alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Terry EDWARDS, petitioner, v. Lorie DAVIS, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division.

No. 16-7714 (16A759).

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 26, 2017.

Application for stay of execution of sentence of death presented to Justice THOMAS and by him referred to the Court denied. Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
FI L ED U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S EL EVENTH CI RCUI T Sept. 22, 2009 THOMAS K. KAH

N CL ERK [ D O N O T P U B L I S H ]

I N T H E U N I T E D S T A T E S C O U R T O F A P P E A L S

F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C I R C U I T

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ N o

. 0 9

- 1 0 0 0 7

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ D

. C

. D o c k e t N o

. 0 7

- 0 1 0 8 3

- C V

- J

- 3 2 J R K

C O L I N B R U L E Y ,
P l a i n t i f f

- A p p e l l a n t ,

v e r s u s

L B K , L P , a f o r e i g n l i m i t e d p a r t n e r s h i p , d

. b

. a

. T h e O a k s a t M i l l C r e e k A p a r t m e n t s , V I L L A G E G R E E N M A N A G E M E N T C O M P A N Y , a f o r e i g n c o r p o r a t i o n , T R M I L L C R E E K C O R P , a f o r e i g n c o r p o r a t i o n d

. b

. a

. T h e O a k s a t M i l l C r e e k A p a r t m e n t s ,
D e f e n d a n t s
- A p p e l l e e s

.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ A p p e a l f r o m t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s D i s t r i c t C o u r t f o r t h e M i d d l e D i s t r i c t o f F l o r i d a

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ( S e p t e m b e r 2 2 , 2 0 0 9 )B e f

o r e M A R C U S a n d H I L L , C i r c u i t J u d g e s , a n d V O O R H E E S , D i s t r i c t J u d g e

. *

P E R C U R I A M :

A p p e l l a n t C o l i n B r u l e y a p p e a l s f r o m t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t ’ s D e c e m b e r 8 , 2 0 0 9

o r d e r g r a n t i n g f

i n a l s u m m a r y j u d g m e n t t o t h e d e f e n d a n t i n t h i s w r o n g f

u l

t e r m i n a t i o n l a w s u i t

. A t i s s u e i n t h i s c a s e i s w h e t h e r F l o r i d a l a w p e r m i t s a p u b l i c

p o l i c y e x c e p t i o n t o a t

- w i l l e m p l o y m e n t t o p r o t e c t t h e r i g h t o f e m p l o y e e s t o c a r r y

w e a p o n s f

o r r e s c u e o r s e l f

- d e f e n s e

. T h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t h e l d t h a t F l o r i d a d o e s n o t

r e c o g n i z e a c o m m o n l a w c a u s e o f a c t i o n f o r w r o n g f

u l d i s c h a r g e

. D e M a r c o v
.
P u b l i x S u p e r M a r k e t s , I n c

. , 3 6 0 S o

. 2 d 1 3 4 , 1 3 6 ( F l a

. C t

. A p p

. 1 9 7 8 ) , a f f ’ d m e m

.
D e M a r c o v
. P u b l i x S u p e r M a r k e t s , I n c

. , 3 8 4 S o

. 2 d 1 2 5 3 , 1 2 5 4 ( F l a

. 1 9 8 0 ) ;

H a r t l e y v
. O c e a n R e e f C l u b , I n c

. , 4 7 6 S o

. 2 d 1 3 2 7 , 1 3 3 0 ( F l a

. D i s t

. C t

. A p p

.
1 9 8 5 )

.
A f t e r t h o r o u g h r e v i e w , w e a f f i r m o n t h e b a s i s o f t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t ’ s w e l l

r e a s o n e d o r d e r g r a n t i n g s u m m a r y j u d g m e n t t o t h e d e f e n d a n t s

.
A F F I R M E D

.

