alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Spring into action: MWR and Environmental team up to offer volunteer opportunities for associates

/ Published April 8, 2019
COLUMBUS, Ohio, 
Defense Logistics Agency Land and Maritime associates looking to take a more active, hands-on role in improving the environment are now able to make an impact on the installation.

DLA Installation Operations at Columbus Morale, Welfare and Recreation Division and Environmental Division volunteer opportunities include the Butterfly Club, Bluebird Box Team and the CDC Garden Team.

The Butterfly Club will meet near the MWR Eagle Eye Golf Course and assist in counting the butterfly population during pre-arranged events and ensure the habitat remains in optimum condition through weeding, planting and adding puddlers on DSCC. Puddlers are shallow puddles designed as a drinking source for butterflies.

“This club is important as pollinators are declining due to habitat loss and overuse of pesticides,” Environmental Specialist Nicole Goicochea said. “Monarch butterfly populations are only 10 percent of their 1990s populations. The Rusty Patch Bumble Bee and the Regal Fritillary are both endangered pollinators that once inhabited Franklin County.”

The Bluebird Box Team will be responsible for checking the boxes located around the MWR Eagle Eye Golf Course for intruders such as house sparrows and to help clean out the boxes at the end of the nesting season.

“Bluebirds are threatened by loss of nesting habitat,” Goicochea said. “The Environmental Division is working with MWR and the US Fish and Wildlife Service to place Bluebird boxes on the Golf Course to supplement nesting sites.

The CDC Garden Team will provide support by weeding and helping maintain the MWR Child Development Center sensory gardens. Each year, the children in the Kindergarten Preparatory classrooms plant a full sensory garden to include vegetables and plants. Throughout the year, the children are provided educational lessons around the garden and help with the upkeep, but they could use assistance.

Associates interested in assisting with MWR and Environmental projects such as the Butterfly Club, Bluebird Box Team, the CDC Garden Team or general interest can register online and select the appropriate categories. DLA associates may choose to use Wellness Program time to support the Eco-Helpers initiative.
#### Com. v. Linderman

04/13/2016

452 WAL (2015)

Denied

Pa.Super., 134 A.3d 478
# EUR-Lex - 32010M6016 - EN

*|*

# 32010M6016

**Commission Decision of 05/11/2010 declaring a concentration to be compatible with the common market (Case No COMP/M.6016 - SUN CAPITAL / DIVISIE VROOM & DREESMANN) according to Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (Only the English text is authentic) **

*

*

(.PICT.) |EUROPEAN COMMISSION |

Brussels , 5.11.2010

SG-Greffe(2010) D/17572

C(2010) 7799

PUBLIC VERSION

MERGER PROCEDURE ARTICLE 6(1)(b) DECISION

SIMPLIFIED PROCEDURE

To the notifying party:

Dear Madam(s) and/or Sir(s),

Subject: Case No COMP/M.6016 - SUN CAPITAL/ DIVISIE VROOM & DREESMANN Notification of 05.10.2010 pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 [1] Publication in the Official Journal of the European Union No C 276, 13.10.2010 p.19

1. On 05.10.2010, the European Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of the Merger Regulation by which the undertaking Sun Capital Partners Fund ("Sun Capital", USA) acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation control of the whole of the undertaking Divisie Vroom & Dreesmann B.V. ("Divisie Vroom & Dreesmann", The Netherlands) by way of purchase of shares.

2. The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:

- for Sun Capital: leveraged buyouts, equity, debt and other investments;

- for Divisie Vroom & Dreesmann: retail sale of clothing, homeware, electronics, entertainment goods and books.

3. After examination of the notification, the European Commission has concluded that the notified operation falls within the scope of the Merger Regulation and of paragraph 5(c) of the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 [2] .

4. For the reasons set out in the Notice on a simplified procedure, the European Commission has decided not to oppose the notified operation and to declare it compatible with the internal market and with the EEA Agreement. This decision is adopted in application of Article 6(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation.

For the European Commission, (signed) Alexander ITALIANER Director General

[1]OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 ("the Merger Regulation"). With effect from 1 December 2009, the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union ("TFEU") has introduced certain changes, such as the replacement of "Community" by "Union" and "common market" by "internal market". The terminology of the TFEU will be used throughout this decision.

