alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Stephen J. Markman

, Chief Justice

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein

Kurtis T. Wilder

Elizabeth T. Clement

, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, 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.

June 27, 2018

p0620 

# Order

Clerk June 27, 2018

156711

STAN MICIURA,

Plaintiff/Counterdefendant

- Appellee,

v SC: 156711

COA: 338945

Wayne CC: 17

- 000217

- AV

STACY KURC, JOHN KURC, and

1410 SYCAMORE, WYANDOTTE, MI

48192, LLC,

Defendants/Counterplaintiffs

- Appellants.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the September 21, 2017

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

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
Exhibit 4.10

    

    
      

      

      TERMINATION AGREEMENT

       

      Between

       

      DHT Management Pte. Ltd.

      (“Employer”)

       

      and

       

      

      Trygve P. Munthe

      (“Executive”)

       

      Executive has been employed by Employer pursuant to an employment agreement of 20 December 2018 (the “Employment Agreement”). Executive and Employer
        have agreed that the Employment Agreement shall be terminated on the terms set out in this termination agreement (“the Agreement”).

      

      

      All abbreviations in the Agreement shall, unless otherwise expressly stated herein, have the same meaning as in the Employment Agreement.

       

      
        
          	1	
                  TERMINATION OF EMPLOYMENT

                


        

      

       

      
        
          	1.1	
                  The Parties agree that Executive’s employment with Employer shall formally terminate at the end of business hours on 31 October 2019 (the “Termination Date”).

                


        

      

      

      

      
        
          	1.2	
                  The Executive shall maintain and receive his salary and other benefits as set out in the Employment Agreement, up to and including the Termination Date.

                


        

      

      

      

      
        
          	2	
                  MISCELLANEOUS

                


        

      

      

      

      
        
          	2.1	
                  Executive confirms that he will not in any way dispute the termination of his employment with Employer and/or put forward any claims against Employer other than those set out in this Agreement.

                


        

      

       

      
        
          	2.2	
                  Executive confirms that this is full and final settlement and that he is not entitled to any severance payment as set out in the Employment Agreement or otherwise as a result of the termination of employment
                    with Employer.

                


        

      

       

      
        
          	2.3	
                  All payments made under this Agreement are subject to normal tax deductions.

                


        

      

       

      * * *

       

      

      IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have duly executed this Agreement as of the date stated below.

      

      

      	Place, date:	 	Place, date:	 
	 	 	 	 
	/s/ Trygve P. Munthe	 	 	 
	Trygve P. Munthe

            	 	
              DHT Management Pte. Ltd.
- Text118: 
    - Text119: 
    - Text120: 
    - Text121: 
    - Text122: 
    - Text123: 
    - Text124: 
    - Text125: 
    - Text126:
116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 2047 

AN ACT 

To provide for a 2-week extension of the Medicaid community 

mental health services demonstration program, and for 

other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

†S 2047 ES

1 SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF THE MEDICAID COMMUNITY 

2 MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES DEMONSTRA3 TION PROGRAM. 

4 Section 223(d)(3) of the Protecting Access to Medi5 care Act of 2014 (42 U.S.C. 1396a note) is amended by 

6 striking ‘‘June 30, 2019’’ and inserting ‘‘July 14, 2019’’. 

7 SEC. 2. MEDICAID IMPROVEMENT FUND. 

8 Section 1941(b)(1) of the Social Security Act (42 

9 U.S.C. 1396w–1(b)(1)) is amended by striking 

10 ‘‘$6,000,000’’ and inserting ‘‘$1,000,000’’. 

Passed the Senate June 27, 2019. 

Attest: 

Secretary. 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 2047 

AN ACT 

To provide for a 2-week extension of the Medicaid 

program, and for other purposes. community mental health services demonstration
II 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 2136 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to improve the ability of veterans 

to receive in-state tuition using educational assistance administered by 

the Secretary of Veterans Affairs, and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 17, 2019 

Mrs. BLACKBURN (for herself and Mr. MANCHIN) introduced the following 

bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs 

A BILL 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to improve the 

ability of veterans to receive in-state tuition using educational assistance administered by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs, and for other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. REQUIREMENTS FOR IN-STATE TUITION. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 3679(c) of title 38, 

5 United States Code, is amended— 

6 (1) in paragraph (2)(A), by striking ‘‘less than 

7 three years before the date of enrollment in the 

8 course concerned’’; and 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2136 IS

1 (2) in paragraph (4)— 

2 (A) by striking ‘‘It shall’’ and inserting 

3 ‘‘(A) It shall’’; and 

4 (B) by adding at the end the following: 

5 ‘‘(B)(i) To the extent feasible, the Secretary 

6 shall make publicly available on the internet website 

7 of the Department a database explaining any re8 quirements described in subparagraph (A) that are 

9 established by a public institution of higher learning 

10 for an individual to be charged tuition and fees at 

11 a rate that is equal to or less than the rate the pub12 lic institution charges for tuition and fees for resi13 dents of the State in which the public institution is 

14 located. 

