alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NO. 06-16 -00063

STATE OF TEXAS § IN THE § VS. § 6TH COURT § ANTHONY JOHN LIBERTO § OF APPEALS

MOTION TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE APPELLANT'S BRIEF

TO THE HONORABLE JUSTICES OF SAID COURT:
Now comes ANTHONY JOHN LIBERTO, Appellant in the above styled and numbered
cause, and moves this Court to grant an extension of time to file appellant's brief, pursuant to Rule
38.6 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, and for good cause shows the following:

1. This case is on appeal from the 13TH Judicial District Court of Navarro County, Texas.

2. The case below was styled the STATE OF TEXAS vs. ANTHONY JOHN

LIBERTO, and numbered D3945.

3. Appellant was convicted of Theft Over $1500.

4. Appellant was assessed a sentence of 13 months TDC on 3/30/16.

5. Notice of appeal was given on 3/31/16..

6. The clerk's record was filed on 5/27/16; the reporter's record was filed on 5/27/16.

7. The appellate brief was due on 6/27/16.

8. Appellant requests an extension of time of 30 days from the due date, i.e. 7/27/16.

9. No previous extensions to file the brief has been received in this cause.

10. Defendant is currently incarcerated.

11. Appellant relies on the following facts as good cause for the requested extension: ACCEPTED 06-16-00063-CR SIXTH COURT OF APPEALS TEXARKANA, TEXAS 6/30/2016 11:45:50 AM DEBBIE AUTREY

CLERKAppellant’s Counsel is self

- employed and a sole practitioner. Appellant’s Counsel is also a full
time professor at Navarro College. Due to counsel’s case load and other work and personal
obligations, counsel did not have adequate time to research and prepare the issues in this case
within the 30 day period. Counsel was working on two other briefs being filed with the courts this
week including Ipina v. State, 10

- 16

- 00052, and Crenshaw v. State, 06

- 16

- 00061.
WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED , Appell ant prays that this Court grant this
Motion To Extend Time to File Appellant's Brief, and for such other and further relief as the
Court may deem appropriate.
Respectfully submitted, Damara H. Watkins Attorney at Law 1541 Princeton Dr. Corsicana, TX 75110 Tel: (903) 641

- 2595 Fax: (903) 872

- 6456

By: /s/ Damara H. Watkins State Bar No. 00787740 Attorney for ANTHONY JOHN LIBERTO

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
This is to certify that on June 29, 2016, a true and correct copy of the above and foregoing
document was served on the District Attorney's Office, Navarro County, Navarro County

Courthouse, 300 W. 3 rd Ave., Corsicana, Texas, by electronic service.

/s/ Damara H. Watkins
#### Guthrie *v.*Bullock *et al.,*administrators.

Hill, J.

This was a claim filed upon advertisement of an administrators’ sale of real .estate. The administrators exhibited muniments of title to 100 acres, more or less, in the eastern part of land lot 245 in the 10th district of Berrien county, with certain boundaries. The claimant exhibited muniments of title to 50 acres, more or less, in the northwest corner of the same land lot, with designated boundaries. The eastern call of the claimant’s muniments of title was to an agreed line; and the western call of the administrators’ muniments of title was to an original and agreed line. The evidence was in dispute as to the location of the eastern boundary of the claimant and the western boundary of the land held under the administrators’ title. The evidence of the administrators showed that the eastern portion of the land embraced within the boundaries of the tract offered for sale by them had certain trees growing upon it, which were being operated for turpentine purposes by the claimant at the time the property was advertised for sale. *Held,*that the occupation by the claimant of a portion of the land, evidenced by his working the trees for turpentine, was such adverse possession as to *18forbid sale by the administrators of that portion of the land, under the statute which declares: “An administrator can not sell property held adversely to the estate by a third person; he must first recover possession.” Civil Code (1910), § 4033; *Lowe*v. *Bivins,*112 *Ga.*341 (37 S. E. 374) ; *Downing Lumber Co.*v. *Medlin,*136 *Ga.*665, 667 (72 S. E. 22).

January 12, 1915.

Claim. Before Judge Thomas. Berrien superior court. November 15, 1913.

*W. B. Smith*and *Lovett & Murray,*for plaintiff in error.

*J. A. Alexander*and *W. D. Buie,*contra.