Honora ble Richard L . Voorhe es, United States District Judge f or the Western D istrict of * North Carolina, sitting by desig nation.
2
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA OP 21-0377
MONTANA SHOOTING SPORTS ASSOCIATION,

Petitioner,

v. MONTANA FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT,LEWIS & CLARK COUNTY,THE HONORABLE MICHAEL F.McMAHON, DISTRICT JUDGE,

Respondent. ORDER 

# FILLED AUG 09 2021 Bowen Greenwood Clerk of Supreme Court State of Montana Petitioner Montana Shooting Sports Association (MSSA), via counsel, seeks a writ ofsupervisory control over the First Judicial District Court,Lewis and Clark County, to reverse its July 16,2021 Order Denying Intervention Motions and Briefing Schedule in its Cause No. BDV-2021-598. In the underlying case, the Board ofRegents of Higher Education of the State of Montana petitioned for declaratory judgment regarding the constitutionality of portions of House Bill 102 that regulate firearms within the Montana University System on the basis that these provisions unconstitutionally infringe on the Board of Regents' authority under Article X, Section 9(2), of the Montana Constitution. MSSA sought intervention ofright under M.R. Civ.P. 24(a)and the District Court denied its motion. Having reviewed the Petition and the challenged Order, this Court deems it appropriate to obtain a summary response. Therefore, in accordance with M.R.App.P. 14(7), IT IS ORDERED that the First Judicial District Court, the Montana Board of Regents ofHigher Education,and the State ofMontana,are each granted 30 days from the 08/09/2021

Case Number: OP 21-0377date of this Order to prepare, file, and serve a response(s) to the petition for writ of

supervisory control. The Clerk is directed to provide immediate notice of this Order to all counsel of record in the First Judicial District Court, Lewis and Clark County, Cause No.BDV-2021-598,and the Honorable Michael F.McMahon,presiding. DATED this 9th day ofAugust,2021. For the Court,
By

2 ustice
Richardson Osaigbovo EDIONSERI, petitioner, v. Jefferson B. SESSIONS, III, Attorney General.

No. 17-1068.

Supreme Court of the United States

March 26, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     This schedule  contains summary  financial  information  extracted from NDE
Environmental  Corporation's  financial  statements as of the quarter ended June
30, 1997
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1

       
<S>                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                  6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>              Dec-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                 Jan-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                   Jun-30-1997
<CASH>                          3,422,983
<SECURITIES>                            0
<RECEIVABLES>                   7,320,168
<ALLOWANCES>                      844,155
<INVENTORY>                       502,251
<CURRENT-ASSETS>               12,050,608
<PP&E>                         12,323,177
<DEPRECIATION>                  7,814,413
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                 19,173,002
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>           8,675,850
<BONDS>                        11,345,534
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                   0
<PREFERRED>                         5,000
<COMMON>                            1,598
<OTHER-SE>                     (2,855,480)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>   19,173,002
<SALES>                        15,518,398
<TOTAL-REVENUES>               15,518,398
<CGS>                                   0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                  11,800,713
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                3,915,230
<LOSS-PROVISION>                  203,115
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>              1,671,364
<INCOME-PRETAX>                (2,072,024)
<INCOME-TAX>                       25,300
<INCOME-CONTINUING>            (2,097,324)
<DISCONTINUED>                          0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                         0   
<CHANGES>                               0   
<NET-INCOME>                   (2,097,324)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                       (0.13)
<EPS-DILUTED>                           0
        

</TABLE>
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ALLIANCE OF PUBLICLY OWNED TREATMENT WORKS, petitioner, v. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, et al.

No. 17-542.

Supreme Court of the United States

Feb. 20, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
# C_2009205EN.01004501.xml

| 29.8.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 205/45 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.8.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 205/45

---

Action brought on 6 July 2009 — i-content Ltd Zweigniederlassung Deutschland v OHIM (BETWIN)

(Case T-258/09)

2009/C 205/82

Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: i-content Ltd Zweigniederlassung Deutschland (Berlin, Germany) (represented by A. Nordermann, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Defendant:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | Annul the decision of the Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 4 May 2009 in appeal case R 1528/2008-4 concerning Community trade mark application No 006849641 — word mark: BETWIN — and the earlier decision of the Office of 10 September 2008 concerning Community trade mark application No 006849641 — word mark: BETWIN; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision of the Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 4 May 2009 in appeal case R 1528/2008-4 concerning Community trade mark application No 006849641 — word mark: BETWIN — and the earlier decision of the Office of 10 September 2008 concerning Community trade mark application No 006849641 — word mark: BETWIN;

| — | Order the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

Community trade mark concerned: word mark ‘BETWIN’ for services in Classes 35, 38 and 41 (application No 6849641)

