alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

May 2, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

131229 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

WILLIAM BUSHY, Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman, Plaintiff-Appellee, Justices 

and 

GERALD NAGTZAAM and ROBERT 

HAWKES,

 Plaintiffs, 

v SC: 131229 

 COA: 262909 

Gratiot CC: 01-070212-CL 

ROBERT L. BERACY and GRATIOT 

COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS, 

Defendants-Appellants. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the February 16, 2006 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court prior to the 

completion of the proceedings ordered by the Court of Appeals. 

s0425 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

May 2, 2007 

 Clerk
FILED 

Bowen Greenwood 

CLERK OF THE SUPREME COURT 

STATE OF MONTANA IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 23-0461

STATE OF MONTANA, 

Plaintiff and Appellee, 

v. 

DONALD EDWARD FOSTER,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, 

and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including September 27, 2024, within which to prepare, 

file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

08/26/2024

Case Number: DA 23-0461

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

August 26 2024

08/26/2024

Case Number: DA 23-0461
Exhibit 99.2

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

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

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned certifies that (1) this
Quarterly Report of Cedric Kushner Promotions, Inc. (the "Company") on Form
10-QSB/A for the period ended September 30, 2002, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (this "Report"), fully complies with
the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, as amended, and (2) the information contained in this Report fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition of the Company as of
September 30, 2002 and December 31, 2001 and its results of operations for the
three-month and nine-month periods ended September 30, 2002.





/s/ James DiLorenzo
--------------------------------------------------------
Name: James DiLorenzo
Title: Executive Vice President
(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)



Date: February 21, 2003
#### In the Matter of Roy Edwards, Respondent, v City of New York, Appellant.

[767 NYS2d 608]

*111Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Michael Stallman, J.), entered April 16, 2003, granting petitioner’s application to serve a late notice of claim, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The record shows that within 90 days of September 11, 2001, the City acquired actual knowledge of the essential facts constituting petitioner sanitation worker’s claim that he sustained injury because the City did not provide him with gear needed to protect against toxic substances stemming from the immediate aftermath of the World Trade Center collapse. In particular, we note the memorandum dated December 10, 2001 that the Department of Sanitation distributed to the medical files of its employees who were assigned to the area of the World Trade Center on or after September 11, stating that “[a]s a result of such work assignment . . . the employee may have been exposed to asbestos.” Nor does the City show prejudice as a result of the delay in serving a notice of claim. It is not credible that the Department of Sanitation lacks records of its employees’ work assignments and its provision of protective equipment. Under the circumstances, including accepted notices of claim from persons similarly situated to petitioner, the court properly granted the motion to file a late notice of claim *(see Weiss v City of New York,*237 AD2d 212, 213 [1997]). We have considered and rejected the City’s other arguments. Concur— Buckley, P.J., Saxe, Ellerin, Marlow and Gonzalez, JJ.
# Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

May 26, 2016

No. 04

- 16

- 00212

- CR

Richard VARGAS,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 20th District Court, Milam County, Texas

Trial Court No. CR24573

John Youngblood, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

Rule 25.2(d) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure provides, in part,

If the defendant is the appellant, the record must include the trial court’s

certification of the defendant’s right of appeal under Rule 25.2(a)(2)

. . . . The

certification should be part of the record when notice [of appeal] is filed, but may

be added by timely amendment or supplementation . . . by order of the appellate

court under Rule 34.5(c)(2). The appeal must be dismissed if a certification that

shows the defendant has the right of appeal has not been made part of the reco rd

under these rules.

T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 25.2(d).

The record before us, however, does not contain the trial court’s certification of the

defendant’s right of appeal

. The trial court clerk is therefore ORDERED to prepare, certify, and

file a supplemental clerk’s record containing the trial court’s certification pursuant to Rule 25.2

within 10 days of the date of this order. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 25.2(d )._________________________________ Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of t he said

court on this 26th day of May, 2016

.

___________________________________ Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
#### W. H. Markham, *Appellant,*vs. S. C. M. Thomas, as Sheriff of Marion County, *Appellee.*

144 So. 885.

Division B.

