alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13

- 16

- 00400

- CR

Karl Dean Stahmann

v. The State of Texas

On a ppeal from the 207th District Court of Comal County , Texas Trial Cause No. CR2013

- 409

JUDGMENT THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this caus e on appeal, concludes that the judgment of the trial court should be reversed and the cause
remanded to the trial court. The Court orders the judgment of the trial court REVERSED and REMANDED for further proceedings in accordance with its opinion

. We fur ther order this decision certified below for observance. January 4, 2018
U.S. flagAn official website of the United States government
                    Here's how you know **Official websites use .gov**
                            
                            A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
 **Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**
                            
                            A **lock** (                            
                              A locked padlock                                                      
                            
                            ) or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Menu Agricultural Research Service
						
                    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
 Insect Genetics and Biochemistry Research: Fargo, ND
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    Careers


        


                    ETSARC Research Units
                        ETSARC Home page
                                    Office of the Center Director
                                    Location Support Staff
                                    Animal Metabolism-Agricultural Chemicals Research
                                    Cereal Crops Research
                                    Insect Genetics and Biochemistry Research
                                    Sugarbeet and Potato Research
                                    Sunflower and Plant Biology ResearchSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Plains Area Fargo, North Dakota Edward T. Schafer Agricultural Research Center Insect Genetics and Biochemistry Research Research





- ARS National Programs
- Search for a scientific manuscript
- Search for a research project
- ARS Software
- Programs and Projects
- Collaborations
- Subjects of Investigation
- Publications

Research Projects Subjects of Investigation at this LocationEach ARS research project has related subjects of investigation.  Listed below are the subjects of investigation currently conducted at this location.
Clicking on a subject of investigation will list the research projects within that  subject of investigation.


Return to top


Connect with ARS Sign up


ARS Home
                            USDA.gov
                            Plain Writing
                            Policies & Links
                            Civil Rights Statements
                            FOIA
                            Accessibility Statement
                            Privacy Policy
                            Non-Discrimination Statement
                            Quality of Information
                            USA.gov
                            WhiteHouse.gov
#### STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA ex rel. NORTH CAROLINA UTILITIES COMMISSION, v. YOUNGBLOOD TRUCK LINES, INC., Applicant-Petitioner; GREAT SOUTHERN TRUCKING COMPANY, McLEAN TRUCKING COMPANY, INC., MILLER MOTOR EXPRESS, INC., FREDRICKSON MOTOR EXPRESS CORP., HELMS MOTOR EXPRESS, INC., OVERNITE TRANSPORTATION CO., and THURSTON MOTOR LINES, INC., Protestants.

(Filed 3 February, 1956.)

Appeal by Protestants, Great Southern Trucking Company, McLean Trucking Company, Inc., Miller Motor Express, Inc., Fredrickson Motor Express Corp., Helms Motor Express, Inc., Overnite Transportation Co., and Thurston Motor Lines, Inc., from *Clarkson, J.,*at 1 August, 1955, Special Term of MeCICleNbuRG.

Proceeding instituted before the North Carolina Utilities Commission by petition of Youngblood Truck Lines, Inc., an irregular route common carrier of motor freight, for authority to interchange freight with Goldston Motor Express, Inc., a regular route common carrier of motor freight.

The protestants, all being regular route common carriers of motor freight in the State of North Carolina, came in as intervenors and objected to the petition. The cause came on for hearing before the Commission on 29 March, 1955. By consent, the case was consolidated for trial with seven other similar cases in which Youngblood Truck Lines, Inc., is petitioner.

The protestants moved the Commission to dismiss the petition, on the ground that it was without jurisdiction to grant the relief sought. After argument of counsel, the Commission sustained the motion of the protestants, and Chairman Winborne stated that the proceeding was dismissed. The petitioner noted an exception to the ruling and *457indicated a desire to appeal. Whereupon Chairman Winborne announced that the ruling would be put in the form of an order, which would be subject to petition for rehearing and other rules of appellate procedure.