Community trade mark concerned:

Decision of the Examiner: rejection of the application

Decision of the Examiner:

Decision of the Board of Appeal: dismissal of the appeal

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Council Regulation (CE) No 207/2009 (1)) as the mark applied for has the requisite distinctive character and there is no need to maintain it in the public domain; Infringement of Article 79 of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009, the principle of equal treatment in connection with Articles 6 and 14 ECHR; infringement of Article 49 EC

Pleas in law:

1

---

(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark (OJ 2009 L 78, p. 1).

1

---
Mark CRAWFORD, et al., petitioners, v. DEPARTMENT OF the TREASURY, et al.

No. 17-911.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 2, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.
II-00926

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

William Barrett <ganesha7@comcast.net>

Thursday, December 2, 2010 9:59 AM

dfadefinitions <dfadefinitions@CFTC.gov>

Re: No loopholes in Dodd-Frank

1) Securities and Exchange Commission/Commodities Futures Trading Commission, Re: Commercial Risk (CFTC RIN

3235-AK65, SEC File Number $7-12-10)

Dear Commissioners Shapiro and Gensler: Don’t let the American Bankers Association (ABA) redefine important terms like

"commercial risk" to keep banks that engage in risky derivatives trading from complying with transparency and business

conduct requirements. Commercial risk should not be expanded to include financial risk. Accepting the ABA argument

would open the door for exemptions for risky hedge funds and insurance companies.

2) Commodities Futures Trading Commission, Re: Position Limits (RIN 3038-AD 17 )

Dear Commissioner Gensler: The CFTC needs to set strong position limits to crack down on the energy and food commodity

speculation that serves no productive purpose. I urge the Commission to define limits that will address not only manipulation,

but also excessive speculation, which will require a stricter approach.

3) U.S. Department of the Treasury, Re: FX Swaps (75 FR 66426 Document Number 2010-27274)

Dear Secretary Geithner: Just say "no" to foreign exchange traders who want to exempt foreign currency derivatives from the

clearing and transparency requirements of the

Dodd-Frank Act. $4 trillion dollars a day is traded in these highly-leveraged swaps and this number may increase to over $10

trillion in a decade. As the head of the Financial

Stability Oversight Board your job is to decrease risk in the system, not encourage off-book trading and opaque markets.

William Barrett

825 Gilpin Dr

Boulder, CO 80303
II-00896

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Michael Stuart <mike3116@gmail.com>

Thursday, December 2, 2010 10:15 AM

dfadefinitions <dfadefinitions@CFTC.gov>

Re: No loopholes in Dodd-Frank

1) Securities and Exchange Commission/Commodities Futures Trading Commission, Re: Commercial Risk (CFTC RIN

3235-AK65, SEC File Number $7-12-10)

Dear Commissioners Shapiro and Gensler: Don’t let the American Bankers Association (ABA) redefine important terms like

"commercial risk" to keep banks that engage in risky derivatives trading from complying with transparency and business

conduct requirements. Commercial risk should not be expanded to include financial risk. Accepting the ABA argument

would open the door for exemptions for risky hedge funds and insurance companies.

2) Commodities Futures Trading Commission, Re: Position Limits (RIN 3038-AD 17 )

Dear Commissioner Gensler: The CFTC needs to set strong position limits to crack down on the energy and food commodity

speculation that serves no productive purpose. I urge the Commission to define limits that will address not only manipulation,

but also excessive speculation, which will require a stricter approach.

3) U.S. Department of the Treasury, Re: FX Swaps (75 FR 66426 Document Number 2010-27274)

Dear Secretary Geithner: Just say "no" to foreign exchange traders who want to exempt foreign currency derivatives from the

clearing and transparency requirements of the

Dodd-Frank Act. $4 trillion dollars a day is traded in these highly-leveraged swaps and this number may increase to over $10

trillion in a decade. As the head of the Financial

Stability Oversight Board your job is to decrease risk in the system, not encourage off-book trading and opaque markets.