Opinion filed December 12, 1932.

*Norris F. Baskin*and W. *E. Smith,*for Appellant;

*E. H. Martin,*for Appellee.

Per Curiam.

This Court having held in the companion case to this one (S. C. M. Thomas, as Sheriff, v. Ferdi*393nand Mills, decided at this Term) that the enforcement of Chapter 15328, Acts of 1931, Laws of Florida, prohibiting livestock from running at large in Marion County, was *conditioned*upon a compliance by the County Commissioners with Section 8 of the Act, the decree in this ease should be reversed on authority of the decision rendered in said companion case, and also on authority of Gill v. Wilder, 95 Fla. 901, 116 Sou. Rep. 870.

This Court holds said Chapter 15328, Acts of 1931, to be constitutional and valid as a special and local law applicable to Marion County, but that it is enforceable as such only after it has been localized in its effect to the territory of Marion County by compliance with Section 8. Compliance with said Section 8 will necessarily relieve the Act from any other constitutional objection such as has been raised in this ease to the effect that to enforce it against cattle owners of Marion County, without enforcing it, or making it effective, against cattle owners of adjoining counties, deprives Marion County cattle owners of the equal protection of the laws.

The decree herein should be reversed but with leave to enter an appropriate decree permitting enforcement of the Act conditioned upon compliance with Section 8 within a reasonable time.

Reversed and remanded with directions.

Whitfield, P.J., and Tereell and Davis, J.J., concur.

Buford, C.J., and Ellis and Brown, J.J., concur in the opinion and judgment.
II

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 2312

To maintain the ability of United States agriculture to remain viable and

competitive in domestic and international markets, to meet the food

and fiber needs of United States and international consumers, and for

other purposes.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JULY 22 (legislative day, JULY 20), 1994

Mr. DASCHLE introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred

to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry

A BILL

To maintain the ability of United States agriculture to remain viable and competitive in domestic and international markets, to meet the food and fiber needs of

United States and international consumers, and for other

purposes.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 That, in order to maintain the ability of United States

4 agriculture to remain viable and competitive in domestic

5 and international markets, the Secretary of Agriculture,

6 consistent with the obligations of the United States to

7 limit agricultural export subsidies as set forth in the Uru-
2

•S 2312 IS

1 guay Round Agreement and notwithstanding any other

2 provision of law, shall—

3 (1) make available and aggressively utilize in

4 each fiscal year the funds and commodities of the

5 Commodity Credit Corporation in the maximum

6 amounts allowed under the Agreement for the export

7 enhancement program, the dairy export incentive

8 program, the cottonseed oil assistance program, and

9 the sunflowerseed oil assistance program; and

10 (2) make available additional funds and com11 modities in each fiscal year in an amount equal to

12 the total of the reductions below the amounts made

13 available in fiscal year 1994 for the programs de14 scribed in paragraph (1) that are made as a condi15 tion of compliance with the budgetary outlay or vol16 ume restrictions on agricultural export subsidies

17 under the Agreement, in addition to any funds or

18 commodities that may be authorized, appropriated,

19 or otherwise made available, for authorized export

20 promotion, foreign market development, export cred21 it guarantee, and international food assistance pro22 grams, for commodity purchases under the Emer23 gency Food Assistance Program, and to promote the

24 development, processing, commercialization, and

25 marketing of products resulting from alternative
3

•S 2312 IS

1 uses of agricultural commodities, including vegetable

2 oil.

Æ
From: Buckingham, Wendy [mailto:wendy.buckingham@HQ.DHS.GOV]

Sent: Friday, March 13, 2015 9:07 AM

To: Buckingham, Wendy

Subject: National Consultation Proposed DHS Supplemental Ethics Regulation

From: Livoti, Carmen

Sent: Friday, March 13, 2015 8:52 AM

To: 'Colleen Kelley'

Cc: Jonathan Levine

Subject: National Consultation Proposed DHS Supplemental Ethics Regulation

Dear Ms. Kelley,

The Department of Homeland Security’s proposed Supplemental Ethics Regulation is hereby p rovided in

accordance with 5 U.S.C. § 7113(b)(1). Please provide your comments and/or recommendations to me by

April 13, 2015. We are attaching the comments NTEU submitted in response to the Federal Register

notice. Please advise if NTEU wishes to add a nything to the comments provided. If you have any

questions or require further information, please contact me. You can reach me at 202

- 357

- 8175 and via

e

- mail at carmen.livoti@hq.dhs.gov

.

