alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Jensen *v.*Jacobs Pharmacy Company.

Evans, P. J.

To the direction of a verdict rendered on January 13, 1914, a bill of exceptions was sued out, which contained eight pages. In the certificate the trial judge stated: “This bill of exceptions was presented to me on February 2nd, 1914. I was out of the State during the month of February, 1914. I turned over the bill of exceptions to counsel for defendant in error, March 5th, 1914. He stated that the bill of exceptions was not correct; and I requested counsel for defendant in error and plaintiff in error to try to agree upon the bill. It was presented to me again and agreed upon by counsel this May 23rd, 1914, on which day I sign this certificate.” On motion to dismiss the bill of exceptions, on the ground thp,t it is not certified within the time required by law: *Eeld,*that the motion must prevail. *Walker*v. *Wood,*119 *Ga.**725624 (46 S. E. 869); *Dykes*v. *Brock,*128 *Ga.*395 (57 S. E. 700); *Duke*v. *Kelly,*136 *Ga.*832 (72 S. E. 250).

July 17, 1915.

Equitable petition; from Eulton. Motion to dismiss writ of error. •

*Lowndes Calhoun,*for plaintiff.

*C. T. & L. C. Hopkins,*for defendant.

*Writ of error dismissed.*

*All the Justices concur.*
NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

NO. CAAP-23-0000009

IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS

OF THE STATE OF HAWAI I

IKA M. VEA, JR., Claimant-Appellant-Appellant, v.

COUNTY OF HAWAII, DEPARTMENT OF PARKS & RECREATION,

Employer-Appellee-Appellee, and 

ACCLAMATION INSURANCE MANAGEMENT SERVICES,

Third-Party Administrator-Appellee-Appellee

APPEAL FROM THE LABOR AND INDUSTRIAL APPEALS BOARD

(DCD NO. 9-16-48117; AB NO. 2020-131 (WH))

ORDER APPROVING STIPULATION TO DISMISS APPEAL

(By: Ginoza, Chief Judge, Wadsworth and Chan, JJ.)

Upon consideration of (1) the January 12, 2023 Motion

Requesting Leave to Withdraw as Counsel by Vladimir Devens

(Devens), counsel for Claimant-Appellant Ika M. Vea, Jr.

(Appellant), (2) the January 13, 2023 Motion to Withdraw Appeal

by Appellant, (3) the January 18, 2023 Stipulation for Dismissal,

and (4) the January 19, 2023 Motion to Withdraw Appeal by

Appellant, the papers in support, and the record, it appears

that: 

(1) Devens requests that he be allowed to withdraw as

counsel for Appellant, Appellant was served a copy of the motion

and did not object to the request to withdraw, and withdrawal

will not have a material adverse effect on Appellant's interest;

(2) the appeal has not been docketed; 

(3) pursuant to Hawai i Rules of Appellate Procedure

Rule 42(a), the parties stipulate to dismiss the appeal with each

party to bear their own attorneys' fees and costs; and

Electronically Filed

Intermediate Court of Appeals

CAAP-23-0000009

27-JAN-2023

07:58 AM

Dkt. 15 OAWST
NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

(4) the stipulation is dated and signed by counsel for

all parties appearing in the appeal.

Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the January 12,

2023 Motion Requesting Leave to Withdraw as Counsel is granted. 

Upon the filing of this order, Appellant is deemed to be selfrepresented and shall be conventionally served. The January 18,

2023 Stipulation for Dismissal is approved and the appeal is

dismissed. The January 13, 2023 Motion to Withdraw Appeal and

the January 19, 2023 Motion to Withdraw Appeal are denied. The

appellate clerk shall conventionally serve Appellant a copy of

this order.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai i, January 27, 2023.

/s/ Lisa M. Ginoza

Chief Judge

/s/ Clyde J. Wadsworth

Associate Judge

/s/ Derrick H.M. Chan

Associate Judge

2
# C_2010309EN.01S00301.xml

| 13.11.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 309/s3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.11.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 309/s3

---

NOTICE

On 13 December 2010, in Official Journal of the European Union C 309 A, the ‘Common catalogue of varieties of agricultural plant species — seventh supplement to the 28th complete edition’ will be published.

Official Journal of the European Union

Subscribers to the Official Journal may obtain the same number of copies and language versions of this Official Journal as those to which they subscribe free of charge. They are requested to return the attached order form, duly completed and bearing their subscription registration number (code appearing on the left of each label and beginning with: O/...). This Official Journal will remain available free of charge for 1 year from the date of its publication.