Michael Stuart

3116 Shady Dr

Wonder Lake, IL 60097
Global Markets Advisory Committee Meeting 

September 24, 2019 

Commodity Futures Trading Commission 

st 1155 21 Street, NW 

Washington, DC 20581 

AGENDA

9:30 AM –

9:45 AM

Welcome and Opening Remarks 

o Commissioner Dawn D. Stump (GMAC Sponsor) 

o Chairman Heath P. Tarbert 

o Commissioner Brian D. Quintenz 

o Commissioner Rostin Behnam 

o Commissioner Dan Berkovitz 

Uncleared Margin Rules 

9:45 AM –

10:15 AM

Panel 1: Status Update on Implementation of Uncleared Margin Rules 

Presenters:

o Michael Gibson, Director, Division of Supervision and Regulation, 

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System

o Rafael Martinez, Senior Financial Risk Analyst, Division of Swap 

Dealer and Intermediary Oversight, CFTC

10:15 AM –

11:00 AM 

Panel 2: Buy-Side Perspective on Implementation of Uncleared Margin 

Rules 

Presenters: 

o Richard Grant, Global Head of Regulatory and Government 

Affairs, Associate General Counsel, AQR Capital Management, 

LLC 

o Wendy Yun, Managing Director & Associate General Counsel, 

Goldman Sachs Asset Management 

11:00 AM –

11:15 AM 

Break 

11:15 AM –

12:00 PM 

Panel 3: Custody Bank Perspective on Implementation of Uncleared Margin

Rules 

Presenters: 

o Judson Baker, Head of Product Development for Derivatives and 

Collateral Services, Northern Trust 

o Dominick Falco, Managing Director, Head of Segregation, BNY 

Mellon 
12:00 PM –

12:30 PM

Panel 4: Cross-Jurisdictional Issues in Implementation of Uncleared Margin 

Rules 

Presenter: 

o Tara Kruse, Global Head of Infrastructure, Data and Non-Cleared 

Margin, ISDA

12:30 PM –

1:45 PM 

Lunch 

EMIR 2.2

1:45 PM –

2:45 PM

Panel 5: EMIR 2.2 and ESMA Consultation 

Presenters: 

o Sean Downey, Executive Director, Global Clearing & Risk Policy, 

CME Group 

o Jacqueline Mesa, Chief Operating Officer & Senior Vice President 

of Global Policy, FIA 

o Carolyn Van den Daelen, Head of Regulation & Compliance, ICE 

Clear Europe 

2:45 PM –

3:00 PM

Closing Remarks and Adjournment
Miguel Angel GUTIERREZ, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-7623.

Supreme Court of the United States

March 19, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 126 (Friday, June 29, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 34700]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-16339]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; Notice of Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(a) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following 
meeting.
    The meeting will be open to the public, with attendance limited to 
space available. Individuals who plan to attend and need special 
assistance, such as sign language interpretation or other reasonable 
accommodations, should notify the Contact Person listed below in 
advance of the meeting.

    Name of Committee: National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute 
Special Emphasis Panel, Stem Cell Plasticity in Hematopoietic and 
Non-Hematopoietic Tissue.
    Date: July 10-11, 2001.
    Time: 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.
    Agenda: To provide concept review of proposed grant 
applications.
    Place: Holiday Inn, 5520 Wisconsin Avenue, Chevy Chase, MD 
20815.
    Contact Person: Robert B. Moore, Scientific Review 
Administrator, Review Branch, Room 7192, Division of Extramural 
Affairs, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, National 
Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-435-3541, 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#caa7a5a5b8afa88aa4a2a6a8a3e4a4a3a2e4ada5bc"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="294446465b4c4b694741454b4007474041074e465f">[email protected]</span></a>.
    This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the 
meeting due to the timing limitations imposed by the review and 
funding cycle.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.233, 
National Center for Sleep Disorders Research; 93.837, Heart and 
Vascular Diseases Research; 93.838, Lung Diseases Research; 93.839, 
Blood Diseases and Resources Research, National Institutes of 
Health, HHS)

    Dated: June 22, 2001.
LaVerne Y. Stringfield,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 01-16339 Filed 6-28-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 23-0503

STATE OF MONTANA, 

Plaintiff and Appellee, 

v. 

