alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 52 (Thursday, March 19, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 11764]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-5897]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-65,519]


Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company, Union City, TN; Notice of 
Termination of Investigation

    Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an 
investigation was initiated on March 9, 2009 in response to a worker 
petition filed by the United Steelworkers of America, Local 878, on 
behalf of workers of Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company, Union City, 
Tennessee.
    The petitioner has requested that the petition be withdrawn. 
Consequently, the investigation has been terminated.

    Signed at Washington, DC, this 10th day of March 2009.
Richard Church,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
 [FR Doc. E9-5897 Filed 3-18-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
CHARLESTON.

#### Merriner v. Merriner *et als.*

Submitted June 16, 1903.

Decided November 21, 1903.

1. Injunction.

A general allegation that the defendant is interfereing with the plaintiff “in the matter of farming, cultivating or tilling a farm on which plaintiff resides” presents no sufficient grounds for an injunction, (p. 170).

Appeal and *supersedeas*from Circuit Court, Wetzel County. Action by David Merriner against M. II. Merriner. Judgment for defendant and plaintiff appeals.

*Affirmed.*

*170T. P. Jaoobs and E. B. Swodgrass, for appellant.

MclNTiRE *&*McIntire and M. lb Morris,-for appellee.

DeNt, Judge:

David Merriner appeals from an order of the circuit court of Wetzel County, entered on the 28th day of March, 1902, dissolving an injunction obtained by him against his father, Matthew H. Merriner.

The facts as shown by the bill and exhibits are that David Merriner holds in trust for himself and father a certain tract of land known as the Beck Farm. By the deed conveying title to him a life estate and right of possession is vested in the father. The son says “that under an agreement between himself and father he is entitled to possession of the farm for cultivation and tilling,” that his said father “has become disagreeable, and ill tempered so that it is impossible to deal with him or to come to any amicable adjustment between themselves; that he continually interferes with your orator in his management of said farm; that while your orator holds said property in trust for himself and said Matthew II. Merriner, the said Matthew H. Merriner has so continuously interfered with his rights and duties in the performance of his trust that it has become impossible for him longer to discharge his trust on account of the interference and hostility of the said Matthew H. Merriner.” The only trust the plaintiff shows he holds by his bill is the legal title to the lands jointly for the benefit of himself and father, while his father under the deeds is entitled to a life estate in and the possession of such lands, and the plaintiff occupies them by virtue of an alleged agreement with his father, and therefore as his tenant and not as his trustee. It is his tenancy that is interfered with and not his trusteeship.

He prays that his father “may be inhibited, restrained and enjoined from interfering with” him “in the matter of farming, cultivating or tilling the said farm on which he now resides until” the matter between them may be settled.

The circuit court awarded a preliminary injunction, and then dissolved it on motion of the father.

The bill presents no sufficient grounds for injunction. It wholly fails to- show or allege any irreparable damage either com*171mitted or threatened. *Becker*v. *McGraw,*48 W. Va. 539; *Greathouse*v. Greathouse, 46 W. Va. 21.

If the plaintiff has any sufficient grounds for injunction he fails to set it out in his bill. The order of dissolution is affirmed.

*Affirmed.*
BRIAN QUINN

Chief Justice

JAMES T. CAMPBELL

Justice

MACKEY K. HANCOCK

Justice

PATRICK A. PIRTLE

Justice 

# Court of Appeals

Seventh District of Texas

Potter County Courts Building

501 S. Fillmore, Suite 2-A

Amarillo, Texas 79101-2449

www.txcourts.gov/7thcoa.aspx VIVIAN LONG

Clerk

MAILING ADDRESS:

P. O. Box 9540

79105-9540

(806) 342-2650

October 21, 2015

Adam C. Burney

Mark D. Scott

SCOTT, McNEILL & BURNEY, PLLC

3000 East Loop 820

Fort Worth, TX 76112

* DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL * Steven W. Conder

Assistant Criminal District Attorney

401 W. Belknap

Fort Worth, TX 76196

* DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL *

RE: Case Numbers: 07-14-00083-CR, 07-14-00084-CR, 07-14-00085-CR

Trial Court Case Numbers: 1328179D, 1328181D, 1344140R

Style: Malishia Lynn Booker v. The State of Texas

Dear Counsel:

The Court this day issued an opinion and judgment in the captioned causes.

T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 48.

In addition, pursuant to Texas Government Code, Sec. 51.204(b)(2), exhibits on

file with this Court, if any

, will be destroyed three years after final disposition of the case

or at an earlier date if ordered by the Court.

