alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
INLET MARINA OF PALM BEACH, LTD., Appellant, v. SEA DIVERSIFIED, INC., Anderson-Moore Construction Corp., and Ardaman & Associates, Inc., Appellees.

No. 4D17-1406

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[January 31, 2018]

Raymond M. Masciarella II, North Palm Beach, and Tyson J. Waters, Jupiter, for appellant.

Richard G. Rumrell and Lindsey C. Brock III of Rumrell, McLeod & Brock III, Jacksonville, for appellee Sea Diversified.

Gerber, C.J.

The plaintiff marina sued the defendant engineer in alternative causes of action arising from the engineer's design of a concrete runway slab upon which forklifts transport boats from a boat barn to the water launch area. The slab developed cracks, spalling, and other deterioration over a period of time. The engineer filed a motion for summary judgment, arguing that the four-year statute of limitations barred the plaintiff's causes of action. The circuit court entered a final order granting the engineer's motion.

The marina appeals, arguing, among other things, that a genuine issue of material fact existed as to when it discovered or should have discovered the latent design defect in the runway slab with the exercise of due diligence, which should have precluded the court's application of the statute of limitations as a matter of law. *See* § 95.11(3)(c), Fla. Stat. (2013) ( "Actions ... shall be commenced ... [w]ithin four years [for] [a]n action founded on the design, planning, or construction of an improvement to real property, with the time running from ... the date of completion or termination of the contract between the professional engineer ... *except that, when the action involves a latent defect, the time runs from the time the defect is discovered or should have been discovered with the exercise of due diligence* .") (emphasis added).

Based on our review of the record, we agree with the marina on this argument only and reverse. *See**396*Performing Arts Ctr. Auth. v. Clark Constr. Grp., Inc.* , 789 So.2d 392, 394 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001) ("[W]here there is an obvious manifestation of a defect, notice will be inferred at the time of manifestation regardless of whether the plaintiff has knowledge of the exact nature of the defect. *However, ... where the manifestation is not obvious but could be due to causes other than an actionable defect, notice as a matter of law may not be inferred* .") (emphasis added; citation omitted). As in *Performing Arts* , whether the facts and circumstances were sufficient to put the marina on notice that a cause of action existed before the four-year limitations period expired should be a question for the jury.

We conclude without further discussion that the other arguments which the marina raises in support of reversal (including its procedural, equitable tolling, and equitable estoppel arguments) lack merit.

*Reversed and remanded.*

Levine, J., and Singhal, Raag, Associate Judge, concur.
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________ 

No. 1D19-609 

_____________________________ 

REGINALD BROWN, 

Appellant, 

v. 

STATE OF FLORIDA, 

Appellee. 

_____________________________ 

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County. 

Angela M. Cox, Judge. 

July 8, 2019 

PER CURIAM. 

AFFIRMED. 

LEWIS, WETHERELL, and M.K. THOMAS, JJ., concur. 

_____________________________ 

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331. 

_____________________________ 
2 

Reginald Brown, pro se, Appellant. 

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
Mr. Nick Parsons 

Environmental Engineer 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

OAR/OAQPS/SPPD/CCGEPA Denver (Region 8) 

In Re Docket ID: EPA-HQ-Oq-2010-0505 

Dear Mr. Parsons: 

I am a resident of the Colorado Plateau and have grown EXTREMELY concerned about the 

lack of oversight of those who would exploit this beautifully scenic area for extraction purposes 

and industry. In addition, I understand that there are those who would have my state (Utah) be 

able to exchange parcels of public lands for trust lands now administered by entities in the 

state of Utah. I know that this is not your purview, but I thought it important to mention in case 

your department and agency is involved in this part to any degree. 

 

Regarding EPA interaction with extraction industries operating on the Colorado Plateau, we 

have witnessed a deplorable lack of sufficient oversight in this area for far too long. I urge you 

to support adequate and complete environmental oversight so that natural gas exploration and 

extraction does not contaminate our aquifers any longer or anymore. These industrialists are 

too comfortable with their ability to do their business and then to leave the consequences for 

those who live near their work to live with the after effects. 