[2] OJ C 56, 5.3.2005, p. 32.
159 A.3d 889

#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. JAMAR JENKINS, DEFENDANT-PETITIONER.

February 1, 2017

ON PETITION FOR CERTIFICATION

To the Appellate Division, Superior Court:

A petition for certification of the judgment in [ A-XXXXXX-XX ] having been submitted to this Court, and the Court having considered the same;

It is ORDERED that the petition for certification is denied.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Bryon Coleman, Appellant.

[48 NYS3d 577]

An appeal having been taken to this Court by the above-named appellant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, New York County (Bonnie Wittner, J.), rendered August 6, 2015, said appeal having been argued by counsel for the respective parties, due deliberation having been had thereon, and finding the sentence not excessive, it is unanimously ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same is hereby affirmed.

Concur — Friedman, J.P., Andrias, Gische and Webber, JJ.
<PAGE>


                                POWER OF ATTORNEY

                  KNOWN ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that the undersigned hereby
constitutes and appoints each of Christie S. Flanagan, Renee Nichols Tucei, and
Eric K. Kawamura or any of them, each acting alone, his true and lawful
attorney-in-fact and agent, with full power of substitution for him and in his
name, place and stead, in any and all capacities, in connection with the
CALIFORNIA FEDERAL PREFERRED CAPITAL CORPORATION (the "Corporation"), Annual
Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1999 under the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended including, without limiting the generality of
the foregoing, to sign the Form 10-K in the name and on behalf of the
Corporation or on behalf of the undersigned as a director or officer of the
Corporation, and any amendments to the Form 10- K and any instrument, contract,
document or other writing, of or in connection with the Form 10- K or amendments
thereto, and to file the same, with all exhibits thereto, and other documents in
connection therewith, including this power of attorney, with the Securities and
Exchange Commission, the Office of Thrift Supervision, or other appropriate
regulatory authority and any applicable securities exchange or securities
self-regulatory body, granting unto said attorneys-in- fact and agents, each
acting alone, full power and authority to do and perform each and every act and
thing requisite and necessary to be done in and about the premises, as fully to
all intents and purposes as he might or could do in person, hereby ratifying and
confirming all that said attorney-in-fact and agents, each acting alone, or his
substitute or substitutes, may lawfully do or cause to be done by virtue hereof.

                  IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has signed these presents
 this 15th day of March 2000.



                                                             /s/ Robert Nichols
                                                             ------------------
                                                             Robert Nichols
Summary of Compensation Arrangements



 EXHIBIT 10.3 
 SUMMARY OF COMPENSATION ARRANGEMENTS 
 Chief Executive Officer Salary

 The base salary of Mr. Daniel R. Lee as Chief Executive Officer is increased to $1 million, effective June 1, 2006.

 Special Bonuses 
 The following summarizes the amounts awarded on May 26, 2006 to certain executive officers of Pinnacle Entertainment, Inc. as special bonuses for those who had played important roles in the Company’s attempt
to acquire Aztar Corporation: 
  

				
	 Name and Title
	  	Special Bonus
	 Daniel R. Lee
 Chairman of the Board of Directors and Chief Executive Officer
	  	$	500,000
	 Stephen H. Capp
 Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
	  	$	250,000
	 Wade W. Hundley
 President
	  	$	100,000
	 John A. Godfrey
 Executive Vice President, Secretary and General Counsel
	  	$	100,000
<Page>


                                                                  EXHIBIT 10. 28


                           EPIX PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.
               NAMED EXECUTIVE OFFICERS COMPENSATION ARRANGEMENTS

         The following are our named executive officers. Their salaries for 2005
have been set as follows:


<Table>
<Caption>
                                                                                        2005
NAMED EXECUTIVE OFFICER                    POSITION                                    SALARY
-------------------------------- --------------------------------------            -----------------
<S>                              <C>                                               <C>
Michael D. Webb                  Chief Executive Officer                               $ 350,301

Andrew C.G. Uprichard, M.D.      President & Chief Operating Officer                   $ 311,160

Peyton J. Marshall, Ph.D.        Senior Vice President and                             $ 240,750
                                 Chief Financial Officer

Alan P. Carpenter, Ph.D., J.D.   Vice President, Legal and                             $ 257,237
                                 Government Affairs