RICK DENNIS STROBEL,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, 

and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including January 19, 2024, within which to prepare, file, 

and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

December 13 2023

12/13/2023

Case Number: DA 23-0503
Devin GRAY, petitioner, v. NEW YORK.

No. 17-7416.

Supreme Court of the United States

March 19, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Appellate Division, Supreme Court of New York, Third Judicial Department denied.
II-00875

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Barbara Campbell <barbarino5969@att.net>

Thursday, December 2, 2010 10:26 AM

dfadefinitions <dfadefinitions@CFTC.gov>

Re: No loopholes in Dodd-Frank

1) Securities and Exchange Commission/Commodities Futures Trading Commission, Re: Commercial Risk (CFTC RIN

3235-AK65, SEC File Number $7-12-10)

Dear Commissioners Shapiro and Gensler: Don’t let the American Bankers Association (ABA) redefine important terms like

"commercial risk" to keep banks that engage in risky derivatives trading from complying with transparency and business

conduct requirements. Commercial risk should not be expanded to include financial risk. Accepting the ABA argument

would open the door for exemptions for risky hedge funds and insurance companies.

2) Commodities Futures Trading Commission, Re: Position Limits (RIN 3038-AD 17 )

Dear Commissioner Gensler: The CFTC needs to set strong position limits to crack down on the energy and food commodity

speculation that serves no productive purpose. I urge the Commission to define limits that will address not only manipulation,

but also excessive speculation, which will require a stricter approach.

3) U.S. Department of the Treasury, Re: FX Swaps (75 FR 66426 Document Number 2010-27274)

Dear Secretary Geithner: Just say "no" to foreign exchange traders who want to exempt foreign currency derivatives from the

clearing and transparency requirements of the

Dodd-Frank Act. $4 trillion dollars a day is traded in these highly-leveraged swaps and this number may increase to over $10

trillion in a decade. As the head of the Financial

Stability Oversight Board your job is to decrease risk in the system, not encourage off-book trading and opaque markets.

Barbara Campbell

485 S. Tannahill St.

Vidor, TX 77662-4816
Opinion filed March 31, 2017



### In The 

# Eleventh Court of Appeals

____ ___ _____ No. 11
- 1 7
- 00 056
- CR

_____ __ _____ ANGEL MORENO GONZALEZ , Appellant

V. THE S TATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

On Appeal from the 220th District Court Comanche County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 00
- 01
- 02203
- CCCR

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N Angel Moreno Gonzalez , Appellant, filed a pro se notice of appeal from the denial of his “M otion N unc P ro T unc
. ” Appellant sought to have the trial court enter a judgment nunc pro tunc to correct a clerical error in a judgment that was rendered in March 2000; he claims that the judgment should reflect that he was convicted of the offense of “Assault,” not “Sexual Assault.” We dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction

.2

When the appeal w as filed in this court, we notified Appellant by letter that the order from which he attempted to appeal did not appear to be a final, appealable order

. We requested that Appellant respond and show grounds to continue , and we informed him that th is appeal may be dismissed

. Appellant filed a response in which he states that he timely appealed from the trial court’s denial of the motion. An intermediate appellate court has no jurisdiction over an appeal from an order denying a request for judgment nunc pro tunc because such an order is not an appealable order

. Sims v. State , No. 05

- 14

- 01438

- CR, 2014 WL 6453607, at *1 (Tex. App.

— Dallas Nov. 18, 2014, no p et.) (mem. op., not designated for publication); Sanchez v. State , 112 S.W.3d 311, 312 (Tex. App.

— Corpus Christi 2003, no pet.) ; Everett v. State , 82 S.W.3d 735 (Tex. App.

— Waco 2002, pet. dism’ d )

. Thus, we h ave no jurisdiction to entertain this appeal. We dismiss th is appeal for want of jurisdiction.

PER CURIAM

March 31, 2017 Do not publish. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 47.2(b). Panel consists of: Wright, C.J., Willson , J., and Bailey, J.