alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
2008 Decisions

Opinions of the United

States Court of Appeals

for the Third Circuit

12-30-2008

Jurinko v. Med Protective Co

Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential

Docket No. 06-3519

Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2008

This decision is brought to you for free and open access by the Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at Villanova

University School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in 2008 Decisions by an authorized administrator of Villanova

University School of Law Digital Repository. For more information, please contact Benjamin.Carlson@law.villanova.edu.

Recommended Citation

"Jurinko v. Med Protective Co" (2008). 2008 Decisions. Paper 32.

http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2008/32
 The Honorable Maryanne Trump Barry participated in the oral argument but *

discovered facts causing her to recuse from this matter prior to filing of the Opinion. The

remaining judges are unanimous in this decision, and this Opinion and Judgment are

therefore being filed by a quorum of the panel.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

Nos. 06-3519 & 06-3666

STEPHEN P. JURINKO; CYNTHIA JURINKO, H/W

as assignees of Paul G. Marcincin,

Appellants at 06-3666

v.

THE MEDICAL PROTECTIVE COMPANY;

MEDICAL CARE AVAILABILITY AND

REDUCTION OF ERROR FUND,

Successor in interest to or formerly known as

Medical Professional Liability Catastrophe Loss Fund

Medical Protective Company,

Appellant at 06-3519

On Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania

D.C. Civil Action No. 03-cv-4053

(Honorable Cynthia M. Rufe)

Argued January 17, 2008

Before: SCIRICA, Chief Judge, BARRY and ROTH, Circuit Judges.

*

ORDER AMENDING OPINION

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the not precedential opinion in the abovecaptioned case, filed December 24, 2008, be amended as follows:
2

Page 28, footnote 15, last full sentence, which read:

However, the Court again said that, when punitive damages

are substantial, “the constitutional outer limit may well be

1:1.” Id. at 2634 n.28. 

shall read:

However, the Court again said that, when compensatory

damages are substantial, “the constitutional outer limit may

well be 1:1.” Id. at 2634 n.28.

BY THE COURT,

/s/ Anthony J. Scirica 

Chief Judge

DATED: December 30, 2008
# Official Journal C 114/2016

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 114 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 5931 March 2016 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 114

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 5931 March 2016

---

| Contents | page |
| --- | --- |
| | II   Information |
| | INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2016/C 114/01 | Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.7967 — Apax Partners/Neuberger Berman/Engineering)Text with EEA relevance
   (1
  ) | 1 |
| 2016/C 114/02 | Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.7925 — Newell Rubbermaid/Jarden)Text with EEA relevance
   (1
  ) | 1 |

Contents

page

II   Information

INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2016/C 114/01

Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.7967 — Apax Partners/Neuberger Berman/Engineering)Text with EEA relevance
   (1
  )

1

1

2016/C 114/02

Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.7925 — Newell Rubbermaid/Jarden)Text with EEA relevance
   (1
  )

1

1

---

| | IV   Notices |
| --- | --- |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2016/C 114/03 | Euro exchange rates | 2 |

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2016/C 114/03

Euro exchange rates

2

---

| | V   Announcements |
| --- | --- |
| | PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMMON COMMERCIAL POLICY |
| | European Commission |
| 2016/C 114/04 | Notice of initiation of an anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports of certain concrete reinforcement bars and rods originating in the Republic of Belarus | 3 |
| | PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPETITION POLICY |
| | European Commission |
| 2016/C 114/05 | Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.7976 — Deutsche Alternative Asset Management (Global)/Ermewa/Akiem) — Candidate case for simplified procedureText with EEA relevance
   (1
  ) | 10 |

V   Announcements

PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMMON COMMERCIAL POLICY

European Commission

2016/C 114/04

Notice of initiation of an anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports of certain concrete reinforcement bars and rods originating in the Republic of Belarus

3

PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPETITION POLICY

European Commission

2016/C 114/05

Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.7976 — Deutsche Alternative Asset Management (Global)/Ermewa/Akiem) — Candidate case for simplified procedureText with EEA relevance
   (1
  )

1

10

---

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

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance

1

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

EN
1... See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.

COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 2-07-349-CR

TOMMY JEROLD HUTCHINGS, JR. APPELLANT

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS STATE

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

FROM CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT NO. 1 OF TARRANT COUNTY

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

MEMORANDUM OPINION1

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

Tommy Jerold Hutchings, Jr. appeals his conviction for possession of

methamphetamine—one gram or more but less than four grams. Hutchings’s

court-appointed appellate counsel has filed a motion to withdraw as counsel

and a brief in support of that motion. In his motion, counsel avers that he has

conducted a professional evaluation of the record and, after a thorough review
2

of the applicable law, has reached the conclusion that there are no arguable

grounds to be advanced to support an appeal of this cause and that the appeal

is frivolous. Counsel’s brief and motion meet the requirements of Anders by

presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are

no reversible grounds on appeal and referencing any grounds that might

arguably support the appeal. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 741, 87

S. Ct. 1396, 1400 (1967); Mays v. State, 904 S.W.2d 920, 922–23 (Tex.

App.—Fort Worth 1995, no pet.). Hutchings was given the opportunity to file

a pro se brief on his own behalf, but he chose not to do so.

In our duties as a reviewing court, we must conduct an independent

evaluation of the record to determine whether counsel is correct in determining

that the appeal is frivolous. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex.

Crim. App. 1991); Mays, 904 S.W.2d at 923. Only then may we grant

counsel’s motion to withdraw. See Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 82–83, 109

S. Ct. 346, 351 (1988).

We have carefully reviewed the appellate record and counsel’s brief. We

agree that the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. We find nothing in

the record that might arguably support the appeal. See Bledsoe v. State, 178

S.W.3d 824, 827 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). Therefore, we grant the motion to
3

withdraw filed by Hutchings’s appellate counsel and affirm the trial court’s

judgment.

PER CURIAM

PANEL: HOLMAN, GARDNER, and WALKER, JJ.

DO NOT PUBLISH

Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)

DELIVERED: October 16, 2008
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

September 9, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

136555 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

LAWRENCE BLEAU, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman, 

Justices 

v SC: 136555 

 COA: 281260 

WCAC: 06-000182 

GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION,

Defendant-Appellee. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the April 18, 2008 order 

of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded 

that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

t0828 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

September 9, 2008 

 Clerk
1... Sitting by assignment.

i i i i i i

MEMORANDUM OPINION ON REHEARING

No. 04-07-00574-CR

Jeremiah Heath CARDIN,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 198th Judicial District Court, Kerr County, Texas

Trial Court No. B0750

Honorable Charles Sherrill, Judge Presiding1

Opinion by: Catherine Stone, Justice

Sitting: Catherine Stone, Justice

Karen Angelini, Justice

Steven C. Hilbig, Justice

Delivered and Filed: October 1, 2008

REVERSED AND REMANDED

In light of the State’s concession of error on rehearing, we withdraw our opinion and

judgment of June 25, 2008, and substitute this opinion and judgment in theirstead. Jeremiah Cardin

was found guilty of possession of cocaine, and he was sentenced to two years imprisonment and

fined $2,000. Cardin’s only complaint on appeal is that he was denied effective assistance of counsel
 04-07-00574-CV

-2-

during the punishment phase of his trial. The State concedes, with commendable professional

candor, that: (1) defense counsel’s representation of Cardin during the punishment phase of his trial

was so deficient as to fall below an objective standard of reasonableness; and (2) there is a

reasonable probability that but for counsel’s unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would

have been different. See Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687 (1984); Thompson v. State,

9 S.W.3d 808, 812 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999). Given the State’s concession of error, Cardin’s motion

for rehearing is granted and the case is remanded to the trial court for further proceedings. 

Catherine Stone, Justice

Do Not Publish
i i i i i i

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-08-00655-CR

Jose Alberto GUTIERREZ,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 290th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2008CR1186

Honorable Sharon MacRae, Judge Presiding

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Alma L. López, Chief Justice

Catherine Stone, Justice

Karen Angelini, Justice

Delivered and Filed: October 15, 2008

DISMISSED

The trial court’s certification in this appeal states that the case is a “plea-bargain case, and

the defendant has NO right of appeal.” Rule 25.2(d) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure

provides, “[t]he appeal must be dismissed if a certification that shows the defendant has a right of

appeal has not been made part of the record under these rules.” TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d). 

Appellant’s counsel has filed written notice with this court that counsel has reviewed the

record and “can find no right of appeal for Appellant.” We construe this notice as an indication that
04-08-00655-CR

-2-

appellant will not seek to file an amended trial court certification showing that he has the right of

appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d); 37.1; see also Daniels v. State, 110 S.W.3d 174, 177 (Tex.