15 ‘‘(ii) The Secretary shall disapprove a course of 

16 education provided by a public institution of higher 

17 learning that does not provide the Secretary— 

18 ‘‘(I) an initial explanation of the require19 ments described in subparagraph (A); and 

20 ‘‘(II) not later than 90 days after the date 

21 on which any requirements change, the updated 

22 requirements.’’. 

23 (b) APPLICATION.—The amendments made by this 

24 section shall apply with respect to a quarter, semester, or 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 2136 IS

1 term, as applicable, commencing no earlier than August 

2 1, 2020. 

Æ 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          APR-30-2000             APR-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             MAY-01-1999             MAY-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               APR-30-2000             APR-30-1999
<CASH>                                          91,532                   2,291
<SECURITIES>                                    33,788                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    3,462                   1,474
<ALLOWANCES>                                     (350)                   (121)
<INVENTORY>                                      4,741                     932
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               134,373                   4,636
<PP&E>                                           5,860                   1,716
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (1,139)                   (365)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 140,734                   6,716
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            7,938                   3,849
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       1
<COMMON>                                             4                       1
<OTHER-SE>                                     132,626                   (346)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   140,734                   6,716
<SALES>                                         29,277                   7,036
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                29,277                   7,036
<CGS>                                           11,212                   3,297
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   43,306                  12,968
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                38,405                   3,776
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 747                     357
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (60,613)                (13,202)
<INCOME-TAX>                                        73                       0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (60,686)                (13,202)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (60,686)                (13,202)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (3.31)                  (2.17)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (3.31)                  (2.17)


</TABLE>
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

December 22, 2014

No. 04-14-00891-CR

IN RE Samuel ESPINOZA

Original Mandamus Proceeding1

ORDER

Sitting: Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice

Marialyn Barnard, Justice

Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice

On December 19, 2014, relator filed a pro se petition for writ of mandamus. The court 

has considered relator’s petition and is of the opinion that relator is not entitled to the relief 

sought. Accordingly, the petition for writ of mandamus is DENIED. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a). 

Relator’s request for leave to file the petition for writ of mandamus is DENIED AS MOOT. The 

court’s opinion will issue at a later date.

It is so ORDERED on December 22, 2014.

_____________________________

Marialyn Barnard, Justice

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

court on this 22nd day of December, 2014.

_____________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court

1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 5924, styled The State of Texas v. Samuel Espinoza, pending in the 229th 

Judicial District Court, Duval County, Texas, the Honorable Ana Lisa Garza presiding.
**EXHIBIT10.1**

** **

**STRAIGHT NOTE**

 

 
| $200,000 |   | South El Monte,  California |   | May 17, 2004 |
|----------|--------|-----------------------------|--------|--------------|

 

 

For value received, LeePharmaceuticals promises to pay Mark DiSalvo or order, at South El Monte,California the sum of TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS, with interest from May 17,2004, on unpaid principal at the rate of fifteen (15) percent for a ninety (90)day period.  Principal plus accruedinterest will be due and payable on August 14, 2004.  Interest shall be calculated on the basis of the unpaid principalbalance daily, based on a 365-day year, actual day month.  Principal and interest shall be payable inlawful money of the United States.  Ifaction were instituted on this note, I promise to pay such sum as the Court mayfix as attorney’s fees.  This note isunsecured.

 

 
| MAY 17, 2004 |                                           | RONALD G. LEE      |   |
|--------------|------------------------------------------------|--------------------|--------|
| Date         | Lee Pharmaceuticals -  Ronald G. Lee           |
|         |                                           |
|         |                                           |
| MAY 17, 2004 |                                           | MICHAEL L. AGRESTI |   |
| Date         | Lee Pharmaceuticals –  Michael L. Agresti |
|              |                                                |                    |        |  |

 

----
#### SMITH v. AMERICAN AND EFIRD MILLS

No. 191 PC.

No. 160 (Fall Term)

Case below: 51 N.C. App. 480.

Petition by defendants for rehearing allowed, and orders dated 6 October 1981 denying petition for discretionary review and allowing motion to dismiss rescinded. Petition by defendants for discretionary review is now allowed and the motion to dismiss appeal is denied by order of the Court 1 December 1981.
mbcc-ex1060_9.htm



Exhibit 10.60

AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT FOR SALE OF COMMERCIAL TIME

 

This Amendment dated as of February 14, 2019 by and between Nexstar Broadcasting, Inc., as successor-in-interest to Quorum Broadcasting of Texas, Inc. (“Nexstar”), and Mission Broadcasting, Inc., as assignee of VHR Broadcasting of Lubbock, Inc. (“Mission”) is made to that certain Agreement for Sale of Commercial Time dated February 16, 1999, as amended December 30, 2003 and extended (the “Agreement”).