Thomas J. McMurry, Ph.D.         Vice President, Research                              $ 224,328

Gregg Mayer                      Vice President, Strategic Marketing                   $ 210,431
                                 and Corporate Communications

</Table>
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 21.1


                         Subsidiaries of the Registrant

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

Subsidiary                                        State of Domicile
----------                                        -----------------
<S>                                               <C>
Ameritrade (Inc.)                                 Nebraska
Accutrade, Inc.                                   Nebraska
Advanced Clearing, Inc.                           Nebraska
AmeriVest, Inc.                                   California
OnMoney Financial Services Corporation            Delaware
Freetrade.com, Inc.                               New York
Ameritrade Institutional Services, Inc.           Florida
Financial Passport, Inc.                          Delaware
PFN Financial, LLC                                Delaware
PFN Mortgage Services, LLC                        Delaware
PFN Mortgage Services, Inc.                       Delaware
PFN Insurance Agency, LLC                         Delaware
PFN Insurance Agency, Inc.                        Delaware
PFN Investment Management, LLC                    Delaware
Financial Passport Insurance Agency, Inc.         Virginia
PFN Consumer Credit, LLC                          Delaware
</TABLE>


Each subsidiary does business under its actual name.
#### Ital Associates et al., Appellants, v Thomas Axon et al., Defendants, and Salvatore Sommella et al., Respondents.

[51 NYS3d 877]

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Ellen M. Coin, J.), entered May 9, 2016, which denied plaintiffs’ motion for an order awarding legal fees to their counsel from defendants-respondents Sommella and Karol, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court properly denied plaintiffs’ fee application as procedurally defective. While plaintiff limited partners are entitled to bring under the “common fund doctrine” an application on behalf of their counsel Samuel Goldman & Associates (SGA) for the equitable recovery of attorneys’ fees from defendants-respondents, who did not sign the written retainer agreement but signed a settlement agreement obtained by SGA entitling the limited partners, including defendants-respondents, to receive a pro-rata payout from the proceeds of the sale of a building in which the limited partners had invested *(see e.g. Matter of Kantrowitz-Goldhamer & Graifman, P.C. v New York State Elec. & Gas Corp.,*27 AD3d 872, 874 [3d Dept 2006], *lv denied*7 NY3d 704 [2006]), the application here did not ask the court to determine “reasonable” attorneys’ fees *(see Boeing Co. v Van Gemert,*444 US 472, 478 [1980]). Rather, plaintiffs’ application sought an award of attorneys’ fees in specified amounts “computed in accordance with Plaintiffs’ Counsel’s Contingent Fee Legal Services Agreement for this matter.” Since the common fund doctrine provides a basis for recovery of attorneys’ fees where there is no contractual basis for the recovery *(see Flemming v Barnwell Nursing Home & Health Facilities, Inc.,*15 NY3d 375, 379 [2010]), the application here does not properly seek a recovery under that doctrine, and plaintiffs cannot obtain a recovery of those fees based *475on the written agreement, which defendants-respondents did not sign. Nor is the record adequate to support a claim for payments specified in that agreement based on an oral contract theory.

We find that the court correctly found that New York Partnership Law § 115-a (5) would not provide a statutory basis for a fee application brought by plaintiffs since the settlement did not result in proceeds received by the limited partners that were to be accounted to the partnership, which was dissolved under the settlement agreement *(see Shlomchik v Richmond 103 Equities Co.,*763 F Supp 732, 745 [SD NY 1991]).

Concur—Sweeny, J.P., Richter, Andrias, Feinman and Kahn, JJ.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AS OF JUNE 30, 2000 ANDIS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                           2,264
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      145
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   2,778
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                          4,936
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            3,281
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                     (7,971)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     2,778
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 1,079
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 1,074
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 193
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    567
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                567
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       567
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .18
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .18


</TABLE>
# Black History Month spotlight: Michael McKiver 

/ Published Feb. 28, 2020
FORT BELVOIR, Virginia , 
Editor’s note: February is Black History Month and this year’s Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute theme is “Honoring the Past, Securing the Future.” Throughout the month, we will spotlight Defense Logistics Agency Energy employees who are honoring their history and making a difference through their accomplishments both in their workplace and community.