On 22 April, 1955, the Commission filed and promulgated its order sustaining the motion to dismiss.

In due course and pursuant to the procedure outlined in G.S. 62-26.6, both sides petitioned the Commission for rehearing. Both petitions to rehear were denied *in toto*by the Commission, and each side, as allowed by statute, appealed to the Superior Court. The case was heard on appeal by Judge Clarkson, after which judgment was entered modifying and affirming the order of the Commission.

From the judgment so entered the protestants appealed to this Court.

*Allen & Hipp, Bunn & Bunn, and J. Ruffin Bailey for appellants.*

*Williams & Williams for appellee.*

Per Curiam.

In this case (No. 252) the judgment of the Superior Court will be modified and affirmed in accord with what is said in the opinion filed simultaneously herewith in the companion case of State of North Carolina *ex rel.*North Carolina Utilities Commission *v.*Youngblood Truck Lines, Inc., *et al., ante,*442, which is decisive of the questions raised by the instant appeal.

Modified and affirmed.
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 46 (Thursday, March 9, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 12940]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-5727]



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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. RP95-179-000]


Northern Natural Gas Co.; Notice of Proposed Changes in FERC Gas 
Tariff

March 3, 1995.
    Take notice that on February 28, 1995, Northern Natural Gas Company 
(Northern), tendered for filing changes in its FERC Gas Tariff, Fifth 
Revised Volume No. 1.
    Northern states that the filing revises the current GSR surcharge 
which is designed to recover Northern's gas supply realignment costs. 
Therefore, Northern has filed Seventeenth Revised Sheet Nos. 50 and 51 
to revise the GSR surcharge, effective April 1, 1995.
    Northern states that copies of this filing were served upon the 
Company's customers and interested State Commissions.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should 
file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 825 North Capitol Street NE., Washington, D.C., 
20426, in accordance with Secs. 385.214 and 385.211 of the Commission's 
Rules and Regulations. All such motions or protests should be filed on 
or before March 10, 1995. All protests will be considered by the 
Commission in determing the appropriate action to be taken in this 
proceeding, but will not serve to make protestant a party to the 
proceedings. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to 
intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and 
are available for inspection.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 95-5727 Filed 3-8-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 44 (Tuesday, March 7, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12568-12569]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-5559]



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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Health Resources and Services Administration


Advisory Council; Notice of Meeting

    In accordance with section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory 
Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463), announcement is made of the following 
National Advisory body scheduled to meet during the month of March 
1995.

    Name: Advanced General Dentistry Review Committee.
    Date and Time: March 20-22, 1995, 8:30 a.m.
    Place: Conference Room J, Parklawn Building, 5600 Fishers Lane, 
Rockville, Maryland 20857.
    Open on March 20, 8:30 a.m.-9:30 a.m.
    Closed for Remainder of Meeting.
    Purpose: The Advanced General Dentistry Review Committee shall 
review applications from public and nonprofit private schools of 
dentistry or accredited postgraduate dental [[Page 12569]] training 
institutions that plan, develop and operate an approved residency 
program or advanced educational program in the general practice of 
dentistry, including the support of trainees in such programs who 
plan to specialize in the practice of general dentistry.
    Agenda: The open portion of the meeting will cover welcome and 
opening remarks, legislative updates, and overview of the review 
process. The meeting will be closed to the public on March 20, at 
9:30 a.m. for the remainder of the meeting for the review of grant 
applications. The closing is in accordance with the provisions set 
forth in section 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., and the Determination 
by the Associate Administrator for Policy Coordination, Health 
Resources and Services Administration, pursuant to Public Law 92-
463.
    Anyone requiring information regarding the subject Council 
should contact Dr. Rosemary E. Duffy, Executive Secretary, Advanced 
General Dentistry Review Committee, Room 8C-09, Parklawn Building, 
5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, Maryland 20857, Telephone (301) 443-
6837.
    Agenda Items are subject to change as priorities dictate.

