alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### A. W. De Bell, *Secretary, Etc. v.*Elizabeth J. Goodall, *County Superintendent, Etc.*

(No. 7210)

Submitted December 7, 1931.

Decided December 12, 1931.

*Campbell. & McClintic*and *Ernest K. James,*for relator.

*Thomas Goleman,*for respondent.

Maxwell, Judge:

The Board of Education of Malden District, Kanawha County, appointed relator custodian of the school property *590of said district at a salary of $65,00 per mouth. Respondent, Superintendent of public schools for Kanawha County, has declined to countersign orders issued by said board for relator’s salary, and he is consequently unable to obtain payment of his salary by the sheriff, ex officio treasurer of the county. Relator seeks by mandamus to compel respondent to countersign his salary orders.

Resondent has rightly declined to approve these orders. There is no authority in the statute for the appointment by a district board of education of a custodian of property on fixed salary. The nearest approach to such authorization is in Code 1931, 18-5-31, wherein a board of education is authorized, in its discretion, to

> “appoint one school trustee for each subdistrict in its district or for any one or more of such sub-districts, to be custodian of the school properties therein. * ** **

> A school trustee shall be under the immediate direction of the board of education of his district, or of its authorized executive officer. He shall receive no salary or other emolument in recognition of his services as school trustee, but if, while performing any duty imposed upon him by an order of the board of education of his district, he incurs any expense, he shall be reimbursed therefor out of the building fund of the district, and if he is required to perform any labor by an order of the board, he shall be allowed a reasonable compensation for the time actually and necessarily spent at such labor.”

The wording of the statute is plain. The authorization which it carries and the limitations which it imposes are entirely clear. It does not, either directly or by implication, authorize the employment of a trustee or other person, as custodian on fixed stipend.

The record discloses that the services supposed to be discharged by relator can readily be discharged by other salaried employees of the board, and, in fact, were so discharged prior to relator’s appointment. The taxpayers should not *591be called upon to carry tbe burden of duplication of service in tbe public school system.

Relator not having shown a clear legal right to the relief he seeks, we deny the writ.

*Writ denied.*
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5155 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5155

 To provide for the release of certain land from the Sunrise Mountain 
 Instant Study Area in the State of Nevada and to grant a right-of-way 
  across the released land for the construction and maintenance of a 
                         flood control project.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 6, 2006

 Mr. Porter (for himself, Mr. Gibbons, and Ms. Berkley) introduced the 
    following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To provide for the release of certain land from the Sunrise Mountain 
 Instant Study Area in the State of Nevada and to grant a right-of-way 
  across the released land for the construction and maintenance of a 
                         flood control project.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Orchard Detention Basin Flood 
Control Act''.

SEC. 2. RELEASE OF CERTAIN LAND IN THE SUNRISE MOUNTAIN INSTANT STUDY 
              AREA.