App.—San Antonio 2003, no pet.). In light of the record presented, we agree with appellant’s

counsel that Rule 25.2(d) requires this court to dismiss this appeal. Accordingly, this appeal is

dismissed.

PER CURIAM

DO NOT PUBLISH
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-6483

ABDUL-AZIZ RASHID MUHAMMAD, a/k/a William A.

Brown,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

J. BUNTS, Health Services Administrator; DAVID

T. BUCKINGHAM, Nurse; E. MASTELLER, PA-C; P.

BENDER, PA-C; T. PUCKETT, PA-C; DORIS

WILLIAMS, Clinical Director,

Defendants - Appellees,

and

J. D. HILL, Associate Warden of Programs; K.

M. WHITE, Regional Director, Mid-Atlantic

Regional Office; G. STONE, Superintendent of

Industry; HARRELL WATTS, Administrator,

National Inmate Appeals; B. A. BLEDSOE,

Warden, FCI Gilmer,

Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern

District of West Virginia, at Clarksburg. Irene M. Keeley, Chief

District Judge. (1:03-cv-00228-IMK)

Submitted: September 26, 2007 Decided: November 19, 2007

Before WILKINSON and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.
- 2 -

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Abdul-Aziz Rashid Muhammad, Appellant Pro Se. Daniel W. Dickinson,

Jr., OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Wheeling, West Virginia,

for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
- 3 -

PER CURIAM:

Abdul-Aziz Rashid Muhammad appeals the district court’s

order accepting the magistrate judge’s recommendations as modified

and denying relief on his complaint filed pursuant to Bivens v. Six

Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388

(1971). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.

Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district

court. Muhammad v. Bunts, No. 1:03-cv-00228-IMK (N.D. W. Va. Mar.

1, 2007). 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
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 3950 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend for one year the 

credit for energy-efficient existing homes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 28, 2014 

Mr. GRAYSON introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend 

for one year the credit for energy-efficient existing homes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF CREDIT FOR ENERGY-EFFI4 CIENT EXISTING HOMES. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Paragraph (2) of section 25C(g) 

6 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by strik7 ing ‘‘December 31, 2013’’ and inserting ‘‘December 31, 

8 2014’’. 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

HR 3950 IH

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

2 this section shall apply to property placed in service after 

3 December 31, 2013. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                             813
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    14309
<ALLOWANCES>                                       127
<INVENTORY>                                       2595
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 19250
<PP&E>                                           21772
<DEPRECIATION>                                    7873
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   41582
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            11707
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            33
<OTHER-SE>                                       17550
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     41582
<SALES>                                          27249
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 27249
<CGS>                                             6755
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                     6755
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 23692
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 629
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (2015)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       274
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (2289)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (2289)
<EPS-BASIC>                                   (0.70)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.70)


</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.1









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 Quarterly Report of CPI International, Inc. (the
“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 28, 2008 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, O.
Joe Caldarelli, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that:




(1)  
The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and




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






/s/
      O. JOE CALDARELLIO.
      Joe CaldarelliChief
      Executive OfficerMay
      7, 2008
**Judgment of the Court of First Instance (Seventh Chamber) of 30 September 2009 – Netherlands v Commission**

**(Case T-55/07)**

EAGGF – Guarantee Section – Expenditure excluded from Community financing – Rural development support – Transitional measures – Concept of ‘multi-annual expenditure’ – Article 4(2) and (3) of Regulation (EC) No 2603/1999

1.                     *Agriculture – Common agricultural policy – EAGGF financing (Art. 10 EC; Council Regulation No 1258/1999, Art. 8(1)) (see paras
62, 113)*

2.                     *Community law – Principles – Protection of legitimate expectations – Conditions (Council Regulation No 729/70, Art. 5(2)(c))
(see para. 99)*

3.                     *Acts of the institutions – Statement of reasons – Obligation – Scope (Art. 253 EC) (see paras 124-125)*

**Re:**

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | APPLICATION for partial annulment of Commission Decision 2006/932/EC of 14 December 2006 excluding from Community financing certain expenditure incurred by the Member States under the Guarantee Section of the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) (OJ 2006 L 355, p. 96) in so far as it relates to the Kingdom of the Netherlands and more particularly with regard to the financial correction applied to the reimbursement of ineligible expenditure in the framework of the EAGGF, Guarantee Section, for the year 2002 in the amount of EUR 5.67 million. |

**Operative part**

The Court:

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 1. | | Dismisses the action; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 2. | | Order the Kingdom of the Netherlands to pay the costs. |
STATE v. David Michael WILSON

164P16-2

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

March 16, 2017

David Michael Wilson, for Wilson, David Michael.