Very truly yours, 

# Vivian Long

VIVIAN LONG, CLERK

xc: Honorable David Scott Wisch (DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL)

Thomas A. Wilder (DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL)
Amendment No. 3 to the 2003 Director Stock Ownership Plan



 Exhibit 10.55 
 AMENDMENT NO. 3 TO THE 
 QUAKER CHEMICAL CORPORATION 

2003 DIRECTOR STOCK OWNERSHIP PLAN 
 (As amended January 26, 2011) 
 WHEREAS, Quaker Chemical Corporation (the
“Corporation”) maintains the Quaker Chemical Corporation 2003 Director Stock Ownership Plan (the “Plan”) for the benefit of its Eligible Directors; and 
 WHEREAS, the Corporation wishes to amend the Plan to change the cash and stock allocations applicable to the Annual Retainer; 
 NOW, THEREFORE, the Plan is hereby amended as follows: 
  

	 	1.	Section 6 (“Payment of Annual Retainer”) is amended in its entirety to read as follows: 


 

	 	(a)	The Company will pay the Annual Retainer on the Retainer Payment Date. 

  

	 	(b)	Subject to adjustment in accordance with Section 6(d), if on the Measuring Date immediately preceding the Retainer Payment Date for 2004 or any subsequent year an
Eligible Director is the Beneficial Owner of less than 7,500 shares of Common Stock, 75% of the Annual Retainer payable to the Eligible Director for such year shall be paid in shares of Common Stock and 25% of the Annual Retainer for such year shall
be paid in cash. 

  

	 	(c)	Shares of Common Stock issued in payment of the Annual Retainer shall be valued at Fair Market Value. 


 

	 	(d)	No fractional shares of Common Stock shall be issued pursuant to the Plan. The number of shares of Common Stock otherwise issuable to an Eligible Director on any
Retainer Payment Date, if not a whole number, shall be rounded down to the nearest whole share, and any fractional share otherwise issuable shall be paid in cash. 


 

	 	(e)	The Plan is not intended, and shall not be deemed, to limit the authority of the Board or any committee of the Board that is so authorized by the Board to increase or
decrease the amount of the Annual Retainer from time to time. 

  

	 	2.	The first sentence of Section 7 (“Discretionary Election”) is amended to read as follows: 


 

	 	7.	Discretionary Election. 

 If on
the Measuring Date immediately preceding the Retainer Payment Date an Eligible Director is the Beneficial Owner of 7,500 or more shares of Common Stock, the Eligible Director may, in the Eligible








 
Director’s discretion, within the 10-day period following the Measuring Date for the applicable year (the “Option Period”), irrevocably elect to receive Common Stock in payment of
a percentage (up to 100%) of the Annual Retainer for the applicable year. 
  

	 	3.	Section 8 (“Suspension, Termination and Amendment of the Plan”) is amended by deleting the reference to Subsections 6(c), 6(d) and 6(e).


  

	 	4.	Section 9 (“Adjustment Provisions”) is amended by deleting the reference to 6(c), 6(d) and 6(e). 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Quaker Chemical Corporation has caused these presents to be duly executed on this 26th day of January, 2011.

  

									
		 		 		 	Quaker Chemical Corporation
					
	Attest:	 	   /s/ Irene M. Kisleiko
	 		 	By:	 	     /s/ D. Jeffry Benoliel

		 		 		 		 	    D. Jeffry Benoliel
		 		 		 		 	     Vice President – Global Strategy,
     General Counsel and Corporate Secretary
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Quantay Davis, Appellant.

[718 NYS2d 864]

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County (Cacciabaudo, J.), rendered October 5, 1998.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed *(see, People v*
      *477
      *Pellegrino,*60 NY2d 636). S. Miller, J. P., McGinity, Luciano and Smith, JJ., concur.
## S IXTH 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________ Case No. 6D2 3

- 2478 Lower Tribunal No. 2022

- C C

- 00810

- O

_____________________________ T REVOR S. B ROWN , Appellant ,
v. C APITAL O NE B ANK (USA), N.A. ,

Appellee

.

_____________________________ Appeal from the C ounty Court for Orange County

.

Andrew L. Cameron , Judge. June 18, 2024
PER CURIAM

. AFFIRMED

. NARDELLA , WHITE and MIZE , JJ., c oncur.
Trevor S. Brown, Orlando, pro se. Kevin Spinozza , of Pollack & Rosen, P.A. , Coral Gables , for Appellee.

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING

AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF TIMELY FILED
Robert RHODES, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

ED 106177

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION FOUR.

Filed: October 16, 2018

Gwenda R. Robinson, 1010 Market Street, Suite 1100, St. Louis, MO 63101, for appellant.

Joshua D. Hawley, Gregory L. Barnes, P.O. Box 899, Jefferson City, MO 65102, for respondent.

