alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### LONG ENGINEERING COMPANY, INC. *v.*HENNIS FREIGHT LINES, INC.

(Filed 10 April 1963.)

Appeal by defendant from *Johnston, J..,*October 8, 1962, Term of Forsyth.

*253This action for breach of contract, instituted in the Small Claims Division of the Superior Court of Forsyth County, was tried (without a jury) by the presiding judge. G.S. 1-539.3 *et seq.*

At the conclusion of plaintiff’s (the only) evidence, defendant moved for judgment of nonsuit and excepted to the denial thereof.

The court based its conclusions of law and judgment on the following findings of fact:

“1. That on or about October 24, 1960, the defendant, Iiennis Freight Lines, Inc., owned and operated a business enterprise known as 52 Restaurant, located on U. S. Highway 52, located on property known as Lot Number 26-A of Block 2895 on the Tax Map of Forsyth County.

“2. That defendant had in its employ William B. Holliday, as general manager of said restaurant, and that on the 24th day of October, 1960, the defendant, acting through William B. Holliday as its agent and employee, entered into three (3) separate contracts with the plaintiff, as alleged in the Complaint; that in the early part of 1962, the defendant breached the contracts, and that there was due and owing under the terms of the contracts at the time of the breach thereof the sum of $474.85; and that the plaintiff has suffered a loss of profits on account of the breach in the sum of $500.00.”

Defendant made motions “to set the verdict aside” and “for a new trial” and excepted to the denial thereof.

Judgment for plaintiff for $974.85 and costs was entered. Defendant excepted to the judgment and 'appealed; and it is stated in the appeal entries that defendant excepted “to the findings of fact by the Court.”

*Hudson, Ferrell, Petree, Stockton, Stockton & Robinson for plaintiff appellee.*

*Harold R. Wilson for defendant appellant.*

Per Curiam.

The evidence, when considered in the light most favorable to plaintiff, was sufficient to withstand defendant’s motion for judgment of nonsuit. Defendant’s exception to “the findings of fact by the Court” is broadside and ineffectual. It does not present for review the sufficiency of the evidence to support any particular finding of fact. Strong, N. C. Index, Vol. 1, Appeal and Error § 22 and cases cited. The judgment is fully supported by the court’s findings of fact and defendant’s assignments do not disclose prejudicial error.

Affirmed.
Document

EXHIBIT 10.8

AMENDMENT #1
TO AMENDED AND RESTATED EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT


This AMENDMENT #1 TO AMENDED AND RESTATED EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT (this “Amendment”) is effective as of April 1, 2021, by and between BALDWIN RISK PARTNERS, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (the “Company”), and Kris Wiebeck (“Employee”).  


BACKGROUND


The Company employs Employee pursuant to that certain Amended and Restated Employment Agreement by and between the Company and Employee (the “Employment Agreement”), which became effective as of the IPO Closing Date (as defined in the Employment Agreement). 


The Company and Employee desire to amend the Employment Agreement on the terms set forth herein effective as of the date first written above.    


OPERATIVE TERMS


    The parties agree as follows:


1.Section 2(a) of the Employment Agreement is hereby amended and restated as follows:
“During the Employment Period, Employee shall serve as Chief Strategy Officer of the Company and PubCo, and shall have those powers and duties normally and customarily associated with his position in entities comparable to the Company and PubCo and such other powers and duties as may be reasonably prescribed by the Company or PubCo, subject to the power and authority of each of the Company or PubCo to modify such duties, responsibilities, functions and authority from time to time in its sole discretion.”
2.Except as otherwise expressly provided herein, the Employment Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. 


[Signature Page Follows]











The parties hereto have executed this Amendment to be effective as of the date first written above.


COMPANY


BALDWIN RISK PARTNERS, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company 




By: /s/ Trevor Baldwin            
Name: Trevor Baldwin
Title: Chief Executive Officer




EMPLOYEE




/s/ Kris Wiebeck            
Name: Kris Wiebeck




Signature page to Amendment #1 to Amended and Restated Employment Agreement - Wiebeck
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5604 

To rescind amounts authorized for certain surface transportation programs. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 25, 2010 

Mr. PERRIELLO (for himself and Mr. SCHAUER) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 

A BILL 

To rescind amounts authorized for certain surface 

transportation programs. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Surface Transpor5 tation Savings Act of 2010’’. 