*Judgment reversed.*

*All the Justices concur, except Fish, O. J., absent.*
# C_2022432EN.01003903.xml

| 14.11.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 432/39 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.11.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 432/39

---

Order of the General Court of 14 September 2022 — The Weir Group and Others v Commission

(Case T-718/19) (1)

(2022/C 432/48)

Language of the case: English

The President of the Second Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 10, 13.1.2020.

---
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

November 4, 2016

No. 04-16-00298-CV

EL CABALLERO RANCH, INC. and Laredo Marine, L.L.C.,

Appellants

v.

GRACE RIVER RANCH, L.L.C.,

Appellee

From the 218th Judicial District Court, La Salle County, Texas

Trial Court No. 13-04-00108-CVL

Honorable Russel Wilson, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

The reporter’s record in this appeal was originally due July 5, 2016 but was not filed. 

Shortly thereafter, we notified the court reporter that the reporter’s record was past due; however, 

we did not receive a response. On August 26, 2016, we then ordered the court reporter to file the 

reporter’s record in this court on or before September 26, 2016. On September 28, 2016, the 

court reporter filed a notification of late record, requesting an extension of time of thirty days. 

We granted the request for an extension and ordered the court reporter to file the record by 

October 26, 2016. On October 26, 2016, the court reporter requested an additional extension of 

time of thirty days to file the record. 

After consideration, we GRANT the requested extension and ORDER the reporter to file 

the reporter’s record on or before November 28, 2016. The reporter is advised that no 

further extensions of time to file the brief will be granted absent written proof of 

extraordinary circumstances. Appellant’s brief will be due thirty days after the complete 

reporter’s record is filed. 

We order the clerk of this court to serve a copy of this order on all counsel and court 

reporter. 

_________________________________

Marialyn Barnard, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 4th day of November, 2016.
___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
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
 Poultry Research: Mississippi State, MS
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    CareersSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Southeast Area Mississippi State, Mississippi Poultry Research People & Locations







Clint A Benoit
                        Poultry Research

                        




                        
                        Biological Science Technician
                        Phone: (662) 320-7601
                        
                        
                        Fax: (Employee information on this page comes from the REE Directory. Please contact your front office staff to update the REE Directory.)


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
#### In the Matter of Angelo Cervoni, Petitioner, v Commissioner of New York State Department of Motor Vehicles et al., Respondents.

[945 NYS2d 725]

*743Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the New York State Department of Motor Vehicles Administrative Appeals Board dated December 28, 2010, confirming a determination of an administrative law judge, dated April 21, 2010, which, after a hearing, found that the petitioner violated, inter alia, Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1146 (a) and revoked his driver’s license, with permission to apply for a new license after 30 days.

Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, the petition is denied, and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits, with costs.

On February 17, 2009, the petitioner’s vehicle rolled backwards in a parking lot on Parsons Boulevard in Flushing as he unsuccessfully attempted to apply the brakes. The rear of the vehicle then struck and killed a pedestrian walking in the parking lot.

The petitioner contends that since he had parked the vehicle, he was not driving at the time of the accident and, therefore, Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1146 (a) does not apply. Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1146 (a) states, in relevant part, that “every driver of a vehicle shall exercise due care to avoid colliding with any . . . pedestrian.” Pursuant to Vehicle and Traffic Law § 113, a “[d]river” is defined as “[ejvery person who operates or drives or is in actual physical control of a vehicle.” The evidence presented at the administrative hearing established that after the petitioner pulled into a parking space, his vehicle began to roll backwards as he was exiting the car. The petitioner then unsuccessfully attempted to apply the brakes, and the car continued to roll backwards and hit the pedestrian. Since, under the totality of the circumstances, the petitioner operated, drove, or was in actual physical control of the vehicle, he qualified as a driver for the purposes of Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1146 (a). Thus, contrary to the petitioner’s contention, the finding that the petitioner violated Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1146 (a) by failing to exercise due care to avoid striking the pedestrian is supported by substantial evidence (see *Matter of Guarino v New York State Dept. of Motor Vehs.,*80 AD3d 697, 698 [2011]; *Matter of Fazzone v Adduci,*155 AD2d 540, 541 [1989]).