Non-subscribers can order this Official Journal against payment from one of our sales offices (see http://publications.europa.eu/others/agents/index_en.htm).

This Official Journal — like all Official Journals (L, C, CA, CE) — can be consulted free of charge online at http://eur-lex.europa.eu

Image

---
#### In the Matter of Steven Dennehy, Appellant, v Thomas A. Coughlin, III, et al., Respondents.

— Judgment unanimously reversed, on the law, and matter remitted to Supreme Court, Wyoming County, for further proceedings, in accordance with the following memorandum: An attorney with the Wyoming County-Attica Legal Aid Bureau, Inc., assigned to represent petitioner, commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding on behalf of petitioner to nullify a Superintendent’s proceeding conducted at the Attica Correctional Facility which resulted in a penalty of special confinement and 60 days’ loss of good time. On this appeal from the denial of his petition, we sustain petitioner’s *pro se*claim that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel because the issue of misidentification, the basis of his defense at the disciplinary hearing, was not raised at Special Term. The form petition, prepared and sworn to by petitioner’s attorney, alleges that the Superintendent’s proceeding was "illegally conducted” and recites a litany of rights but contains no factual allegation and fails to allege that the procedures used to identify petitioner were overly suggestive. No transcript of the proceedings in Special Term was made a part of the record; consequently, we are unable to determine whether this issue was in fact raised. However, the petition fails to comply with the requirements of the CPLR, makes no claim of misidentification and is facially deficient. The judgment is reversed and the matter remitted to Special Term for a new hearing with leave to the petitioner to amend his petition to assert issues related to his identification as the perpetrator of the alleged assault and other pertinent claims. (Appeal from judgment of Supreme Court, Wyoming County, Dadd, J. — art 78.) Present — Callahan, J. P., Denman, Boomer, Pine and Schnepp, JJ.
U.S. flagAn official website of the United States government
                    Here's how you know **Official websites use .gov**
                            
                            A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
 **Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**
                            
                            A **lock** (                            
                              A locked padlock                                                      
                            
                            ) or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Menu Agricultural Research Service
						
                    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
 Poisonous Plant Research: Logan, UT
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    Careers


        


                    IACUC SummariesSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Pacific West Area Logan, Utah Poisonous Plant Research Docs





- Directions

Aboutusheadline bar


Return to top


Connect with ARS Sign up


ARS Home
                            USDA.gov
                            Plain Writing
                            Policies & Links
                            Civil Rights Statements
                            FOIA
                            Accessibility Statement
                            Privacy Policy
                            Non-Discrimination Statement
                            Quality of Information
                            USA.gov
                            WhiteHouse.gov
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 State

          - [Public Notice: 11491]

# ACTION:

Notice of renewal of the charter of the Foreign Affairs Policy Board.

# SUMMARY:

Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act, the Department of State hereby provides notice of the renewal of the charter of the Foreign Affairs Policy Board (“the Board”). The Foreign Affairs Policy Board provides the Secretary of State with advice, feedback, and perspectives from a diverse array of experts to advance the Department's mission and help root American foreign policy in the needs and aspirations of the American people. The Board's activities are advisory only.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Designated Federal Officer Jennifer R. Littlejohn in the Office of Policy Planning, U.S. Department of State, at email:                         *LittlejohnJR@state.gov.*

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Board is established under the general authority of the Secretary of State and the Department of State as set forth in Title 22 of the United States Code, in particular Section 2656 of that Title and consistent with the Federal Advisory Committee Act.

*Authority:*                     5 U.S.C. Appendix, 41 CFR 102-3.65.                

Salman Ahmed, 

Director, Office of Policy Planning, Department of State.

[FR Doc. 2021-16987 Filed 8-9-21; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4710-10-P
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 21-6818

JESSE ALMENDAREZ,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at 

Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (5:21-ct-03089-FL)

Submitted: November 23, 2021 Decided: November 30, 2021

Before NIEMEYER, FLOYD, and RUSHING, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jesse Almendarez, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Jesse Almendarez appeals the district court’s order dismissing his action filed 

pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 

U.S. 388 (1971), without prejudice for failure to prosecute and failure to comply with the 

district court’s earlier order. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the 

informal brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Almendarez’s informal brief does not 

challenge the basis for the district court’s disposition, he has forfeited appellate review of 

the court’s order. See Jackson v. Lightsey, 775 F.3d 170, 177 (4th Cir. 2014) (“The 

informal brief is an important document; under Fourth Circuit rules, our review is limited 

to issues preserved in that brief.”). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. We 

deny Almendarez’s motion seeking “Reconsideration of Original Jurisdiction Cases.” We 

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately 

presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional 

process. 