    Dated: March 2, 1995.
Jackie E. Baum,
Advisory Committee Management Officer, HRSA.
[FR Doc. 95-5559 Filed 3-6-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-15-P
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

July 3, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-2633

EQI, Ltd: 

I am pleased to notify you that the United States Trade Representative has determined to 

grant the above-referenced exclusion request submitted pursuant to the notice published at 83 FR 

32181 (‘July 11 notice’). The exclusion determination is set out in a formal notice which has 

been submitted to Office of the Federal Register for publication (‘the exclusion notice’). A prepublication version of the exclusion notice has been posted on the USTR website, at 

https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/enforcement/301Investigations/Notice_of_Product_Exclusions.

pdf. 

The scope of the exclusion is governed by the formal HTSUS language in the annex to 

the product exclusion notice, and not by the product descriptions set out in any particular request 

for exclusion. An exclusion in response to your request has been granted by excluding from the 

additional tariffs products covered by a specially drafted description contained in the annex to 

the product exclusion notice. 

In accordance with the July 11 notice, the exclusion applies as of the July 6, 2018 

effective date of the tariff action, and will extend for one year after the exclusion notice is 

published in the Federal Register. As stated in the exclusion notice, U.S. Customs and Border 

Protection will issue additional instructions on entry guidance and implementation

Sincerely,

Joseph Barloon

General Counsel
Third District Court of Appeal

State of Florida 

Opinion filed July 24, 2024.

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D23-1816

Lower Tribunal No. 2022-AP-1-M

________________

Richard Harper,

Petitioner,

vs.

City of Key Colony Beach,

Respondent.

On Petition for Writ of Certiorari from the Circuit Court for Monroe 

County, Appellate Division, Timothy J. Koenig, Judge.

Andrew M. Tobin, P.A., and Andrew M. Tobin, for petitioner.

Johnson, Anselmo, Murdoch, Burke, Piper & Hochman, P.A., and 

Jeffrey L. Hochman (Fort Lauderdale), for respondent.

Before LOGUE, C.J., and EMAS and LINDSEY, JJ. 

PER CURIAM. 
2

Denied. See Haines City Cmty. Dev. v. Heggs, 658 So. 2d 523, 530 

(Fla. 1995) (“As a case travels up the judicial ladder, review should 

consistently become narrower, not broader.”); Dep’t of Highway Safety & 

Motor Vehicles v. Saxlehner, 96 So. 3d 1002, 1005 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012)

(“Because this case involves second-tier certiorari, our scope and standard 

of review is quite limited. . . . A district court of appeal may not utilize secondtier review to correct simple legal error. To permit such a broad scope of 

review would, in essence, permit a second appeal, nullifying the narrowing 

scope of review described in Haines.”) (citation omitted). See also Custer 

Med. Ctr. v. United Auto. Ins. Co., 62 So. 3d 1086, 1092 (Fla. 2010) (“[W]hen 

a district court considers a petition for second-tier certiorari review, the 

‘inquiry is limited to whether the circuit court afforded procedural due process 

and whether the circuit court applied the correct law,’ or, as otherwise stated, 

departed from the essential requirements of law.”) (quoting Haines, 658 So. 

2d at 530); State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. CEDA Health of Hialeah, LLC, 

300 So. 3d 748, 750-51 (Fla. 3d DCA 2020) (“Our analysis is limited ‘by the 

narrow scope of second-tier certiorari review of a circuit court acting in its 

appellate capacity.’”) (quoting State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. CC 

Chiropractic, LLC, 245 So. 3d 755, 758 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018)).
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED FEBRUARY 4, 2015

NO. 03-13-00502-CV

Roderick Lee Mitchell, M.D., Appellant

v.