6 SEC. 2. SAFETY BELT PERFORMANCE GRANTS. 

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subject to subsection (b), of the 

8 amounts authorized for fiscal year 2010 by section 

9 2001(a)(4) of SAFETEA–LU (119 Stat. 1519) to carry 

10 out section 406 of title 23, United States Code, 

11 $80,994,029 is rescinded. 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5604 IH

1 (b) LIMITATION.—The amount rescinded pursuant to 

2 subsection (a) shall be decreased as necessary to ensure 

3 that not less than $28,505,971 is available for fiscal year 

4 2010 to carry out section 406 of title 23, United States 

5 Code. 

6 SEC. 3. ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES. 

7 Of the amounts authorized for fiscal year 2010 by 

8 section 2001(a)(11) of SAFETEA–LU (119 Stat. 1520), 

9 $6,547,000 is rescinded. 

10 SEC. 4. NATIONAL DRIVER REGISTER. 

11 Of the amounts authorized for fiscal year 2010 by 

12 section 2001(a)(7) of SAFETEA–LU (119 Stat. 1520) 

13 for the National Driver Register authorized under chapter 

14 303 of title 49, United States Code, $78,000 is rescinded. 

15 SEC. 5. NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMINISTRA16 TION OPERATIONS AND RESEARCH. 

17 Of the amounts authorized for fiscal year 2010 by 

18 section 2001(a)(2) of SAFETEA–LU (119 Stat. 1519) to 

19 carry out section 403 of title 23, United States Code, 

20 $1,829,000 is rescinded. 

21 SEC. 6. TRANSIT FORMULA AND BUS GRANTS. 

22 Of the amounts authorized for fiscal year 2010 by 

23 section 5338(b)(1) of title 49, United States Code, to 

24 carry out sections 5305, 5307, 5308, 5309, 5310, 5311, 

25 5316, 5317, 5320, 5335, 5339, and 5340 of title 49, 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 5604 IH

1 United States Code, and section 3038 of the Federal 

2 Transit Act of 1998 (112 Stat. 392), $17,394,000 is re3 scinded. 

Æ 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
Executive Order on Requiring COVID-19

Vaccination for All Federal Employees

This message is intended for all DOL employees and contractors.

Colleagues,

Last week, President Biden signed an Executive Order requiring vaccinations for all Federal employees, stating that it is

essential for Federal employees to take all available steps to protect themselves and avoid spreading COVID-19 to their

colleagues and members of the public. This direction will help decrease the spread of COVID-19 in our communities and

protect our employees and their families during this continuing public health emergency. Requiring the COVID-19 vaccine

for our workforce will also increase productivity and our ability to deliver our mission of serving our nation’s workers.

Pursuant to the Executive Order, all DOL employees must be fully vaccinated (i.e., two weeks past your final shot) no

later than Monday, November 22, 2021, unless they have a reasonable accommodation for a qualifying medical condition

or a religious accommodation based on a sincerely held religious belief, practice, or observance. This requirement

applies to all DOL employees, including those who are not currently performing onsite or in-person work. Please get

vaccinated as soon as possible, for yourself and for others.

To meet the November 22, 2021, timeframe to be fully vaccinated, an employee must:

Obtain the first dose of the Moderna vaccine no later than October 11, 2021, and the second dose of the Moderna

vaccine no later than November 8, 2021;

Obtain the first dose of the Pfizer vaccine no later than October 18, 2021, and the second dose of the Pfizer vaccine

no later than November 8, 2021; or

Obtain the single dose of the Johnson and Johnson vaccine no later than November 8, 2021.

Vaccines have been proven safe and are widely available — and they are FDA approved or authorized. For information

about where to obtain a vaccine at no cost to you, please visit www.vaccines.gov. DOL will be updating our Workplace

Safety Plan consistent with the new vaccination requirement, and will be putting out more guidance as needed.

The President signed another Executive Order that will require certain federal contractors to be fully vaccinated. The

Department will continue to communicate with its workforce as it implements both Executive Orders.

As a reminder, all DOL Federal employees are required to submit a response about their vaccination status in the

Department’s VaxTrak system by this Friday, September 17th. Additional information about VaxTrak, including FAQs,

may be found on the Department’s COVID-19 LaborNet Vaccination Information page.

Thank you for your cooperation, and your patience and attention to these changing circumstances and requirements,

while continuing your work in support of the Department’s mission.