Respectfully,

C armen Livoti

Senior Labor & Employee Relations Advisor

MGMT/OCHCO/ HCPP

U.S. Department of Homeland Security

202

- 357

- 8175/202

- 573

- 3445(bb)
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Bernard Fuller, Appellant.

[767 NYS2d 619]

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Laura Drager, J.), rendered October 29, 2001, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of three counts of burglary in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to consecutive terms of 2 to 4 years, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant’s challenge to his plea is unpreserved since he did *163not move to withdraw it *(People v Lopez,*71 NY2d 662, 666 [1988]). In any event, the record establishes that defendant knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily pleaded guilty and waived his right to appeal *(see People v Moissett,*76 NY2d 909 [1990]). Defendant’s valid waiver of his right to appeal forecloses his remaining claims, including those contained in his pro se supplemental brief. Concur—Tom, J.P., Andrias, Saxe and Ellerin, JJ.
II

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 219

To provide for a Federal Open Market Advisory Committee, and for other

purposes.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JANUARY 26 (legislative day, JANUARY 5), 1993

Mr. SARBANES (for himself, Mr. SASSER, Mr. RIEGLE, and Mr. DORGAN) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs

A BILL

To provide for a Federal Open Market Advisory Committee,

and for other purposes.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Monetary Policy Re5 form Act of 1993’’.

6 SEC. 2. MEMBERSHIP OF THE FEDERAL OPEN MARKET AD7 VISORY COMMITTEE.

8 Section 12A(a) of the Federal Reserve Act (12

9 U.S.C. 263(a)) is amended to read as follows:

10 ‘‘(a) ESTABLISHMENT OF ADVISORY COMMITTEE.—
2

•S 219 IS

1 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—There is established a Fed2 eral Open Market Advisory Committee (hereafter in

3 this section referred to as the ‘Advisory Committee’),

4 which shall consist of the presidents of the Federal

5 Reserve banks.

6 ‘‘(2) CHAIRPERSON.—The president of the Fed7 eral Reserve Bank of New York shall serve as the

8 chairperson of the Advisory Committee.

9 ‘‘(3) MEETINGS.—The meetings of the Advisory

10 Committee shall be held in Washington, District of

11 Columbia, not less than 4 times a year upon the call

12 of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve

13 System.

14 ‘‘(4) DUTIES.—The Advisory Committee shall

15 advise the Board on the conduct of open-market op16 erations.’’.

17 SEC. 3. CONFORMING AMENDMENTS

18 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 12A of the Federal Re19 serve Act (12 U.S.C. 263) is amended—

20 (1) in subsection (b)—

21 (A) by striking ‘‘Committee’’ each place it

22 appears and inserting ‘‘Board’’; and

23 (B) by inserting ‘‘REGULATIONS.—’’ be24 fore ‘‘NO FEDERAL RESERVE’’; and
3

•S 219 IS

1 (2) in subsection (c), by inserting ‘‘ACCOMMO2 DATION OF COMMERCE AND BUSINESS.—’’ before

3 ‘‘The time’’.

4 (b) UNITED STATES OBLIGATIONS.—Section

5 14(b)(2) of the Federal Reserve Act (12 U.S.C. 355(2))

6 is amended by striking ‘‘Federal Open Market Commit7 tee’’ and inserting ‘‘Board of Governors of the Federal Re8 serve System’’.

