement shall remain in full force and
effect.



 









 





This Amendment No. 2 is executed as of the date first above written.



THE CLOROX COMPANY

The Company



 




	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	By:
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	 

	 	 

(Executive)
	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	(Address)
1

 
     5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the registrant’s board of directors:          (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operationof internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and          (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employeeswho have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.        Date:  March 3, 2011 /s/      Joel Morganroth, MD   Joel Morganroth, MD,   President and Chief ExecutiveOfficer   
2
#### Grabar v Nichols, Long & Moore Constr. Corp.

4th Dept: 147 AD3d 1489

denied
Exhibit 10.52

 

Kips Bay Medical, Inc. Fiscal 2012 Director Compensation Plan

 

For the twelve month period ending December 31, 2012, each non-employee director of Kips Bay Medical, Inc. (the “Company”) is eligible to receive compensation pursuant to the Fiscal 2012 Director Compensation Plan as follows:

 

Director Fees

 

Each non-employee director will receive an annual retainer of $18,000.  Each member of the audit committee will receive a retainer of $6,000, each member of the compensation committee will receive a retainer of $3,000 and each member of the nominating and governance committee will receive a retainer of $2,000.  In addition, the chair of the audit committee will receive an additional $10,000 and the chair of the compensation committee will receive an additional $5,000 for service as chair.

 

Restricted Stock Grants

 

In addition to the director fees provided above, each non-employee director receives restricted stock in recognition of each director’s service to the Company and to further align director and stockholder interests. On December 13, 2011 each non-employee director received a grant of 15,000 shares of restricted stock pursuant to the Company’s 2007 Long-Term Incentive Plan. The restrictions on such restricted stock will lapse one year from the grant date.