    (a) Finding.--Congress finds that the land described in subsection 
(c) has been adequately studied for wilderness designation under 
section 603 of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 
U.S.C. 1782).
    (b) Release.--The land described in subsection (c)--
            (1) is no longer subject to section 603(c) of the Federal 
        Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1782(c)); and
            (2) shall be managed in accordance with--
                    (A) land management plans adopted under section 202 
                of that Act (43 U.S.C. 1712); and
                    (B) cooperative conservation agreements in 
                existence on the date of the enactment of this Act.
    (c) Description of Land.--The land referred to in subsections (a) 
and (b) is the approximately 65 acres of land in the Sunrise Mountain 
Instant Study Area of Clark County, Nevada, that is--
            (1) known as the ``Orchard Detention Basin''; and
            (2) designated for release on the map titled ``Orchard 
        Detention Basin'' and dated March 18, 2005.
    (d) Right-of-Way.--The Secretary of the Interior shall grant to 
Clark County, Nevada, a right-of-way to the land described in 
subsection (c) for the construction and maintenance of the Orchard 
Detention Basin Project on the land.
                                 <all>
```
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

WESTERN DISTRICT 

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, 

 Respondent 

 v. 

ZAMAR SWIFT, 

 Petitioner 

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 58 WM 2016 

ORDER 

PER CURIAM 

AND NOW, this 21st day of June, 2016, the Petition for Reinstatement of Right to 

File Petition for Allowance of Appeal Nunc Pro Tunc is GRANTED. Although counsel 

was negligent, Petitioner is entitled to a counsel-filed Petition for Allowance of Appeal. 

See Pa.R.Crim.P. 122(B). Counsel is DIRECTED to file a Petition for Allowance of 

Appeal within 15 days.
Anthony GARAVAGLIA, Appellant, v. CCND, LCC, ND Consulting Group, LLC, and Duffe-Nuernberger Realty Company, LLC, Respondents/Cross-Appellants.

No. ED 105588

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION ONE.

Filed: May 22, 2018

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT: Ronald S. Ribaudo, 361 Quail View Drive, Ballwin, MO 63021.

ATTORNEYS FOR RESPONDENT: Shannon M. Rulo, 10803 Olive Blvd., St. Louis, MO 63141.

Before Robert G. Dowd, Jr., P.J. and Sherri B. Sullivan and Kurt S. Odenwald, JJ.

**ORDER**

PER CURIAM.

Anthony Garavaglia appeals the judgment entered after a jury trial on his claims against CCND, LLC, Duffe-Nuernberger Realty Company, LLC and ND Consulting Group, LLC. CCND, LLC cross-appeals from the judgment awarding its attorney fees. We find no error and affirm.

An opinion would have no precedential value nor serve any jurisprudential purpose. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).
C HIEF J USTICE

C AROLYN W RIGHT

J USTICES

D AVID L. B RIDGES

M OLLY F RANCIS

D OUGLAS S. L ANG

E LIZABETH L ANG

- M IERS

R OBERT M. F ILLMORE

L ANA M YERS

D AVID E VANS

D AVID L EWIS

A DA B ROWN

C RAIG S TODDART

B ILL W HITEHILL

D AVID J. S CHENCK L ISA M ATZ

C LERK OF THE C OURT

(214) 712

- 3450

theclerk@5th.txcourts.gov

G AYLE H UMPA

B USINESS A DMINISTRATOR

(214) 712

- 3434

gayle.humpa@5th.txcourts.gov

F ACS IMILE

(214) 745

- 1083

I NTERNET

WWW

. TXCOURTS

. GOV /5 THCOA

. ASPX 

# Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

600 C OMMERCE S TREET

, S UITE 200

D ALLAS

, T EXAS 75202

(214) 712

- 3400



## June 2, 2015

Senrick Shern Wilkerson

#1885146

Ramsey I Unit

1100 F.M. 655 7 E

- 2

- 17T

Rosharon, TX, 77583

RE: Court of Appeals Number: 05

- 15

- 00617

- CV

Trial Court Case Number: DC

- 15

- 01662

Style: Senrick Wilkerson

v.

Dallas Police Department

Dear Mr. Wilkerson:

We have received your letter dated May 25, 2015 in which you included documents that

you requested this Court transmit to the district clerk. We have forwarded those documents to

the district clerk as requested. Please be advised that in the future we will not be able to assist

you with the transmission of documents to the district clerk. In the future, you must make other

arrangements for the transmittal of any documents that you wish to file in the district court.

Respectfully,

/s/ Lisa Matz, Clerk of the Court

LM/bm
Exhibit 10(67)


 


AMERICAN
INTERNATIONAL GROUP, INC.


70
PINE STREET, 27TH FLOOR


NEW
YORK, N.Y. 10270


 




	
  ANASTASIA D. KELLY

  	
  

  	
  TEL: 212-770-5426

  
	
  VICE CHAIRMAN

  	
  FAX: 212-425-2175

  
	
  LEGAL, HUMAN RESOURCES,

  	
  ANASTASIA.KELLY@AIG.COM

  
	
  CORPORATE COMMUNICATIONS,

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  AND CORPORATE AFFAIRS

  	
   

  	
   

  






 


December 30,
2009


 


Robert
H. Benmosche 


Harvey
Golub


Dennis
D. Dammerman


American
International Group Inc.


70
Pine Street


New
York, NY 10270


 


Dear
Bob, Harvey and Dennis:


 


I would like to take an opportunity, before the year
is over and before my formal departure, to thank AIG, the entire board, and
particularly the three of you for all the help and support you provided to me
during the time I was fortunate to work with you.


 


I also want to let you know that, given my
departure, I do not wish to accept the award of three year stock salary in the
amount of $1,710,000. I believe it is appropriate for those executives who will
remain and work for this value to be delivered to receive these awards, but as
I will not be among that group, I respectfully decline this stock salary award.


 


My heart is heavy that my tenure at AIG is coming to