9 (c) OTHER REFERENCES IN FEDERAL LAW.—Except

10 as otherwise provided in this section, any reference in Fed11 eral law to the Federal Open Market Committee shall be

12 construed to be a reference to the Federal Open Market

13 Advisory Committee.

Æ
#### People v Ivey

1st Dept: 138 AD3d 574 (NY)

denied 8/25/16 (Fahey, J.)
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

FRONTLINE PROCESSING CORP., a

Nevada corporation,

 Plaintiff-counter-defendant - 

 Appellee,

 v.

FIRST STATE BANK OF ELDORADO,

ELDORADO, ILLINOIS, an Illionois

corporation,

 Defendant-counter-claimant -

 Appellant,

 v.

LMA UNDERWRITING AGENCY,

INC.; CHRISTOPHER L. KITTLER,

 Third-party-defendants -

 Appellees.

No. 08-35879

D.C. No. CV 01-00074-RFC

District of Montana, 

Butte

ORDER AMENDING

MEMORANDUM DISPOSITION

AND DENYING PETITION FOR

REHEARING

FRONTLINE PROCESSING CORP., a

Nevada corporation,

 Plaintiff-counter-defendant - 

 Appellant,

 v.

FIRST STATE BANK OF ELDORADO,

ELDORADO, ILLINOIS, an Illinois

No. 09-35166

D.C. No. CV 01-00074-BU-RFC

FILED

OCT 05 2010

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2

corporation,

 Defendant-counter-claimant - 

 Appellee,

 v.

LMA UNDERWRITING AGENCY,

INC.; CHRISTOPHER L. KITTLER,

 Third-party-defendants -

 Appellants.

Before: REINHARDT, GRABER, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.

Appellant’s Motion for Leave to File a Reply in Support of Petition for

Rehearing is GRANTED. The reply tendered September 15, 2010, is ordered filed.

The memorandum disposition filed July 30, 2010, is amended as follows:

On page 4, replace the first full paragraph with:

We review for clear error a district court’s factual findings. 

Bertelsen v. Harris, 537 F.3d 1047, 1056 (9th Cir. 2008). Defendant

argues that $160,000 of the Count IIA award is duplicative of the

Count IV award requiring payment of "the Wade Cook reserve

money, plus interest." The district court’s findings of fact show that

Defendant twice deducted from Plaintiff’s income "$80,000 going to

reserve." The district court specified neither which funds comprised

the Wade Cook Reserve nor which reserve account received the two

$80,000 deductions. Because the district court’s award and findings

of fact are ambiguous, we remand to the district court to determine

whether the $160,000 was awarded under either Count IIA or Count

IV, or both.
3

On page 13, replace the last paragraph with:

AFFIRMED in part, and REMANDED in part with instructions

to dismiss Defendant’s indemnification counterclaims without

prejudice and to clarify the award under Count IIA and Count IV.

With these amendments, the petition for panel rehearing is DENIED. No

further petitions for rehearing or for rehearing en banc may be filed.
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2576 

To require a report on expenditures for contracts for advertising services, 

and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 8, 2019 

Ms. NORTON introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on the Budget 

A BILL 

To require a report on expenditures for contracts for 

advertising services, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Federal Government 

5 Advertising Equity Accountability Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. REPORT ON EXPENDITURES FOR CONTRACTS FOR 

7 ADVERTISING SERVICES. 

8 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 1105(a) of title 31, 

9 United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the 

10 following new paragraph: 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
2 

•HR 2576 IH

1 ‘‘(40) The following information with respect to 

2 each executive agency: 

3 ‘‘(A) Expenditures of the executive agency 

4 for the prior fiscal year for— 

5 ‘‘(i) all contracts for advertising serv6 ices; and 

7 ‘‘(ii) contracts for the advertising 

8 services of— 

9 ‘‘(I) socially and economically 

10 disadvantaged small business concerns 

11 (as defined in section 8(a)(4) of the 

12 Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 

13 637(a)(4)); and 

14 ‘‘(II) women- and minority-owned 

15 businesses. 