Under the circumstances of this case, the penalty of revocation of the petitioner’s license, with permission to apply for a new license after 30 days, was not so disproportionate to the offense as to be shocking to one’s sense of fairness, thus constituting an abuse of discretion as a matter of law (see *Matter of*
      *744
      *Kreisler v New York City Tr. Auth.,*2 NY3d 775, 776 [2004]; *Matter of Pell v Board of Educ. of Union Free School Dist. No. 1 of Towns of Scarsdale & Mamaroneck, Westchester County,*34 NY2d 222, 233 [1974]; *Matter of Guarino v New York State Dept. of Motor Vehs.,*80 AD3d at 698).

The petitioner’s remaining contentions are without merit. Skelos, J.P., Leventhal, Belen and Roman, JJ., concur.
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan



### November 29, 2006 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice


### 131853 Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan 

### PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, Justices



### v SC: 131853 COA: 261159 Wayne CC: 02-000181-01 LaRHON LONDON JONES, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the June 22, 2006 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the question presented s hould be reviewed by this Court.

t1120 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

November 29, 2006

Clerk
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-2100
SIKOD BASUNG, Petitioner, versus ALBERTO R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. (A79-235-632) Submitted: March 23, 2005 Decided: April 4, 2005 Before WILKINSON, WILLIAMS, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Bokwe G. Mofor, Silver Spring, Maryland, for Petitioner. Paul J. McNulty, United States Attorney, Robert K. Coulter, Assistant United States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, for Respondent. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Sikod Basung, a native and citizen of Cameroon, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“Board”) denying his motion to reopen and to reconsider its previous order affirming, without opinion, the immigration judge’s denial of asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture. We have reviewed the record and the Board’s order and find that the Board did not abuse its discretion in denying Basung’s motion. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(a) (2004). Accordingly, we deny the petition for review on the reasoning of the Board. See In re: Basung , No. A79-235-632 (B.I.A. Aug. 17, 2004). 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.

PETITION DENIED
#### Terri Samba, Individually and as Administratrix of the Estate of Oumar Samba, Deceased, et al., Respondents, v Julius Delligard, Jr., et al., Appellants, et al., Defendants.

In a negligence action to recover damages for wrongful death and personal injuries, defendants Julius Delligard, Jr., and Mendon Leasing Corp. appeal from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Krausman, J.), dated February 28, 1984, as denied their motion to dismiss the complaint as to them, *inter alia,*pursuant to CPLR 3212, based on the defense of workers’ compensation.

Order modified, on the law, by deleting therefrom the provision which denied that branch of the motion which was *564to dismiss the complaint as against defendant Julius Delligard, Jr., and substituting therefor a provision granting that branch of the motion. As so modified, order affirmed, insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

The van in which plaintiffs’ decedents were riding at the time of the fatal accident was leased by their employer from defendant Mendon Leasing Corp. and driven by a coemployee, Delligard. As to Delligard, the exclusive remedy provision of Workers’ Compensation Law § 29 (6) precludes plaintiffs from proceeding in any manner other than under the Workers’ Compensation Law *(see, Naso v Lafata,*4 NY2d 585). As Mendon Leasing Corp. is neither an employer nor a coemployee of plaintiffs’ decedents, it cannot obtain the benefits of the workers’ compensation defense and may be liable for its negligent acts or omissions in connection with maintenance of the leased vehicle. We note, however, that Mendon Leasing Corp. may not be held *vicariously*liable as owner of the vehicle driven by Delligard, the coemployee of plaintiffs’ decedents. "Inasmuch as the driver * * * is statutorily immune from suit, there can be no liability imputed to [the lessor] and no action can be sustained against it” *(Kenny v Bacolo,*61 NY2d 642, 645; *see also, Naso v Lafata,*4 NY2d 585, *supra; Samba v Delligard,*116 AD2d 563). Gibbons, J. P., Brown, Weinstein and Lawrence, JJ., concur.
UNITED STAT ES DIS TRICT COURT F OR THE DIS TRICT OF COLUM BIA

) L .G. B ROWN et al ., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 10-1418 ( BA H) ) CORNERSTONE SC HOOL S ) OF WASHI

NGTON , ) ) Def endant. ) )
MEMORAN DUM This matter is befor e the Court on the De fenda nt’s motion to di smiss or for summary judgme nt. By

Orde r of F ebrua

ry 17, 2011, the Plaintiff, suing on be half of he r two minor children, w as orde red to re spond to the Defe ndant’s dispositive motion by Marc h 28, 2011. She
was a dvised that her f

ailure to oppose the motion withi n the time allowed c ould result in dismiss al of the c ase on what the Court would trea t as a c oncede d motion. The Plainti ff ha s neither r esponded to the pe nding dispositive nor sought additional time to do so. Therefor e, the Court will treat the De fenda nt’s motion to di smiss as concede d and will dismiss the ca se. See FDIC v. Be nder , 127 F.3d 58, 68 ( D.C. Cir. 1997) (discre tion lies with the district cour t to gr ant unopposed motion to dism iss as conce ded pursua nt to L ocal Civil Rule 7(b)). A separate Orde r
acc ompanies this Memorandum.

