alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

FABION WELSH,

Appellant,

v.

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, CHILD SUPPORT PROGRAM and

SHANNAKAYE SHUSHANNA MORGAN WELSH,

Appellees.

No. 4D21-1715

[September 8, 2021]

Administrative appeal from the State of Florida, Department of 

Revenue, Child Support Program; L.T. Case Nos. 56210000854DR and 

CSE 2001669180.

Fabion Welsh, Port St. Lucie, pro se.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Toni C. Bernstein, Senior 

Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for appellee Department of 

Revenue.

ON CONFESSION OF ERROR

PER CURIAM.

Appellant Fabion Welsh appeals from a final administrative support 

order entered by the Florida Department of Revenue Child Support 

Program (“the Department”). Appellant contends that he did not receive a 

“Proposed Administrative Final Order” and was not given an opportunity 

to request a hearing prior to the issuance of the final administrative 

support order. He also challenges several of the order’s findings, including 

the failure to credit him for payment of his child’s health insurance 

premiums. 

In response, the Department confesses error, noting that it did not 

properly account for Appellant’s information concerning health insurance 

costs in calculating child support. The Department maintains that it 

“should have issued an Amended Proposed Order, with accompanying 

amended child support guideline worksheets, factoring the health 
2

insurance costs into the child support guidelines,” consistent with section 

409.2563(5)(d), Florida Statutes (2021). 

Per the Department’s confession of error, the final support order is 

reversed and remanded for the issuance of an amended proposed

administrative support order. Should Appellant disagree with the 

proposed order, Appellant may thereafter request an administrative 

hearing or contact the Department for an informal discussion. See § 

409.2563(5)(c), Fla. Stat. (2021).

Reversed and remanded.

MAY, CIKLIN and FORST, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
22 December 2014 **********************

NSN: 8950-01-631-1073 (HSB) * MONOGRAPH M9E2

 **********************

Item: Hot sauce, Buffalo style

Document: A-A-20097, Hot Sauce and PKG&QAP

Approximate Caloric Value Per Serving: 46 Component Classification: Ancillary 

Estimated Shelf Life: 36 months at 80°F

Item Characteristics

Appearance: Orange-red colored liquid, slightly thick. Smooth suspension of uniform small particle 

size without stratification or separation.

Odor: Pungent; tangy and buttery.

Flavor: Pungent (heat value or bite); tangy and buttery.

Texture: Uniformly smooth, slightly thick.

Possible Deteriorative Changes 

Appearance: Discoloration to dark brown or black; separation

Odor: Sour, strong vinegar, oxidized 

Flavor: Sour, strong vinegar, oxidized

Texture: Clumping, extremely viscous almost solid, or separation

Unique Examination/Test Procedures

Special Notes

Minor separation may occur, light shaking should result in an acceptable, uniform, relatively stable 

suspension.
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION

I, Corey
Henry, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of Drive Auto Receivables Trust 2017-2 (the
Exchange Act periodic reports);

2. Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do not contain
any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and other information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;

4. Based on
my knowledge and the servicer compliance statements required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicers have fulfilled their obligations under the servicing agreements
in all material respects; and

5. All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities and
their related attestation reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwise disclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliance described in such
reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.

In giving the certifications above, I
have reasonably relied on information provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties: Wilmington Trust, National Association.



By:

/s/ Corey HenryName:

Corey HenryTitle:

President and Chief Executive OfficerSantander Drive Auto Receivables LLC, as Depositor(senior officer in charge of securitization of the depositor)Date:

March 30, 2018
No. 11-7121.