Anne M. Middleton, Special Deputy Attorney General, Todd Williams, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 3rd of January 2017 *290by Defendant for Petition for Discretionary Review:

"Motion Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 16th of March 2017."
State of North Carolina v. Ian Scott Banks, Defendant.

No. COA16-402

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: December 6, 2016

NO ERROR.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                      Exhibit 23


                          INDEPENDENT AUDITOR'S CONSENT

The Board of Directors
PC Service Source, Inc.:

We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statements on Form
S-8 (No. 333-09333, No. 333-09335, No. 33-81146 and No. 33-98176) of PC Service
Source, Inc. of our report dated February 13, 1998, relating to the consolidated
balance sheets of PC Service Source, Inc. and subsidiaries as of December 31,
1997 and 1996, and the related consolidated statements of operations,
stockholders' equity, and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year
period ended December 31, 1997, and related financial statement schedule, which
report appears in the December 31, 1997 Form 10-K of PC Service Source, Inc.







                                                          KPMG Peat Marwick LLP


Dallas, Texas
March 30, 1998
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

2009-3048

TAMILO P. FEA,

Petitioner,

v.

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY,

Respondent.

Petition for review of the Merit Systems Protection Board in

DC0752080398-I-1.

ON MOTION

ORDER

Tamilo P. Fea moves to reinstate this petition for review.

On December 31, 2008, Fea's petition was dismissed by the court for failure to

pay the docketing fee. Fea has now paid the fee.

Upon consideration thereof,

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

The motion is granted. The mandate is recalled, the December 31, 2008

order is vacated, and Fea's petition for review is reinstated.

Fea's brief is due within 21 days of the date of filing of this order.

FOR THE COURT

FEB 11 2009

/s/ Jan Horbalv

Date	 Jan Horbaly

Clerk FILED U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR

cc:	Ariel E. Solomon, Esq.	 THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT

Allison Kidd-Miller, Esq.

s19	 FEB 1 1 2009

JAI NORUALY

CLERK
Order filed, September 29, 2012.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-12-00467-CR

____________

MILLENA R. HEBERT, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 338th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 1309261

ORDER

The reporter’s record in this case was due September 6, 2012. See Tex. R. App. 

P. 35.1. The court has not received a request to extend time for filing the record. The 

record has not been filed with the court. Because the reporter’s record has not been filed 

timely, we issue the following order.

We order Serena Pace, the official court reporter, to file the record in this appeal 

within 30 days of the date of this order. 

PER CURIAM
State v. Mason White Hyde

88P15-4

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

December 8, 2016.

Mr. Mason W. Hyde, Laurinburg, Pro Se.

Mr. James R. Grant, Assistant Appellate Defender, For Hyde, Mason White.

Ms. Kimberly N. Callahan, Assistant Attorney General, Mr. Daniel P. O'Brien, Special Deputy Attorney General, For State of N.C.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 28th of November 2016 by Defendant for Petition for Writ of Error:

"Motion Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 8th of December 2016."
STATE of North Carolina v. Christopher Adam HICKS

No. COA16-1033

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: July 5, 2017

NO ERROR.
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4120 Engrossed in House (EH)]

113th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4120

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
    To amend the National Law Enforcement Museum Act to extend the 
                           termination date.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. NATIONAL LAW ENFORCEMENT MUSEUM ACT TERMINATION DATE 
              EXTENDED.

    Section 4(f) of the National Law Enforcement Museum Act (Public Law 
106-492) is amended by striking ``13 years'' and inserting ``16 
years''.

SEC. 2. EFFECTIVE DATE.

    The provisions of this Act shall take effect as if this Act were 
enacted on November 8, 2013.

            Passed the House of Representatives April 28, 2014.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
113th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                               H. R. 4120

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

    To amend the National Law Enforcement Museum Act to extend the 
                           termination date.
```