 

I urge your agency to apply for any and all available funding to insure that the Colorado 

Plateau will remain a safe and beautiful place to live. I have lived here all of my life, and I 

loathe the day that mine oil and gasfield operators have their complete and unfettered way with 

my home. 

 

Kindly put my e-mail address on any listserve groups that would keep me informed of the 

public process options in this matter.

 

 

m i c h a e l 

orton 

 

371 South 200 West 

Richfield, Utah 84701-2811 

 

Docket ID: EPA-HQ-Oq-2010-0505

mjorton 

to: 

Nick Parsons 

08/02/2010 11:42 AM 

Cc: 

jacktheimprovident, drmoench

Show Details 

Page 1 of 1

file://C:\Documents and Settings\nparsons\Local Settings\Temp\notesFCBCEE\~web8252.h... 8/9/2010
| 1. | The      Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)      of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d));      and |
|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 2. | The      information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the      Company. |
|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   |   | /s/ Gregory      R. Hahn              |   |
|--------|--------|--------------------------------------------|--------|
|   |   | Gregory      R. Hahn                       |   |
|   |   | President      and Chief Executive Officer |   |
|   |   | August      6, 2008                        |   |
David MILLER, Jr., Petitioner, v. Julie L. JONES, etc., Respondent.

No. SC17-1211

Supreme Court of Florida.

[January 31, 2018]

Christopher J. Anderson of Law Office of Christopher J. Anderson, Neptune Beach, Florida; and Billy H. Nolas, Chief, Capital Habeas Unit, Office of the Federal Public Defender, Northern District of Florida, Tallahassee, Florida, for Petitioner

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Jennifer A. Donahue, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, Florida, for Respondent

PER CURIAM.

David Miller, Jr., petitions this Court for a writ of habeas corpus seeking relief pursuant to the United States Supreme Court's decision in *Hurst v. Florida*, --- U.S. ----, 136 S.Ct. 616, 193 L.Ed.2d 504 (2016), and our decision on remand in *Hurst v. State* (*Hurst* ), 202 So.3d 40 (Fla. 2016), *cert. denied*, --- U.S. ----, 137 S.Ct. 2161, 198 L.Ed.2d 246 (2017). This Court has jurisdiction. *See* art. V, § 3(b)(9), Fla. Const.

This Court stayed Miller's case pending the disposition of *Hitchcock v. State*, 226 So.3d 216 (Fla. 2017), *cert. denied*, --- U.S. ----, 138 S.Ct. 513, 199 L.Ed.2d 396 (2017). After this Court decided *Hitchcock*, Miller responded to this Court's order to show cause arguing why *Hitchcock* should not be dispositive in this case.

After reviewing Miller's response to the order to show cause, as well as the State's arguments in reply, we conclude that Miller is not entitled to relief. Miller was sentenced to death following a jury's recommendation for death by a vote of seven to five, and Miller's sentence of death became final in 2001. *Miller v. State*, 770 So.2d 1144, 1146 (Fla. 2000). Thus, *Hurst* does not apply retroactively to Miller's sentence. *See**Hitchcock*, 226 So.3d at 217. Accordingly, we deny Miller's petition.

The Court having carefully considered all arguments raised by Miller, we caution that any rehearing motion containing reargument will be stricken. It is so ordered.

LABARGA, C.J., and QUINCE, POLSTON, and LAWSON, JJ., concur.

PARIENTE, J., concurs in result with an opinion.

LEWIS and CANADY, JJ., concur in result.

PARIENTE, J., concurring in result.

*922I concur in result because I recognize that this Court's opinion in *Hitchcock v. State*, 226 So.3d 216 (Fla. 2017), *cert. denied*, --- U.S. ----, 138 S.Ct. 513, 199 L.Ed.2d 396 (2017), is now final. However, I continue to adhere to the views expressed in my dissenting opinion in *Hitchcock*.
Joseph FOX, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 3D17-1714

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed November 8, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 10.9

                ADDENDUM TO UNCONDITIONAL AND CONTINUING GUARANTY

This addendum is made part of the Unconditional Guaranty executed by Overhill
Corporation on April 12, 2002. BancorpSouth (Bank) has been made aware of and
agrees with the following;