#### Demel Dukes, Petitioner v. Mary Berghuis, Warden.

565 U.S. 1124, 132 S. Ct. 1028,

181 L. Ed. 2d 758,

2012 U.S. LEXIS 47.

January 9, 2012.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.
bicx_ex41.htm


EXHIBIT 4.1


 





 




  





1











  






 


 


 







  





2











  






 





 




  





3











  






 





 




  





4











  









 


 


 


 


 


5
-86 -84 -82 -80 -78 -76 -74 -72

32 34 36 38 40 42


### ★

▲ ▲ ▲ ▲



### ★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ 500 1000 1500 500 18 12 06 00 06/08 

### NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL 

## Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 08 Jun 07

EDAS Meteorological DataSource★at 38.90 N 76.65 WMeters AGL
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 97-7658
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus WILLIAM BOYD FINE, JR., Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Spartanburg. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District Judge. (CR-93-278, CA-97-1140-7-20) Submitted: January 15, 1998 Decided: January 30, 1998 Before MURNAGHAN and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. William Boyd Fine, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Harold Watson Gowdy III, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1997). We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find noreversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Fine , No. CR-93-278 (D.S.C. Oct. 30, 1997). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
ex-10.2

 Exhibit 10.2
 

  
 Letter of interest by and between Isidro Medina and GGSM dated  June 09,2014
 

 

 June 19, 2014
 

 ISIDRO MEDINA IBARRA
 ARSENIO DE LA ROCHA ALARCON
 JOSE ANGEL MARTINEZ AYON
 DANIEL CASTRO VERDUGO
 FRANCISCO VALENCIA ALARCON
 San Ignacio, Sinaloa, México
 

 	 	
	 Attention:
	 ISIDRO MEDINA IBARRA

	  
	 Partner representative


 

 Dear Sirs:
 

 According to our letter of interest that we sent you the 09th day of June, 2014. With number 3788.002\0010v5. In where the purpose of that letter (the “Letter of Intent”) was and is to set forth the mutual intentions of Gold and Gemstone Mining Mexico SRL de CV (“GGMM”) and Isidro Medina Ibarra (“MR. ISIDRO”) regarding the acquisition (“Acquisition”) of LOT MINING "SAN JOSE" located in Culiacan municipality, Sinaloa state, Mexico under number mining title 218155 from ISIDRO MEDINA IBARRA, ARSENIO DE LA ROCHA ALARCON, JOSE ANGEL MARTINEZ AYON, DANIEL CASTRO VERDUGO, FRANCISCO VALENCIA ALARCON by way of an option to purchase agreement (‘Formal Agreement”).  
 

 We reiterate you our interest and we ask that you give us 15 more days of extended.
 

 GOLD AND GEMSTONE MINING DE MEXICO S.R.L. DE C.V.
 

 Per: /s/ Ivan Mondragon Mendez
   Authorized Signatory
 

 Confirmed this 19th day of June, 2014
 

 ISIDRO MEDINA IBARRA.
 

 Per:  
   Authorized Signatory
No. 10-10231.

#### Robert Bertola, Petitioner v. James Hartley, Warden.

565 U.S. 1074, 132 S. Ct. 801,

181 L. Ed. 2d 512,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 8454.

November 28, 2011.

Petition for rehearing denied.

Former decision, 565 U.S. 831, 132 S. Ct. 130, 181 L. Ed. 2d 51, 2011 U.S. LEXIS 5594.
No. 11-6878.

#### Timothy Harris, Petitioner v. United States.

565 U.S. 1043, 132 S. Ct. 597,

181 L. Ed. 2d 437,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 8116.

November 14, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.

*438Same case below, 429 Fed. Appx. 543.
No. 11-6059.

#### John Ronald Espie, Petitioner v. Steven Rivard, Warden.

565 U.S. 983, 132 S. Ct. 508,

181 L. Ed. 2d 358,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 7830.

October 31, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

BEAU PARRY, Individually and as Next

Friend to his Minor Daughters,

Appellant,

v.

JASON A. SHAFFER, VANEZA R.

SHAFFER, and TEAM TUTTLE, INC.

d/b/a LEGACY REAL ESTATE

SERVICES,

Appellees. §

§

§

§

§

§

§ No. 08

- 21

- 00 094

- CV

Appeal from the

120th Judicial District Court

of El Paso County, Texas

(TC# 2019DCV1811 )

CONCURRING OPINION

I concur in judgment b ecause the Parrys’ claim involves only mental

- anguish damages

based on negligent conduct, and outside of certain narrow exceptions, Texas does not recognize a

general legal duty to avoid negligently inflicting mental anguish

. City of Tyler v. Likes , 962 S.W.2d

489, 4 94 (Tex. 1997)

.