 

WHEREAS, the Agreement expires by its terms on February 16, 2019; and

 

WHEREAS, Nexstar and Mission desire to extend the Agreement for two additional terms.

 

NOW THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the foregoing, Nexstar and Mission hereby amend the Agreement as follows:

 


	
 
	
1.
	
Paragraph 1 of the Agreement (Term of the Agreement) is hereby amended to provide that upon the expiration of the current term, the term of this Agreement will be extended for an additional eight (8) year term (the “Renewal Term”); and that upon expiration of the Renewal Term, unless otherwise terminated by either Party, the term of the Agreement will be extended automatically for an additional eight (8) year term.




 


	
 
	
2.
	
As so amended, all sections and provisions of the Agreement are hereby ratified in full.




 

 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Shared Services Agreement as of the date first written above.


		
	
MISSION BROADCASTING, INC.

	
 
	
 

	
 
	
 

	
 
	
 

	
By:
	
/s/ Dennis Thatcher

	
Name:
	
 Dennis Thatcher

	
Title:
	
 President

	
 
	
 

	
 
	
 

	
NEXSTAR BROADCASTING, INC.

	
 
	
 

	
 
	
 

	
 
	
 

	
By:
	
/s/ Thomas E. Carter

	
Name:
	
 Thomas E. Carter

	
Title:
	
 EVP and Chief Financial Officer
#### HURDLE v. WHITE

No. 16 PC.

Case below: 34 N.C. App. 644.

Petition by defendant for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 7 March 1978.
#### MIDDLETON v. MYERS

No. 233 PC.

No. 110 (Fall Term).

Case below: 41 N.C. App. 543.

Petition by plaintiff for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 allowed 10 September 1979.
Case 1:07-cv-03536-GEL Document 11-3 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 1 of 32
Case 1:07-cv-03536-GEL Document 11-3 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 2 of 32
Case 1:07-cv-03536-GEL Document 11-3 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 3 of 32
Case 1:07-cv-03536-GEL Document 11-3 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 4 of 32
Case 1:07-cv-03536-GEL Document 11-3 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 5 of 32
Case 1:07-cv-03536-GEL Document 11-3 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 6 of 32
Case 1:07-cv-03536-GEL Document 11-3 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 7 of 32
Case 1:07-cv-03536-GEL Document 11-3 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 8 of 32
Case 1:07-cv-03536-GEL Document 11-3 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 9 of 32
Case 1:07-cv-03536-GEL Document 11-3 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 10 of 32
Case 1:07-cv-03536-GEL Document 11-3 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 11 of 32
Case 1:07-cv-03536-GEL Document 11-3 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 12 of 32
Case 1:07-cv-03536-GEL Document 11-3 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 13 of 32
Case 1:07-cv-03536-GEL Document 11-3 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 14 of 32
Case 1:07-cv-03536-GEL Document 11-3 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 15 of 32
Case 1:07-cv-03536-GEL Document 11-3 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 16 of 32
Case 1:07-cv-03536-GEL Document 11-3 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 17 of 32
Case 1:07-cv-03536-GEL Document 11-3 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 18 of 32
Case 1:07-cv-03536-GEL Document 11-3 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 19 of 32
Case 1:07-cv-03536-GEL Document 11-3 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 20 of 32
Case 1:07-cv-03536-GEL Document 11-3 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 21 of 32
Case 1:07-cv-03536-GEL Document 11-3 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 22 of 32
Case 1:07-cv-03536-GEL Document 11-3 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 23 of 32
Case 1:07-cv-03536-GEL Document 11-3 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 24 of 32
Case 1:07-cv-03536-GEL Document 11-3 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 25 of 32
Case 1:07-cv-03536-GEL Document 11-3 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 26 of 32
Case 1:07-cv-03536-GEL Document 11-3 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 27 of 32
Case 1:07-cv-03536-GEL Document 11-3 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 28 of 32
Case 1:07-cv-03536-GEL Document 11-3 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 29 of 32
Case 1:07-cv-03536-GEL Document 11-3 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 30 of 32
Case 1:07-cv-03536-GEL Document 11-3 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 31 of 32
Case 1:07-cv-03536-GEL Document 11-3 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 32 of 32
Case 1:07-cv-03525-PKL Document 8 Filed 05/09/2008 Page 1 of 2Case 1:07-cv-03525-PKL Document 8 Filed 05/09/2008 Page 2 of 2
#### FIRST CITIZENS BANK v. POWELL

No. 462PA82.

Case below: 58 N.C. App. 229.