Bank acknowledges that prior to the execution hereof, Guarantor initiated the
process of enabling Guarantor to dispose of all of its rights and ownership
interest on Overhill Farms, Inc. through a spin-off (non-taxable prorata
distribution) to the existing shareholders of Guarantor. Bank further
acknowledges that Guarantor is continuing the process of effectuating the
spin-off and will consummate the distribution of all of the stock in its
Overhill Farms, Inc. Subsidiary following the execution hereof. Notwithstanding
the foregoing or any other provision herein contained, Guarantor may, for any or
no consideration, dispose of, by way of a spin-off or otherwise, any or all of
Guarantor's interest in its subsidiary, Overhill Farms, Inc., specifically
including without limitation, all shares of stock of or in Overhill Farms, Inc.
and any or all assets owned by Overhill Farms, Inc.

Guarantor and Bank have agreed upon and have executed this document on this the
12/th/ day of April, 2002.


Overhill Corporation                         BancorpSouth Bank


-----------------------------------          -----------------------------------
William E. Shatley, Treasurer                Glenn Bickerdike, Sr Vice President
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

MEMORANDUM ORDER

Appellate case name: Travis O'Neal Bluntson v. The State of Texas

Appellate case number: 01-18-01100-CR

Trial court case number: 2012R-0022

Trial court: 155th District Court of Austin County

Appellant’s second motion for extension of time to file his response to his counsel’s 

Anders brief is hereby GRANTED. Appellant’s brief is due January 25, 2020.

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: _________/s/ Julie Countiss ___________

Acting individually 

Date: December 31, 2019
Walter CLARK, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 3D16-790

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed January 17, 2018

Carlos J. Martinez, Public Defender, and Natasha Baker-Bradley, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Natalia Costea, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

Before ROTHENBERG, C.J., and EMAS and LOGUE, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. *See**Floyd v. State*, 569 So.2d 1225 (Fla. 1990) ; *Everett v. State*, 208 So.3d 833 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017) ; *L.L. v. State*, 189 So.3d 252 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016).
Exhibit 99.2

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

In connection  with the amended  Quarterly  Report of Polaris Income Fund I (the
"Partnership")  on Form 10-Q/A for the period  ended June 30, 2002 as filed with
the Securities  and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I,
Stephen E. Yost,  Chief  Financial  Officer  of  Polaris  Investment  Management
Corporation,  the General Partner of the  Partnership,  certify,  pursuant to 18
U.S.C.  ss. 1350, as adopted  pursuant to ss. 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; and

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


POLARIS AIRCRAFT INCOME FUND I
(Registrant)
By: Polaris Investment Management Corporation
    General Partner


By: /s/ Stephen E. Yost
    -------------------
    Stephen E. Yost
    Chief Financial Officer
    December 9, 2002
From: "Hill, Donna B." <DBHILL@southernco.com>

To: Josh Hall/DC/USEPA/US@EPA

Cc: Ronald Jordan/DC/USEPA/US@EPA

Date: 10/13/2009 04:01 PM

Subject: Draft Sampling Instructions

Josh,

As promised, attached are the instructions that I asked Dr. Boothe to

prepare for the collection of 7 or 8 split samples for the EPA Collision

Cell ICP

- MS Optimization Study. Please feel free to use any or all of

these instructions for your use. Our primary focus is to collect

identical splits for the study so that we can compare analytical results

by different methods. We ask that three (3) splits be sent directly to

Albion Environmental for the confirmi ng analyses. We will more than

likely analyze the samples by HR

- ICP

- MS, ICP

- AES, Se by HGAF, and

DRC

- ICP

- MS. We may also consider sending samples to a collision cell

laboratory. Please advise on the list of trace elements that you will

be analyzing by c ollision cell. As we discussed by phone, I would

appreciate a list of the 9 facilities that will be asked to provide

samples for this study so that we can help them if they have any

questions about the sampling instructions.

Please call or email me if you have any questions.