Texas law does not yet support the assertion that the Parrys’ claim falls into one of the

exceptions to this general rule. However, I would conclude claims arising from the surreptitious

recording of nude children in their homes , even if negligent and regardless of whether the

recordings were transmi tted outside the house, involve “injuries of such a shocking and disturbing2 nature that mental anguish is a highly foreseeable result ” and thus meet criteri a permitting mental

anguish

- only damages set forth by Likes

. Se e id. at 496 (noting the list of enumerated “shocking

and disturbing” injuries is “obviously far from exhaustive”)

. Accordingly

, I write separately.

YVONNE T. RODRIGUEZ

, Chief Justice

November 16, 2022

Before Rodriguez , C.J., Palafox, and Alley, JJ.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-7485

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

TONY ALFORENZO WALKER,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Henry Coke Morgan, Jr., District

Judge. (CR-93-84; CA-98-1415-2)

Submitted: June 28, 2004 Decided: July 30, 2004

Before KING and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Tony Alforenzo Walker, Appellant Pro Se. Paul Joseph McNulty,

United States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Tony Alforenzo Walker seeks to appeal the district

court’s denial of his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion to reconsider

judgment. An appeal may not be taken from the final order in a

habeas corpus proceeding unless a circuit justice or judge issues

a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000).

The denial of a Rule 60(b) motion is the final order in a habeas

proceeding and thus requires a certificate of appealability for

appeal. Reid v. Angelone, 369 F.3d 363, 367-69 (4th Cir. 2004).

A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial

showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C.

§ 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by

demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that his

constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive

procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or

wrong. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336 (2003);

Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d

676, 683 (4th Cir. 2001). 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude

that Walker has not made the requisite showing because his Rule

60(b) motion was untimely filed. Accordingly, we deny a

certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense

with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are
- 3 -

adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument

would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
MENU 1 MENU 2 MENU 3

Beef Stroganoff with Noodles Chicken Fajita Bowl Chili and Macaroni with Beef

Filled Pretzels, Cheddar Cheese Nuts and Raisins with Pan Coated Crackers, Plain

Dessert Bar, Peanut Butter Chocolate Disks Cheese Spread, Cheddar, Plain

Chocolate Protein Drink Powder, Dessert Bar, Mocha Toasted Corn Kernels

 Chocolate Beverage Powder, Carbohydrate, Pan Coated Candy, Oval/Round, 

Beverage Powder, Carbohydrate, Fortified 2/ Milk Chocolate with Peanuts

 Fortified 2/ Dried Fruit, Cranberries Cappuccino, Irish Cream

Accessory Packet Accessory Packet Accessory Packet 

Spoon Spoon Spoon

MENU 4 MENU 5 MENU 6

Homestyle Chicken Noodle Casserole Chicken and Rice Chicken and Biscuit Dumplings with 

First Strike Bar, Chocolate Filled Bakery Item, Cinnamon Bun Vegetables

Crackers, Plain First Strike Bar, Cran-Raspberry Ramen Noodle Soup

Peanut Spread, Smooth, Choclate Cocoa Beverage Powder, Milk Pound Cake, Trans Fat Free, Marble

Beverage Powder, Carbohydrate, Chocolate Crackers, Vegetable

 Fortified 2/ Accessory Packet Beverage Powder, Carbohydrate, 

Accessory Packet Spoon Fortified 2/ 

Spoon Accessory Packet

Spoon

MENU 7 MENU 8 MENU 9

Beef Stew Spaghetti with Meat Sauce Mexican Style Adobo Rice and 

Toasted Corn Kernels Ramen Noodle Soup Chicken

Nuts, Almonds, Smoked Pan Coated Candy, Disks, Milk Dessert Bar, Chocolate Banana Nut