**Describe your job:**  I am a Customer Account Specialist. I assist customers in meeting their direct delivery fuel requirements for jet and ground fuels and ensure timely payment to vendors. 

**What makes you proud about your job?**  In my 36 years of experience – first as a System Engineer as a Department of Defense civilian for the U.S. Navy, then as a U.S. Air Force fuels specialist and now as a DLA Energy employee – help me see the big picture and understand how I support the Warfighter. My customers appreciate my expertise and trust me to get them the fuel they need to perform their mission. 

**What was your most recent professional success story?** I traveled to Seoul, South Korea, where I served as a subject matter expert, alongside of my Republic of Korea counterparts, during a training event where we validated contingency fuel requirements. 

**What would you consider your greatest accomplishment?** My 23-year Air Force career that includes numerous accolades, hard-earned promotions, and a proud retirement.

**How do you honor your past?**  I honor my past by reflecting on our great history. I’m inspired by our Army Air Corps/Air Force heroes; especially the Tuskegee Airmen who overcame extreme discrimination, downing 261 enemy aircraft and earning their place in history as some of the greatest pilots of World War II. 

**How do you make a difference?** By sharing my skills and knowledge with my coworkers and by trying to promote a harmonious work environment. As a sports enthusiast, I dedicate numerous hours every week to, training and officiating youth and intramural sports in basketball, football and volleyball.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Olivia Carter, Appellant.

[64 NYS3d 530]

An appeal having been taken to this Court by the above-named appellant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, New York County (Gregory Carro, J.), rendered July 15, 2015, said appeal having been argued by counsel for the respective parties, due deliberation having been had thereon, and finding the sentence not excessive, it is unanimously ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same is hereby affirmed.

Concur—Manzanet-Daniels, J.P., Mazzarelli, Kapnick and Webber, JJ.
No. 12-8867.

#### Bell *v.*United States.

C. A. 3d Cir. Certio-rari denied.
#### Com. v. Ramos

10/27/2015

442 MAL (2015)

Denied

Pa.Super., 122 A.3d 441
|                                                                              
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                              
|View History:  Monthly  Annual Download Data (XLS File)                      
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                                
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                                
|View History:                                                                 
|                                                                              
|Freeport, TX Liquefied Natural Gas Exports to Philippines (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                                              
|                                                                              
|Freeport, TX Liquefied Natural Gas Exports to Philippines (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                                              

|Year                                                                                                                              | Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct   | Nov   | Dec
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | ----- | ----- | ---
|2023                                                                                                                              |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |     | 3,378 | 3,445 |    
|- = 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
United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 15-3118

___________________________

Chris Erwin; T. Blake Mitchell

lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiffs - Appellees

v.

David Hudson, individually and in his official capacity as a Police Officer in and

for the City of Little Rock, Arkansas

lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant

Stuart Thomas, Chief of Police, individually and in his official capacity as Chief of

Police for the Little Rock Police Department; City of Little Rock, Arkansas;

Ferneau, LLC; Donnie Ferneau; John Does, 1-10

lllllllllllllllllllll Defendants

____________

Appeal from United States District Court 

for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Little Rock

____________

 Submitted: April 11, 2016

Filed: April 14, 2016 

[Unpublished]

____________

Before WOLLMAN, BOWMAN, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.

____________
PER CURIAM.

Little Rock Police Officer David Hudson challenges the district court’s1

 denial

of summary judgment based on qualified immunity on an excessive-force claim raised

by plaintiff Chris Erwin in a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. After careful review, see

Shannon v. Koehler, 616 F.3d 855, 861 (8th Cir. 2010) (appellate court has

jurisdiction to review denial of qualified immunity through interlocutory appeal under

collateral order doctrine; appellate review in this circumstance is limited to

determining whether conduct district court found sufficiently supported for summary

judgment purposes violated plaintiff’s clearly established rights); Krout v. Goemmer,

583 F.3d 557, 564 (8th Cir. 2009) (de novo review of legal issues is given to district

court’s determination that defendant is not entitled to qualified immunity), we

conclude denial was appropriate for the reasons stated by the district court.

The denial of qualified immunity is affirmed. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

______________________________

1

The Honorable James M. Moody Jr., United States District Judge for the

Eastern District of Arkansas.

-2-