Thanks,

Donna

205

- 587

- 4846

(See attached file: DRAFT_EPA_CRC_Study_Sampling_Insts_10

- 13

- 09_REV.doc)
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                               9

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>          3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               Dec-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                    Jun-30-1999
<CASH>                            4,382,705
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>              188,602
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                 17,300,000
<TRADING-ASSETS>                          0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>      59,197,281
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>            9,262,266
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>             68,521,764
<LOANS>                         143,169,436
<ALLOWANCE>                       2,246,890
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                  244,159,795
<DEPOSITS>                      200,507,083
<SHORT-TERM>                     20,000,000
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>               1,142,196
<LONG-TERM>                       5,000,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                     0
<PREFERRED>                               0
<COMMON>                          2,239,775
<OTHER-SE>                       15,093,084
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>  244,159,795
<INTEREST-LOAN>                   5,702,706
<INTEREST-INVEST>                 2,162,402
<INTEREST-OTHER>                      1,968
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                  7,867,076
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                1,843,729
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                2,144,221
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>             5,722,855
<LOAN-LOSSES>                       180,000
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                        0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                   3,930,506
<INCOME-PRETAX>                   3,107,411
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>        1,986,046
<EXTRAORDINARY>                           0
<CHANGES>                                 0
<NET-INCOME>                      1,986,046
<EPS-BASIC>                          2.44
<EPS-DILUTED>                          2.44
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                         8.29
<LOANS-NON>                       1,905,739
<LOANS-PAST>                         20,325
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                          0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                           0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                          0
<CHARGE-OFFS>                        88,989
<RECOVERIES>                         35,508
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                 2,120,371
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>              2,246,890
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                       0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>             584,697


</TABLE>
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee:*                         National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine Special Emphasis Panel Clinical Sciences.                    

*Date:*                         June 22-23, 2009.                    

*Time:*                         8 a.m. to 5 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         Embassy Suites at the Chevy Chase Pavilion,  4300 Military Road, NW., Washington, DC 20015.                    

*Contact Person:*                         Laurie Friedman Donze, PhD, Scientific Review Officer, Office of Scientific Review, National Center for Complementary, and Alternative Medicine, NIH, 6707 Democracy Blvd., Suite 401, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-402-1030,                         *donzel@mail.nih.gov.*

Dated: March 31, 2009.

Jennifer Spaeth,

Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

 [FR Doc. E9-7709 Filed 4-3-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
Steven Anthony MULLIN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D15-3173

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed September 29, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
# Official Journal C 25/22 J

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 25 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 6422 January 2021 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 25

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 6422 January 2021

---

| Contents | page |
| --- | --- |
| | II   Information |
| | INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2021/C 25/01 | Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union — Cases where the Commission raises no objections (
  1
  ) | 1 |

Contents

page

II   Information

INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2021/C 25/01

Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union — Cases where the Commission raises no objections (
  1
  )

1

1

---

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance. |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance.

1

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
Franklin B. MANN, Jr., Appellant, v. Deirdre L.S. MANN, n/k/a Deirdre Sullivan ; Cosas Buenas Baratas, Inc., a Florida Corporation; Thrift-Dee, LLC, a Florida Limited Liability Company; DLSFBM, LLC, a Florida Limited Liability Company; and JLS, Ltd, Appellees.

Case No. 2D16-3649

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed September 1, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Michael WEAVER, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 3D17-1148

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed November 01, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
**EXHIBIT 23.1**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

We consent to the incorporationby reference in Registration Statements Nos. 333-160201 and 333-164606 on Form S-8, of our reports dated February 16, 2011, relating to the (1) consolidated financial statements and financial statement schedule of Mead Johnson NutritionCompany and subsidiaries (the “Company”) (which report expresses an unqualified opinion and includes an explanatory paragraph relating to the financial statement allocations of expenses from Bristol-Myers Squibb Company in 2008) and(2) the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting, appearing in the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Mead Johnson Nutrition Company for the year ended December 31, 2010. 

/s/    DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP 

Chicago, Illinois 

February 16, 2011
Exhibit 32.1











CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF


THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2004








In connection with the Annual Report of Sungame Corp. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ending December 31, 2012, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Neil Chandran, President of the Company, respectfully certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2004, that:





That as Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, I conducted an evaluation of the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2012. In making this evaluation, I used the framework in Internal Control – Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Based on our evaluation under the framework in Internal Control – Integrated Framework, I concluded that our internal control over financial reporting was not effective as of December 31, 2012.





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





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









/s/Neil Chandran


Neil Chandran


President (Principal Executive and Financial Officer)








Date: November 6, 2013