Pound Cake, Trans Fat Free, Vanilla Chocolate Cornbread

Beverage Powder, Carbohydrate, Plain Beverage Powder, Carbohydrate, Dried Fruit, Cranberries

 Fortified 2/ Fortified 2/ Beverage Powder, Carbohydrate, 

Accessory Packet Cocoa Beverage Powder, Fortified 2/

Spoon Milk Chocolate Accessory Packet

Dried Fruit, Whole Raisins Spoon

Accessory Packet

Spoon

1/ Accessory pack component listed at the end of this document.

MEAL, COLD WEATHER (MCW) MENUS -ACR-C-022 (From late 2022)

2/ Flavors shall be procured in equal quantities and assembled in a distribution which provides the greatest variation.
MENU 10 MENU 11 MENU 12

Western Style Scrambled Eggs with Scrambled Eggs with Uncured Bacon Breakfast Skillet with Pork Sausage

 Uncured Ham, Cheese, Peppers Cereals, Rolled Oats, Instant, Maple Cereals, Rolled Oats, Instant, 

 and Onions and Brown Sugar Strawberries and Cream

Granola with Milk and Blueberries Nuts and Raisins with Pan Coated Tortillas, Plain

Toaster Pastry, Chocolate Chip Chocolate Disks Cheese Spread, Cheddar, With 

Muffin Top, Maple Patriotic Sugar Cookies Jalapeno Peppers

Filled Pretzels, Cheddar Cheese Cocoa Beverage Powder, Milk Chocolate Beverage Powder, Carbohydrate, 

Beverage Base, Sweetened with Accessory Packet Fortified 2/ 

 Nonnutritive Sweetener, Fortified, Spoon Chocolate Protein Drink Powder, 

 Orange Chocolate 

Coffee, Cappuccino, Irish Cream Accessory Packet

Accessory Packet Spoon

Spoon

1/ Accessory pack component listed at the end of this document.

Accessory Packet 

2/ Flavors shall be procured in equal quantities and assembled in a distribution which provides the greatest variation.

Coffee

Creamer

Sugar

Chewing Gum, Xylitol Sweetened, Peppermint or Cinnamon

Hand Cleaner (3)

Matches, Safety

Salt

Toilet Tissue
No. 10-10714.

#### Jason Benjamin Reynolds, Petitioner v. Colorado.

565 U.S. 845, 132 S. Ct. 163,

181 L. Ed. 2d 77,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 6560.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Colorado denied.

Same case below, 252 P.3d 1128.
Summary of revised compensation arrangements



 Exhibit 10.10 
 In lieu of the relocation benefits described in Mr. Greenleaf’s amended and restated employment agreement effective as of November 30, 2010 (which provided for a housing allowance of $5,000
per month for a six-month period), Apria and Mr. Greenleaf agreed that the Company would (i) pay $10,856 per month for a furnished home in California to be used by Mr. Greenleaf for a period of approximately twelve months, pending the
possible relocation of his principal residence to be proximal to Apria’s headquarters in Lake Forest, California and (ii) reimburse Mr. Greenleaf for the reasonable costs for Mr. Greenleaf’s spouse and children to travel
periodically between Denver, Colorado and California pending any such relocation.
Exhibit 10.6


 


Director Compensation Arrangements


 


The board of directors (the “Board”)
of Global Axcess Corp (the “Company”) has approved an equity compensation package for the members of the Board. Each
outside director of the Company will receive an annual grant of options to purchase 20,000 shares of the Company’s common
stock. The options will have an exercise price equal to the market close price on the date of grant and are issued to each outside
director on the anniversary date of his or her membership on the Board. The options will be exercisable in full on the one year
anniversary of the date of grant. The options expire five years from the date of grant.