/s/ 

# B eryl A. H owell United States District Judg e DATE: April 29, 2011
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
 Water Management Research: Parlier, CA
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    Careers


        


                    Research Units
                        San Joaquin Valley Agricultural Sciences Center
                                    Commodity Protection and Quality Research
                                    Crop Diseases, Pests and Genetics Research
                                    National Arid Land Plant Genetic RepositorySearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Pacific West Area Parlier, California San Joaquin Valley Agricultural Sciences Center Water Management Research People & Locations







Cody  Cochran
                        Water Management Research

                        




                        
                        Engineering Technician
                        Phone: (559) 596-2876
                        
                        
                        Fax: (Employee information on this page comes from the REE Directory. Please contact your front office staff to update the REE Directory.)


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
EX-10.3(D)






Exhibit 10.3(d)




AMENDMENT NO. 7 TO THE

CHS INC.

SUPPLEMENTAL EXECUTIVE RETIREMENT PLAN




CHS Inc. (formerly known as Cenex Harvest States Cooperatives), pursuant to the power of amendment
reserved to it in Section 8.1 of the CHS Inc. Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan (“Plan”),
hereby amends the Plan in the manner set forth below effective as of September 1, 2008.



1. Section 4.5 of the Plan is amended by the addition of the following new paragraph (e):




     (e) Cofina Financial, LLC. In connection with CHS’ acquisition of one hundred percent
(100%) of Cofina Financial, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company (“Cofina”), CHS assumed all
deferred compensation obligations under the Cofina Financial, LLC Supplemental Executive Retirement
Plan (“Cofina SERP”). Prior to such acquisition, Cofina was (and continues to be) a participating
employer in the CHS Inc. Pension Plan. The Cofina SERP is (like the CHS SERP) a nonqualified
defined benefit pension plan that provides benefits that would be provided under the CHS Inc.
Pension Plan but which are not provided thereunder because of the compensation limitations under
Section 401(a)(17) (compensation limit) and Section 414 (exclusion of deferred compensation from
pensionable earnings) of the Internal Revenue Code, as well as the annual addition limitations
under and Section 415 of the Internal Revenue Code. The Cofina SERP is, in all material respects,
identical to the CHS SERP. Accordingly, each Cofina SERP Participant’s Pension Plan Account under
the Cofina Plan shall be merged with and into the CHS Plan, and such account shall become the
Participant’s opening Pension Plan Account under the CHS Plan as of September 1, 2008 (the “Merger
Date”). (No Cofina SERP Participants have accrued benefits determined under an alternative,
traditional pension formula; rather, all benefits are determined under a “cash balance” formula.)
Effective as of the Merger Date, Cofina shall become a participating employer in the CHS SERP.
With respect to each eligible employee of Cofina who is selected to become an Active Participant in
the CHS SERP, such Participant’s service and compensation earned with Cofina both before and after
the Merger Date shall be taken into account for purposes of determining such Participant’s
contribution credits and special career credits under the CHS SERP.



     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, CHS Inc. has caused its name to be hereunto subscribed on this 3rd day of September, 2008.



	 	 	 	 	 
	 	CHS INC.

	 	 	 
	 	 	 
	 	By	 	/s/ John D.
Johnson
	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	John D. Johnson
	 	 	 	Its President and CEO
Case: 1:02-cv-00256 Document #: 50 Filed: 10/07/02 Page 1 of 5 PageID #:373
Case: 1:02-cv-00256 Document #: 50 Filed: 10/07/02 Page 2 of 5 PageID #:374
Case: 1:02-cv-00256 Document #: 50 Filed: 10/07/02 Page 3 of 5 PageID #:375
Case: 1:02-cv-00256 Document #: 50 Filed: 10/07/02 Page 4 of 5 PageID #:376
Case: 1:02-cv-00256 Document #: 50 Filed: 10/07/02 Page 5 of 5 PageID #:377