AFFIRMED
III 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. RES. 420 

Designating April 5, 2012, as ‘‘Gold Star Wives Day’’. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

APRIL 17, 2012 

Mr. BURR (for himself and Mrs. MURRAY) submitted the following resolution; 

which was considered and agreed to 

RESOLUTION 

Designating April 5, 2012, as ‘‘Gold Star Wives Day’’. 

Whereas the Senate honors the sacrifices made by the 

spouses and families of the fallen members of the Armed 

Forces of the United States; 

Whereas Gold Star Wives of America, Inc. represents the 

spouses and families of the members and veterans of the 

Armed Forces of the United States who have died on active duty or as a result of a service-connected disability; 

Whereas the primary mission of Gold Star Wives of America, 

Inc. is to provide services, support, and friendship to the 

spouses of the fallen members and veterans of the Armed 

Forces of the United States; 

Whereas, in 1945, Gold Star Wives of America, Inc. was organized with the help of Eleanor Roosevelt to assist the 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•SRES 420 ATS 

families left behind by the fallen members and veterans 

of the Armed Forces of the United States; 

Whereas the first meeting of Gold Star Wives of America, 

Inc. was held on April 5, 1945; 

Whereas April 5, 2012, marks the 67th anniversary of the 

first meeting of Gold Star Wives of America, Inc.; 

Whereas the members and veterans of the Armed Forces of 

the United States bear the burden of protecting the freedom of the people of the United States; and 

Whereas the sacrifices of the families of the fallen members 

and veterans of the Armed Forces of the United States 

should never be forgotten: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the Senate— 

2 (1) designates April 5, 2012, as ‘‘Gold Star 

3 Wives Day’’; 

4 (2) honors and recognizes— 

5 (A) the contributions of the members of 

6 Gold Star Wives of America, Inc.; and 

7 (B) the dedication of the members of Gold 

8 Star Wives of America, Inc. to the members 

9 and veterans of the Armed Forces of the United 

10 States; and 

11 (3) encourages the people of the United States 

12 to observe Gold Star Wives Day to promote aware13 ness of— 

14 (A) the contributions and dedication of the 

15 members of Gold Star Wives of America, Inc. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•SRES 420 ATS 

1 to the members and veterans of the Armed 

2 Forces of the United States; and 

3 (B) the important role Gold Star Wives of 

4 America, Inc. plays in the lives of the spouses 

5 and families of the fallen members and veterans 

6 of the Armed Forces of the United States. 

Æ 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Case: 1:03-cv-01915 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/17/03 Page 1 of 6 PageID #:1
Case: 1:03-cv-01915 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/17/03 Page 2 of 6 PageID #:2
Case: 1:03-cv-01915 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/17/03 Page 3 of 6 PageID #:3
Case: 1:03-cv-01915 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/17/03 Page 4 of 6 PageID #:4
Case: 1:03-cv-01915 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/17/03 Page 5 of 6 PageID #:5
Case: 1:03-cv-01915 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/17/03 Page 6 of 6 PageID #:6
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.                  

###### Small Business Administration

          - [License No. 05/05-0342]

Notice is hereby given that Stonehenge Community Impact Fund, L.P., 191 W Nationwide Blvd., Suite 600, Columbus, OH 43215, a Federal Licensee under the Small Business Investment Act of 1958, as amended (“the Act”), in connection with the financing of a small concerns, has sought an exemption under Section 312 of the Act and Section 107.730, Financings which Constitute Conflicts of Interest of the Small Business Administration (“SBA”) Rules and Regulations (13 CFR 107.730). Stonehenge Community Impact Fund, L.P. is proposing to provide financing to Phonesoap, LLC. to support the Company's growth.

The proposed transaction is brought within the purview of § 107.730 of the Regulations because Stonehenge Community Development 117, LLC, an Associate of Stonehenge Community Impact Fund, L.P., by virtue of Common Control as defined at § 107.50, holds a debt investment in Phonesoap, LLC and the proposed transaction would free other funds to pay such obligation to an Associate.