 


Each director also receives $1,000 monthly
as compensation for their service on the Board. In addition to the foregoing, directors occupying the following positions receive
additional monthly compensation as follows:


 


	Position	Additional Monthly Compensation
	Chairman	$3,500
	Vice-Chairman	$2,300
	Audit Committee Chair	$500
	Compensation Committee Chair	$250
	M&A Committee Chair	$250
# Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Opinion filed May 3, 2023. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________ No. 3D22-680 Lower Tribunal No. 20-7960

________________ Mickgolden, Inc., Appellant, vs. Victory Capital Group, LLC, et al.,

Appellees. An Appeal from a non-final order from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Carlos Guzman, Judge. The Belleh Law Group, PLLC, and Owei Z. Belleh (Fort Lauderdale), for appellant. Taylor Espino Vega, PLLC, and Timothy S. Taylor and Vanessa A. Van Cleaf, for appellee Oreola, LLC; Cohen, Norris, Wolmer, Ray, Telepman, Berkowitz & Cohen, and James S. Telepman (North Palm Beach), for appellee Victory Capital Group, LLC. Before EMAS, SCALES and LINDSEY, JJ. PER CURIAM.2

Affirmed.
TABLE 3. Percentage of persons aged 65 years who reported receiving influenza or pneumococcal vaccine

poverty status†, education level, and number of physician contacts during the previous 12 months — Nati

Survey, United States, 1999‡

Characteristic

Received influenza vaccine during previous 12

mos Ever received pneumo

Non-Hispanic

white

(n=4,581)

 % (95% CI§)

Non-Hispanic

black

(n=642)

 % (95% CI)

Hispanic

(n=543)

% (95% CI)

Non-Hispanic

white

(n=4,498)

% (95% CI)

Non-Hispa

black

(n=630

% (95% 

Poverty status At or above poverty level Below poverty level

68.1 (±1.9)63.8 (±6.2)

52.6 (±5.6)46.7 (±10.9)

58.7 (±6.8)50.0 (±11.2)

54.9 (±2.0)49.6 (±6.8)

34.0 (±528.6 (±11

Education level Less than high

 school 

 High school

 More than high school

64.3 (±2.9)66.1 (±2.8)72.4 (±2.5)

48.7 (±6.1)47.9 (±9.7)51.5 (±9.2)

50.6 (±6.1)53.8 (±13.8)70.5 (±9.4)

49.5 (±3.2)50.7 (±2.8)58.5 (±3.0)

29.1 (±534.1 (±1036.8 (±8

No. physiciancontacts during theprevious 12 mos

None1 2-3

 4-9

10

37.1 (±5.6)58.3 (±5.2)70.8 (±3.1)72.9 (±2.6)72.9 (±3.5)

28.9 (±14.5)31.1 (±14.2)44.6 (±9.9)59.0 (±7.5)56.3 (±8.3)

30.3 (±11.3)29.7 (±13.7)68.0 (±9.1)62.4 (±7.8)61.1 (±12.8)

28.5 (±5.8)41.1 (±4.9)50.8 (±3.2)58.9 (±2.6)61.8 (±3.4)

27.3 (±1416.7 (±1032.6 (±934.8 (±738.2 (±9

Total 67.9 (±1.6) 49.7 (±4.4) 55.1 (±5.1) 53.1 (±1.8) 32.6 (±4

*Data are presented only for non-Hispanic whites, non-Hispanic blacks, and Hispanics because numbers fgroups were too small for meaningful analysis. Persons of Hispanic origin can be of any race; however, non-Hispanic white and non-Hispanic black do not include persons of Hispanic origin.

†Poverty status is based on family size, number of children aged <18 years, and family income. Publishe

from the Census Bureau are used in these calculation. Persons for whom poverty level was not determineanalysis.‡Provisional release data, National Health Interview Survey, 1999. n=6,002. Sample sizes might not twith unknown vaccination status were excluded from analysis.

§Confidence interval. 95% CIs were calculated by multiplying the standard error by ±1.96.¶The standard of reliability is RSE <0.3 (where RSE = the ratio of the standard error and the prevalenc

meet that standard, or the denominator was <30. 
**Meets the standard of reliability; however, <50 respondents were in the denominator.