Petition by defendants for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 allowed 21 September 1982.
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 11 Filed 05/24/2007 Page 1 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 11 Filed 05/24/2007 Page 2 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 11 Filed 05/24/2007 Page 3 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 11 Filed 05/24/2007 Page 4 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 11 Filed 05/24/2007 Page 5 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 11 Filed 05/24/2007 Page 6 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 11 Filed 05/24/2007 Page 7 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 11 Filed 05/24/2007 Page 8 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 11 Filed 05/24/2007 Page 9 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 11 Filed 05/24/2007 Page 10 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 11 Filed 05/24/2007 Page 11 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 11 Filed 05/24/2007 Page 12 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 11 Filed 05/24/2007 Page 13 of 13
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

SHERRIE RUSSELL-BROWN,

Plaintiff,

v. CASE NO. 1:09-cv-00257-MP -GRJ

ROBERT H JERRY, II, LEVIN COLLEGE OF LAW, THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA, THE

UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA BOARD OF TRUSTEES,

Defendants.

_____________________________/

O R D E R

This matter is before the Court on Doc. 150, Notice Filing Affidavits of Rodney W.

Smith and Richard C. Mccrea, Jr. by Robert H Jerry, II, Levin College of Law, the University of

Florida, the University of Florida Board of Trustees. In accordance with this Court’s August 19,

2010 order, Defendants have filed an application for attorney fees and costs. Plaintiff has filed a

Notice of Appeal, Doc. 146, seeking review of the order dismissing her claims by the United

States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. 

Normally, the filing of a notice of appeal divests the district court of jurisdiction over all

matters covered in the appeal and transfers jurisdiction over those matters to the court of appeals. 

United States v. Rogers, 788 F.2d 1472 (11th Cir. 1986). However, “[i]t is well settled in this

circuit that costs may be taxed after a notice of appeal has been filed.” Rothernberg v. Security

Management Co., Inc., 677 F.2d 64, 64 (11th Cir. 1982). Our sister court in Georgia stated

“[t]he award of costs [under Rule 41(a)(2)] usually includes all litigation-related expenses

incurred by the defendant, including reasonable attorney fees.” Bishop v. West American Ins.

Co., 95 F.R.D. 494 (D.C. GA., 1982). Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(2) allows the
Page 2 of 2

Case No: 1:09-cv-00257-MP -GRJ

district court to grant voluntary dismissal under terms it considers proper, including the taxation

of attorney fees. Ortega Trujillo v. Banco Central Del Ecuador, 379 F.3d 1298, 1301 (11th Cir.

2004). Therefore, this Court determines that it is fitting and proper to assess costs and attorney

fees pursuant to order granting voluntary dismissal under Rule 41(b)(2), even if that order has

been appealed. 

Defendants’ motion for attorney fees and supporting affidavits are sufficiently specific. 

Plaintiff, however, will have an opportunity to object to the hours billed and hourly rate. 

Accordingly, it is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:

1. The Clerk is directed to set a hearing on this motion for Wednesday, October 6,

2010 at 10:00 a.m. 

2. Plaintiff must submit objections to hours billed or hourly pay rates, if any, in

writing no later than close of business Friday October 1, 2010. 

DONE AND ORDERED this 27th day of September, 2010

 s/Maurice M. Paul 

 Maurice M. Paul, Senior District Judge
#### BANK v. GILLESPIE

No. 53 PC.

Case below: 28 N.C. App. 237.

Petition for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 allowed 6 April 1976.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

**COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,**

**Respondent**

**v.**

**JUNIOR THOMPSON,**

**Petitioner :** 

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**: No. 615 EAL 2015** 

**Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the Order of the Superior Court** 

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW **, this 30th day of March, 2016, the Petition for Allo wance of Appeal is** 

DENIED

**.**
EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL
OFFICER PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C.
SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Patricia S. Morris, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual Report of SourceForge, Inc. on Form
10-K for the fiscal year ended July 31, 2007 fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
and that information contained in such Annual Report on Form 10-K fairly
presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of
operations of SourceForge, Inc.

|Date: October 9,
      2007 | By:    | /s/ PATRICIA S. MORRIS                                 
|--------------------------- | ------ | -------------------------------------------------------
|                            | Name:  | Patricia S.
      Morris                               
|                            | Title: | Chief
      Financial Officer and Senior Vice President

---
Case 5:10-mc-00002-RS-EMT Document 1 Filed 01/25/10 Page 1 of 3
Case 5:10-mc-00002-RS-EMT Document 1 Filed 01/25/10 Page 2 of 3
Case 5:10-mc-00002-RS-EMT Document 1 Filed 01/25/10 Page 3 of 3
Case 7:07-cv-03544-KMK-LMS     Document 5      Filed 05/30/2007     Page 1 of 1