an end but it is also full of gratitude for the experience of working with such
a dedicated and committed team.


 


Sincerely,


 





 


Anastasia
D. Kelly


 


 


CC:                             Marc R. Trevino


Sullivan and Cromwell


 


Deborah
Kelly


Dickstein
Shapiro Morin & Oshinsky
exv10w23






Exhibit 10.23




Newfield Exploration Company

Non-Employee Director Compensation




	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	For Annual Periods beginning	 	For the Annual Period beginning
	 	 	on or after May 7, 2010	 	May 7, 2009
	Annual Cash Retainer	 	$	50,000	 	 	$	50,000	 
	 
	Meeting Attendance
Fees
	 	None	 	•    $1,500 for Board and
Committee meetings if not on
same day as Board meeting
($750 if telephonic)

•    $1,000 if on same day
as Board but substantial time
required


	 
	Committee Chair Fee
	 	
•    Audit: $15,000

•    Compensation & Management Development: $15,000
	 	
•    Audit: $15,000

•    Compensation & Management Development: $15,000


	 

	 	
•    Nominating & Corporate Governance: $7,500
	 	
•    Nominating & Corporate Governance: $6,000


	 
	Annual Stock Award1	 	
•    $150,000 of value in restricted stock

•    Vests day before next annual meeting

	 	
•    $100,000 of value in restricted stock

•    Vests day before next annual meeting


	 
	Annual Lead
Director Fee
	 	$	30,000	 	 	$	15,000	 








 




			
	1	 	For a description of the Non-Employee
Director Restricted Stock Plan, see the “Non-Employee Director Compensation”
and “Approval of the Newfield Exploration Company 2009 Non-Employee Director
Restricted Stock Plan” sections of Newfield Exploration Company’s Proxy
Statement for its May 7, 2009 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, which was filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 16, 2009.
ATTORNEY GRIEVANCE COMMISSION IN THE

OF MARYLAND COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND Petitioner,

v. Misc. Docket AG No. 51 DAVID LESLIE MCGILL September Term, 2017 Respondent.

ORDER The Court of Appeals of Maryland, having considered the Joint Petition of the Attorney Grievance Commission and Respondent, David Leslie McGill, to place Respondent on Inactive Status by Consent pursuant to Maryland Rules 19-736(c), it is this
20th day of December , 201 7 ; ORDERED, that the Joint Petition be, and it is hereby GRANTED, and the Respondent, David Leslie McGill, is hereby placed on Inactive Status by consent; and it is further, ORDERED, that the Clerk of this Court shall remove the name of David Leslie McGill from the register of attorneys in the Court and certify that fact to the Client Protection Fund of the Bar of Maryland and all Clerks of all judicial tribunals in this State in accordance with Maryland Rule 19-761.

/s/ Clayton Greene Jr. Senior Judge
Jacob MONTGOMERY, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

No. ED 105263

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION TWO.

FILED: February 13, 2018

Mathhew Huckeby, 1010 Market Street, Suite 1100, St. Louis, MO 63101, for Appellant.

Joshua D. Hawley, Garrick Aplin, P.O. Box 899, Jefferson City, MO 65102, for Respondent.

Before Lisa P. Page, P.J., Roy L. Richter, J., and Philip M. Hess, J.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM

Jacob Montgomery ("Movant") appeals from the motion court's judgment denying his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief. The State charged Movant with a total of seven counts: two counts of the class A felony of robbery in the first degree, two counts of the unclassified felony of armed criminal action, one count of the class B felony of burglary in the first degree, and two counts of the class D felony of unlawful use of a weapon. Movant agreed to plead guilty to all counts. The trial court sentenced Movant to concurrent sentences of thirteen years for robbery, armed criminal action, burglary, and unlawful use of a weapon, and four years for unlawful use of a weapon. The motion court denied Movant's motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing. We affirm the motion court's judgment.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The judgment is affirmed pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).
EXHIBIT 31.1




                             CERTIFICATION
           PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


I, Jacinta Sit, certify that:

1.   I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Oxford
Technologies, Inc.;

2.   Based on my knowledge, this report does 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, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects
the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.   The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined
in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

      a)  Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to
ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its
consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,
particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

      b)  Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls
and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the
period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

      c)  Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most
recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of
an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting;
and

5.   The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based
on our most recent evaluation of the internal control over financial reporting,
to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's
board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

      a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal  controls over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial information; and