Before: Kurt S. Odenwald, P.J., Gary M. Gaertner, Jr., J., and Colleen Dolan, J.

***ORDER***

PER CURIAM.

*415Robert Rhodes appeals the judgment of the motion court denying his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been provided with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order. The judgment is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).
Offer Letter for J. Lynn Greenstein



 Exhibit 10.43 

 

 

 November 16, 2009         
 Lynn Greenstein 
 Lynn, 
 Congratulations on your new position as President, Nationwide Bank, reporting to me. I am looking forward to working with you in this new capacity.

 Details of your new role and compensation package are outlined below. 
 Executive Grade 
 You will remain a grade 12 Senior Vice President. 
 Base Salary 
 Your annual base salary will
remain at $294,200. 
 Annual Incentive 
 You will continue to participate in Performance Incentive Plan (PIP) at your current target rate of 60%, based on a combination of business unit and individual performance. 
 Long-Term Incentive 
 You will retain 2009 long-term incentive (LTI) award at a target of
$263,200. All long-term awards are reviewed annually and you will receive a new award in 2010. 
 All executive grades and variable rewards
plans are subject to approval by the Board of Directors and are reviewed on an annual basis. 
 Please feel free to contact me if you have any
questions. 
 Larry Hilsheimer 
 President and COO, Direct and Customer Solutions 
  

					
	 /s/ Lynn Greenstein
	 		  	                  
	Lynn Greenstein	 		  	(Date)

  

	CC:	Nick Muntean, VP Human Resources
SCWC-12-0000870
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI # I

ASSOCIATION OF CONDOMINIUM HOMEOWNERS OF TROPICS AT WAIKELE, by its Board of Directors, Respondent/Plaintiff-Appellee,

vs. PATSY NAOMI SAKUMA, Petitioner/Defendant-Appellant,

and FIRST HAWAIIAN BANK, a Hawai # i corporation; and WAIKELE COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION, a Hawai # i nonprofit corporation,

Respondents/Defendants-Appellees.

CERITORARI TO THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS (CAAP-12-0000870; CIV. NO. 07-1-1487) ORDER ACCEPTING APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI, VACATING THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS’ JUDGMENT ON APPEAL, AND REMANDING THE CASE TO THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS (By: Nakayama, Acting C.J., McKenna, Pollack, and Wilson, JJ. and Circuit Judge Kubo, in place of Recktenwald, C.J, recused)

On September 28, 2015, Petitioner/Defendant-Appellant Patsy Naomi Sakuma (Sakuma) filed an application for a writ of certiorari seeking review of the Intermediate Court of Appeals’ (ICA) September 23, 2015 judgment on appeal. Although it is understandable that the ICA presumed it had jurisdiction and Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCWC-12-0000870 06-NOV-2015 09:45 AMaddressed Sakuma’s appeal after the majority’s opinion in Ass’n

of Condo. Homeowners of Tropics at Waikele ex rel. Bd. of Dirs. v. Sakuma, 131 Hawai # i 254, 318 P.3d 94 (2013) was issued, our recent decision in Deutsche Bank Nat’l Trust Co. v. Amasol, 135 Hawai# i 357, 351 P.3d 584 (2015) clarified that the ICA did not have jurisdiction to hear the appeal. Therefore,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the application for writ of certiorari is accepted. The ICA’s September 23, 2015 judgment on appeal is vacated for lack of jurisdiction. The case is remanded to the ICA with instructions to temporarily remand the case to the Circuit Court of the First Circuit (circuit court) to enter a written order disposing of Sakuma’s June 7, 2012 motion for reconsideration, and direct the circuit court to supplement the record on appeal with the written order.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai # i, November 6, 2015. Patsy N. Sakuma, petitioner pro se /s/ Paula A. Nakayama /s/ Sabrina S. McKenna /s/ Richard W. Pollack /s/ Michael D. Wilson /s/ Edward H. Kubo, Jr.

2
**Exhibit 99.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

The undersigned certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C.§ 1350, that:

 

(1)                                  The accompanying Quarterly Report on Form10-QSB for the period ended March 31, 2003, fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;and

 

(2)                                  The information contained in the accompanyingReport fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresults of operations of the Company.

 

 
| Date:  | May  15, 2003 |      | /s/ Floyd A. Schultz |
|--------|---------------|-----------|----------------------|
|   |          | President |
|   |          |      |
|   |          |      |
| Date:  | May  15, 2003 |      | /s/ Douglas G. Foss  |
|   |          | Treasurer |

 

----
EX PARTE Louis LEVINE, Applicant

NO. AP-75,302 & AP-75,303

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Date filed: December 7, 2005

Jessie G. Rivera, San Antonio, TX, for applicant.