Thank you,

LABORNET

■

■

■
Rachana Desai Martin (she/her)

Assistant Secretary for Administration and Management

Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration and Management

U.S. Department of Labor

Questions? Visit the COVID-19 Guidance and Resources on LaborNet or email us at

Posted: September 15, 2021
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 16

- 10818 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

–

Appellee
,

v ersus

BRITT MICHAEL GRESHAM
,
Defendant

– Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 2:15

- CR

- 38

- 2

Before JOLLY, SMITH, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *

The attorney appointed to represent Britt Gresham has moved for leave

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED February 20, 2017 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 16-10818 Document: 00513881619 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/20/2017No. 16

- 10818

2 to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California
, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) , and United States v. Pesina

- Rodriguez , 825 F.3d 787, 788 (5th Cir. 2016). Gresham has filed a res ponse. We have reviewed counsel ’ s brief, G resham ’ s response , and the relevant portions of the record reflected
therein. We concur with counsel ’ s assessment that the appeal presents no non

frivolous issue for appellate review.
Accordingly, the motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the appeal is DISMISSED.
See 5 TH C IR

. R. 42.2. Gresham ’ s request for appointment of substitute counsel
is DENIED. Gresham ’ s motion for remand or tolli ng of the limitation period
is DENIED. Case: 16-10818 Document: 00513881619 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/20/2017
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 207 (Thursday, October 27, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 61974]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-21460]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-7989-5]


Starmet CMI Superfund Site; Notice of Proposed De Minimis 
Settlement

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of Cost Recovery Settlement.

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

SUMMARY: Under section 122(g)(1) of the Comprehensive Environmental 
Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), the Environmental 
Protection Agency has offered a cost recovery settlement at the Starmet 
CMI Superfund Site located in Barnwell, Barnwell County, South 
Carolina. EPA will consider public comment until November 28, 2005. EPA 
may withdraw from or modify the proposed settlement should such 
comments disclose facts or considerations which indicate the proposed 
settlement is inappropriate, improper, or inadequate. Copies of the 
proposed are available from: Ms. Paula V. Batchelor, U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency, Waste Management Division, Superfund Enforcement & 
Information Management Branch, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 
30303, (404) 562-8890, E-mail: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#1a587b6e79727f767568344a7b6f767b5a7f6a7b347d756c"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="64260510070c01080b164a3405110805240114054a030b12">[email protected]</span></a>.
    Written or e-mail comments may be submitted to Paula V. Batchelor 
at the above address within thirty (30) days of the date of 
publication.

    Dated: October 12, 2005.
De'Lyntoneus Moore,
Acting Chief, Superfund Enforcement & Information Management Branch, 
Waste Management Division.
[FR Doc. 05-21460 Filed 10-26-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
#### ROBERT MICHAEL McSHANE, Appellant, v. THE STATE OF NEVADA, Respondent.

No. 10096

October 3, 1978

584 P.2d 707

*Horace R. Goff,*Nevada State Public Defender, *Robert B. Walker, Jr.,*Contracting Attorney, and *Gregory Damm,*Deputy State Public Defender, for Appellant.

*Rupert C. Schneider,*White Pine County District Attorney, for Respondent.

*670OPINION

*Per Curiam:*

A jury found McShane guilty of involuntary manslaughter, and judgment has duly been entered thereon. The information alleged that the victim was killed by McShane in the commission of the unlawful act of operating his automobile in excess of the posted speed limit, while under the influence of intoxicating liquor, in the wrong lane of traffic and without maintaining a proper brake system.

The appellant contends that the jury should have been instructed on the necessity of a unanimous verdict as to at least one of the alternative means charged, that is, speed, liquor, wrong lane, or lack of proper brakes. Such an instruction was not requested. The failure to so request is a waiver of his right to complain unless the instruction was so essential to his case that the court sua sponte was required to give it. Gebert v. State, 85 Nev. 331, 454 P.2d 897 (1969); Mears v. State, 83 Nev. 3, 422 P.2d 230 (1967). Moreover, we note that evidence was introduced which would have allowed the jury to find that McShane drove his car at an excessive speed, while under the influence of intoxicating liquor, in the wrong lane of traffic and without proper brakes. Consequently, the propriety of such an instruction, had it been requested, is doubtful.