       b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control
over financial reporting.


Date:  June 25, 2004


/s/ Jacinta Sit
---------------------------------------
Jacinta Sit
President and Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Executive Officer and Principal Accounting
and Financial Officer)
**Exhibit 13**

 

RULE 13a-14(b) CERTIFICATION

 

Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), the undersigned officer of Vodafone Group Plc, a company incorporated under the laws of England and Wales (the “Company”), hereby certifies, to such officer’s knowledge, that:

 

The Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended 31 March 2015 (the “Report”) of the Company fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
| 8   June 2015      | /s/   Vittorio Colao |
|--------------------------------------------------|----------------------|
| Date                                             | Vittorio   Colao     |
|                                             | Chief   Executive    |

 

 

The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code) and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.

 

 

 

 

RULE 13a-14(b) CERTIFICATION

 

Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), the undersigned officer of Vodafone Group Plc, a company incorporated under the laws of England and Wales (the “Company”), hereby certifies, to such officer’s knowledge, that:

 

The Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended 31 March 2015 (the “Report”) of the Company fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
| 8   June 2015      | /s/   Nick Read           |
|--------------------------------------------------|---------------------------|
| Date                                             | Nick   Read               |
|                                             | Chief   Financial Officer |

 

 

The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code) and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.

 

----
exv10w20






Exhibit 10.20




FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE

SAVINGS RESTORATION PLAN

FOR NISOURCE INC. AND AFFILIATES




(AMENDED AND RESTATED EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 2008)



BACKGROUND




	A.	 	NiSource Inc. (the “Company”) maintains the Savings Restoration Plan for NiSource Inc. and
Affiliates, amended and restated effective January 1, 2008 (the “Plan”).
	 
	B.	 	The Company desires to amend the Plan to eliminate mid-year enrollment to the Plan and
instead provide that deferral elections become effective in the year after the year a deferral
agreement is completed.
	 
	C.	 	Article VIII of the Plan gives the Company the ability to amend the Plan.





PLAN AMENDMENT





	1.	 	Effective August 1, 2009, the second paragraph of Section 3.3 is deleted in its entirety and
replaced with the following:
	 
	 	 	Employees who are notified of their eligibility to participate in the Plan shall become a
Participant by delivering to the Committee the written agreement referenced in the preceding
paragraph. The written agreement will be effective with respect to the Employee’s
Compensation earned for services performed beginning January 1st of the Plan Year
after the Plan Year in which the written agreement is delivered.
	 
	2.	 	The remainder of the Plan shall remain unchanged.





          IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has caused this First Amendment to be executed on its behalf,
by its officer duly authorized, this 29th day of September, 2009.




	 	 	 	 	 
	 	NISOURCE INC.

 	 
	 	By:  	/s/ Joel Hoezer
----

----

**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**

| (1)   | The                Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)                of                the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;                and |
|-----------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| (2)   | The                information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material                respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the                Company. |
|-----------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                                                      |   |   |   |   |
|-----------------------------------------------------------|--------|--------|--------|--------|
| /s/                  K. John                  Shukur      |   |   |   |   |
| K.                  John                  Shukur          |   |   |   |   |
| Chief                  Financial                  Officer |   |   |   |   |
| November                  13, 2007                        |   |   |   |   |
CITY OF WHITEWATER, Respondent, v. Nathan STRODER, Appellant.

No. ED 105926

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION FIVE.

Filed: August 14, 2018 Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied September 18, 2018

FOR APPELLANT: Tom K. O'Loughlin II, 1736 N. Kingshighway, Cape Girardeau, Missouri 63701.

FOR RESPONDENT: Frank P. Calamita, 6 South 5th Street, Richmond, Virginia 23219.

Before Lisa P. Page, C.J., Gary M. Gaertner, Jr., J., and James M. Dowd, J.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM

Nathan Stroder appeals the judgment entered upon his convictions following a bench trial in the Circuit Court of Cape Girardeau County of two violations of the *659municipal ordinances of Whitewater, Missouri for failing to connect his household water and sewer lines to the public water and sewer systems.

We affirm. Because an extended opinion would have no precedential value, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).