Edward F. Shaughnessy, III, Assistant Criminal District Attorney, San Antonio, TX, for State.

KELLER, P.J.

*29There is a jurisdictional problem with this case. The writ of habeas corpus is the remedy to be used when any person is restrained in his liberty. (1)"Restraint" means:

> the kind of control which one person exercises over another, not to confine him within certain limits, but to subject him to the general authority and power of the person claiming such right. (2)

The term "restraint" has been construed broadly in the context of habeas corpus writ applications, (3) but the requirement of some kind of restraint still exists.

Applicant has not alleged restraint. He acknowledges that he has served all of his time, and he makes no further reference to anything we might even possibly construe as restraint. I would dismiss the application for lack of jurisdiction.

Even if this Court had jurisdiction, though, there is another problem with granting relief. There is nothing in the record to support the trial court's recommendation, because applicant's name does not match the name on the documents that supposedly show his birth date.

Applicant's name is Louis Levine. But the birth certificate attached to the application is for a "Luis Martinez." Applicant attempts to connect himself to the birth certificate by styling himself "Luis Martinez/aka Louis Levine" and by signing his name "Luis Martinez," but those are the only places the names are connected. And the space for "nickname/alias" on applicant's offense report is left blank. Applicant has obtained a birth certificate for someone named Luis, with a last name different from his own, who was born on July 13, 1975. This birth certificate does not support a conclusion that applicant was born on July 13, 1975.

The trial court made a finding that CJIS (4) lists applicant's birth date as an earlier date that would make him seventeen at the time of the offense. The court nevertheless makes a finding that "applicant's" birth certificate shows that he was sixteen at the time of the offense.

Louis Levine and Luis Martinez may be the same person, but there is no evidence in the record to support that conclusion-no testimony, no documents, nothing. Before granting relief from a conviction based upon an applicant's age, I would require some proof that the birth certificate proffered in support of the claim belongs to the applicant.

I respectfully dissent.

Keller, P.J., filed a dissenting opinion in which HERVEY, and COCHRAN, JJ., joined.

1

Article 11.01, Texas Code of Criminal Procedure.

2

Article 11.22, Texas Code of Criminal Procedure.

3

*Ex parte Cathcart* , 13 S.W.3d 414, 417 (Tex. Crim. App. 2000).

4

The Criminal Justice Information Services Division of the FBI.
<Page>

                                                                      EXHIBIT 32

                                 CERTIFICATIONS
                 PURSUANT TO 18 UNITED STATES CODE SECTION 1350

     Each of the undersigned hereby certifies that to his knowledge the report
on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2005 of Allstate Life
Insurance Company of New York filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in such report fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of
operations of Allstate Life Insurance Company of New York.

March 13, 2006

                                     /s/  Casey J. Sylla
                                     -------------------
                                     Casey J. Sylla
                                     Chairman of the Board and President


                                     /s/  John C. Pintozzi
                                     ---------------------
                                     John C. Pintozzi
                                     Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
<PAGE>
                                                                     Exhibit 23b

                          INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

The Board of Directors
Bay View Capital Corporation and subsidiaries:


We consent to the inclusion in the registration statements (Nos. 33-30602,
33-30603, 33-36161, 33-41924, 33-95724, 33-95726, 333-37027, 333-37029,
333-37031, and 333-92637) on Form S-8 and in the registration statements (Nos.
333-29757 and 333-64877) on Form S-3 of Bay View Capital Corporation and
subsidiaries of our report dated February 14, 2001, with respect to the
consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive income (loss),
stockholders' equity and cash flows of Bay View Capital Corporation and
subsidiaries for the year December 31, 2000, which report appears in the
December 31, 2002, annual report on Form 10-K of Bay View Capital Corporation
and subsidiaries.

/s/ KPMG LLP

San Francisco, California
March 14, 2003
EXHIBIT 32.1

Certification Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection
with the Quarterly Report of Mewbourne Energy Partners 03-A, L.P. (the Registrant) on Form 10-Q for the three months ended March 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report),
the undersigned hereby certifies, in the capacity as indicated below and pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | 1. | The 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 the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Registrant.
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                   |  |  |  |                                   |  |                        
|------------------ |  |  |  | --------------------------------- |  | -----------------------
|                   |  |  |  | /s/ Curtis W. Mewbourne          
|                   |  |  |  | Name:                             |  | Curtis W. Mewbourne    
|Date: May 15, 2007 |  |  |  | Title:                            |  | Chief Executive Officer
|                   |  |  |  | Mewbourne Development Corporation