Affirmed.1

1

The Chief Justice designated the Honorable David Zenoff, Chief Justice (Retired) to sit in the place of the Honorable Noel E. Manoukian, Justice, who voluntarily disqualified himself in this case. Nev. Const. art. 6, § 19; SCR 244.
#### Frank A. CARTER, Jr., Chief Disciplinary Counsel v. Edward J. KELAGHAN.

No. 90-363-M.P.

Supreme Court of Rhode Island.

July 16, 1990.

*1240Frank A. Carter, Chief Disciplinary Counsel, pro se.

Edward J. Kelaghan, pro se.

OPINION

PER CURIAM.

This is a disciplinary proceeding in which the respondent, Edward J. Kelaghan (Kelaghan), concedes that he gave a false response to an inquiry on his application to take the Rhode Island Bar Examination. The inquiry asked, “Have you ever been charged with, arrested, indicted, or questioned regarding the violation of any law?” Kelaghan responded in the negative.

The record indicates that on July 3, 1982, Kelaghan was arrested in the State of California for operating a motor vehicle while he was intoxicated. When Kelaghan appeared before a hearing panel of this court’s disciplinary board, he acknowledged that on February 14, 1983, he was found guilty of violating California’s prohibition against driving while intoxicated.

He attributed his mendacious behavior to his embarrassment and desire to conceal the drinking episode. Kelaghan’s embarrassment is understandable, but he obviously overlooked what this court said in *In re Capace,*110 R.I. 254, 291 A.2d 632 (1972), wherein it was emphasized that even though at times the truth may hurt, honesty is to be demanded of and expected of all those who seek to practice law within this jurisdiction.

The deception practiced here calls for a sanction. Accordingly, it is hereby ordered and decreed that Edward J. Kelaghan be and hereby is suspended from the practice of law before the courts of this State for a period of ninety days beginning on July 18, 1990, and concluding on October 15, 1990.

MURRAY, J., did not participate.
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 32.2

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

                                November 12, 2004

      In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q by Kaiser Aluminum &
Chemical Corporation, a Delaware corporation (the "Company"), for the period
ending September 30, 2004 (the "Report"), as filed on the date hereof with the
Securities and Exchange Commission, the undersigned, Kerry A. Shiba, Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, does hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that
to such officer's knowledge:

      (1)   The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
            15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or
            78o(d)); and

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

      IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this certification as of
the date first above written.

                                           /s/ Kerry A. Shiba
                                           -----------------------------
                                           Kerry A. Shiba
                                           Chief Financial Officer

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Corporation and will be retained by
Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Corporation and furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

                                       77
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 21.0




                         INTELLIGENT SYSTEMS CORPORATION

                     LIST OF PRINCIPAL SUBSIDIARY COMPANIES
                              AS OF MARCH 31, 1998


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
        SUBSIDIARY NAME                                        STATE OF ORGANIZATION
        ---------------                                        ---------------------
<S>                                                            <C>
ChemFree Corporation                                                   Georgia

HumanSoft LLC                                                          Georgia

Intelligent Enclosures Corporation                                     Georgia

InterQuad Services Limited                                             United Kingdom

INTS Holdings, Inc.                                                    Delaware

JK, Inc.                                                               Wyoming

PsyCare America, LLC dba Rapha or Rapha Treatment Centers              Georgia

Quadram Corporation                                                    Georgia
</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 211 (Wednesday, November 2, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 66412-66413]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-21729]


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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

[Report No. 2733]


Petitions for Reconsideration of Action in Rulemaking Proceeding

October 25, 2005.
    Petitions for Reconsideration have been filed in the Commission's 
Rulemaking proceeding listed in this Public Notice and published 
pursuant to 47 CFR Section 1.429(e). The full text of these documents 
is available for viewing and copying in Room CY-B402, 445 12th Street, 
SW., Washington, DC or may be purchased from the Commission's copy 
contractor, Best Copy and Printing, Inc. (BCPI) (1-800-378-3160). 
Oppositions to these petitions must be filed by November 17,

[[Page 66413]]

2005. See Section 1.4(b)(1) of the Commission's rules (47 CFR 
1.4(b)(1)). Replies to an opposition must be filed within 10 days after 
the time for filing oppositions have expired.
    Subject: In the Matter of Provision of Directory Listing 
Information under the Communications Act of 1934, as Amended (CC Docket 
No. 99-273).
    Number of Petitions Filed: 1.

Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 05-21729 Filed 11-1-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P