16 ‘‘(B) Estimated expenditures of the execu17 tive agency for the fiscal year for which the 

18 budget is submitted for— 

19 ‘‘(i) all contracts for advertising serv20 ices; and 

21 ‘‘(ii) contracts for the advertising 

22 services of— 

23 ‘‘(I) socially and economically 

24 disadvantaged small business concerns 

25 (as defined in section 8(a)(4) of the 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
3 

•HR 2576 IH

1 Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 

2 637(a)(4)); and 

3 ‘‘(II) women- and minority-owned 

4 businesses.’’. 

5 (b) APPLICATION DATE.—The amendment made by 

6 this Act shall apply to the report submitted under section 

7 1105(a) of title 31, United States Code, for fiscal year 

8 2021, and each fiscal year thereafter. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
# C_2016027EN.01003801.xml

| 25.1.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 27/38 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.1.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 27/38

---

Judgment of the General Court of 26 November 2015 — Comunidad Autónoma de Cataluña and CTTI v Commission

(Case T-465/13) (1)

1

((State aid - Digital television - Aid for the deployment of digital terrestrial television in remote and less-urbanised areas in Spain - Decision declaring aid to be partly compatible and partly incompatible with the internal market - Advantage - Service of general economic interest - Article 107(3)(c) TFEU - New aid))

(2016/C 027/44)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Parties

Applicants: Comunidad Autónoma de Cataluña (Spain) and Centre de Telecomunicacions i Tecnologies de la Informació de la Generalitat de Catalunya (CTTI) (Hospitalet de Llobregat, Spain) (represented by: initially J. Buendía Sierra, N. Ruiz García, M. Muñoz de Juan and M. Reverter Baquer, then J. Buendía Sierra, N. Ruiz García, M. Reverter Baquer and A. Lamadrid de Pablo, and finally J. Buendía Sierra, M. Reverter Baquer and A. Lamadrid de Pablo, lawyers)

Applicants:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: É. Gippini Fournier, B. Stromsky and P. Němečková, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Intervener in support of the defendant: SES Astra (Betzdorf, Luxembourg) (represented by: F. González Díaz, F. Salerno, V. Romero Algarra, lawyers)

Intervener in support of the defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision 2014/489/EU of 19 June 2013 on State aid SA.28599 [(C 23/2010) (ex NN 36/010, ex CP 163/2009)] implemented by the Kingdom of Spain for the deployment of digital terrestrial television in remote and less-urbanised areas (other than Castilla-La Mancha) (OJ 2014 L 217, p. 52).

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1) | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1)

Dismisses the action;

| 2) | Orders Comunidad Autónoma de Cataluña (Spain) and Centre de Telecomunicacions i Tecnologies de la Informació de la Generalitat de Catalunya (CTTI) to bear their own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission and by SES Astra. |
| --- | --- |

2)

Orders Comunidad Autónoma de Cataluña (Spain) and Centre de Telecomunicacions i Tecnologies de la Informació de la Generalitat de Catalunya (CTTI) to bear their own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission and by SES Astra.

---

(1)  OJ C 304, 19.10.2013.

1

---
# C_2014159EN.01003901.xml

| 26.5.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 159/39 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.5.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 159/39

---

Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Third Chamber) of 9 April 2014 — Rouffaud v EEAS

(Case F-59/13) (1)

1

((Civil Service - Auxiliary member of contract staff - Reclassification of the contract - Pre-litigation procedure - Rule that the complaint must be consistent with the action - Amendment of the grounds of challenge in the case))

2014/C 159/53

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Thierry Rouffaud (Ixelles, Belgium) (represented initially by: A. Coolen, É. Marchal, S. Orlandi and D. Abreu Caldas, and subsequently by: S. Orlandi and D. Abreu Caldas, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European External Action Service (EEAS) (represented by: S. Marquardt and M. Silva, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application for annulment of the decision rejecting the applicant’s application to have his successive fixed-term employment contracts reclassified as a contract of indefinite duration and to have his period completed as an auxiliary member of the contract staff recognised as a period of service completed as a member of the contract staff.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Mr Rouffard to bear his own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the European External Action Service. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Mr Rouffard to bear his own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the European External Action Service.

---

(1)  OJ C 233, 10.8.2013, p. 14.

1

---