Therefore, the proposed transaction is considered self-deal pursuant to 13 CFR 107.730 and requires a regulatory exemption. Notice is hereby given that any interested person may submit written comments on the transaction within fifteen days of the date of this publication to Associate Administrator for Investment, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 Third Street SW, Washington, DC 20416.

Thomas Morris,

Acting Associate Administrator, Director, Office of SBIC Liquidation, Office of Investment and Innovation.

[FR Doc. 2021-16265 Filed 7-29-21; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE P
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 95-7179

MICHAEL X. JOHNSON,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

J. SMITH, Regional Director; G. BASS, Deputy

Warden; M. PATTERSON, Lieutenant; S. BACON,

Commanding Officer; A. RONEY, Commanding

Officer,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Albert V. Bryan, Jr., Senior

District Judge. (CA-95-273-AM)

Submitted: December 14, 1995 Decided: January 11, 1996

Before ERVIN, Chief Judge, and WIDENER and WILKINS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Michael X. Johnson, Appellant Pro Se. Jill Theresa Bowers, OFFICE

OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for

Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying

relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) complaint. We have reviewed

the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible

error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district

court. Johnson v. Smith, No. CA-95-273-AM (E.D. Va. July 19, 1995).

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.

AFFIRMED
Case: 1:01-cv-03251 Document #: 147 Filed: 12/23/03 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:998
Case: 1:02-cv-00256 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/10/02 Page 1 of 9 PageID #:1
Case: 1:02-cv-00256 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/10/02 Page 2 of 9 PageID #:2
Case: 1:02-cv-00256 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/10/02 Page 3 of 9 PageID #:3
Case: 1:02-cv-00256 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/10/02 Page 4 of 9 PageID #:4
Case: 1:02-cv-00256 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/10/02 Page 5 of 9 PageID #:5
Case: 1:02-cv-00256 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/10/02 Page 6 of 9 PageID #:6
Case: 1:02-cv-00256 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/10/02 Page 7 of 9 PageID #:7
Case: 1:02-cv-00256 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/10/02 Page 8 of 9 PageID #:8
Case: 1:02-cv-00256 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/10/02 Page 9 of 9 PageID #:9
#### Harvey M. Shapiro et al., Appellants, v Michael W. Jackel, Respondent.

[942 NYS2d 208]

In an action, inter alia, for injunctive relief, the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (Brands, J.), dated February 14, 2011, which granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and denied their cross motion for summary judgment on the complaint.

Ordered that the order is modified, on the law, by deleting the provision thereof granting the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and substituting therefor a provision denying the motion; as so modified, the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The plaintiffs seek to permanently enjoin the defendant from placing obstructions over a private lane on the defendant’s property so as to prevent their use of the lane as a means of accessing their adjoining property. They contend that they have an easement by express grant over the private lane for ingress and egress to and from their property.

In opposition to the defendant’s prima facie showing that the plaintiffs attempted to create the alleged easement by way of a 2006 deed, the plaintiffs raised a triable issue of fact by submitting a 1954 deed transferring what is now the defendant’s property, which contains language “[reserving the use of the lanes for public use.” The description of “lanes” is ambiguous and, thus, it cannot be determined, as a matter of law, whether the easement refers to the private lane at issue *(see Route 22 Assoc. v Cipes,*204 AD2d 705, 706 [1994]; *see also Andersen v Mazza,*258 AD2d 726, 727 [1999]). Accordingly, while the plaintiffs’ cross motion for summary judgment on the complaint was properly denied, the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint also should have been denied. Rivera, J.P., Florio, Chambers and Cohen, JJ., concur.
# Official Journal C 234/2019

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 234 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 6211 July 2019 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 234

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 6211 July 2019

---

| Contents | page |
| --- | --- |
| | IV   Notices |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European ParliamentCouncil |
| 2019/C 234/01 | Statements relating to Directive (EU) 2019/1153 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 June 2019 laying down rules facilitating the use of financial and other information for the prevention, detection, investigation or prosecution of certain criminal offences, and repealing Council Decision 2000/642/JHA | 1 |

Contents

page

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European ParliamentCouncil

2019/C 234/01

Statements relating to Directive (EU) 2019/1153 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 June 2019 laying down rules facilitating the use of financial and other information for the prevention, detection, investigation or prosecution of certain criminal offences, and repealing Council Decision 2000/642/JHA

1

---

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

EN