Texas Medical Board, Appellee

APPEAL FROM 126TH DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY

BEFORE JUSTICES PURYEAR, GOODWIN, AND FIELD

AFFIRMED -- OPINION BY JUSTICE PURYEAR

This is an appeal from the judgment signed by the trial court on July 17, 2013. Having reviewed 

the record and the parties’ arguments, the Court holds that there was no reversible error in the 

trial court’s judgment. Therefore, the Court affirms the judgment. The appellant shall pay all 

costs relating to this appeal, both in this Court and the court below.
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk's Office, Atlanta, August 28, 2024. I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia. Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto affixed the day and year last above written. , Clerk. 

# Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia
ATLANTA, August 28, 2024 The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order A25D0025. CHARLIE KIRBY v. AMANDA KATHLEEN FINLEY A/K/A AMANDA KATHLEEN FINLEY KIRBY. Upon consideration of the Application for Discretionary Appeal, it is ordered that it be hereby DENIED.
LC NUMBERS: 23CV000732
<PAGE>
 
                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.22

                            FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE
                              NEW GRANCARE, INC.
                      1996 REPLACEMENT STOCK OPTION PLAN



   THIS FIRST AMENDMENT is made on the _______ day of ___________, 1997, by
GRANCARE, INC., a Delaware corporation (the "Primary Sponsor").


                                 INTRODUCTION:
                                 ------------ 


   The Primary Sponsor maintains the New GranCare, Inc. 1996 Replacement Stock
Option Plan (the "Plan").

   The Primary Sponsor has changed its name from New GranCare, Inc. to
GranCare, Inc. and now desires to amend the Plan to reflect the new name of the
Primary Sponsor.

   NOW, THEREFORE, the Primary Sponsor does hereby amend the Plan, effective as
of February 12, 1997, so that the Plan will hereinafter be referred to as the
GranCare, Inc. 1996 Replacement Stock Option Plan and each reference contained
in the Plan to the New GranCare, Inc. 1996 Replacement Stock Option Plan will be
deemed to be a reference to the GranCare, Inc. 1996 Replacement Stock Option
Plan.

   Except as specifically amended by this First Amendment, the Plan will remain
in full force and effect as prior to this First Amendment.

   IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this First Amendment to be
executed as the day and year first above written.


                                                GRANCARE, INC.


                                                By:
                                                   ----------------------------

                                                Title:
                                                      -------------------------

ATTEST:

By:
   --------------------------

Title:
      -----------------------


     [CORPORATE SEAL]



                                       3
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 46 (Thursday, March 9, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 12941]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-5731]



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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. RP95-176-000]


Panhandle Eastern Pipe Line Co.; Notice of Proposed Changes in 
FERC Gas Tariff

March 3, 1995.
    Take notice on February 28, 1995, that Panhandle Eastern Pipe Line 
Company (Panhandle), tendered for filing to become part of its FERC Gas 
Tariff, First Revised Volume No. 1, the following revised tariff sheets 
listed on Appendix A to the filing. The proposed effective date of 
these revised tariff sheets is April 1, 1995.
    Panhandle states that the purpose of this filing is to eliminate 
from Panhandle's rates the take-or-pay settlement and contract 
reformation volumetric surcharges and the associated provisions of 
Section 18.4 of the General Terms and Conditions of Panhandle's tariff 
which were the subject of Panhandle's filing in Docket No. RP92-118-
000. The volumetric surcharge was established in Article VI, Sections 
1(a) and 2(a) of Panhandle's Stipulation and Agreement (Settlement) 
dated July 15, 1992, for a 36-month period commencing April 1, 1992 and 
terminating on March 31, 1995, and approved by the Commission on August 
28, 1992. With the expiration of the approved three year recovery 
period on March 31, 1995, Panhandle now is proposing to remove the 
agreed upon 0.31 cents from the current 1.50 cents TOP Volumetric 
Surcharge, thus reducing the surcharge to 1.19 cents. In addition, 
Panhandle is proposing to cancel Section 18.4 of the General Terms and 
Conditions of Panhandle's FERC Gas Tariff, First Revised Volume No. 1.
    Panhandle states that copies of this filing are being served on all 
customers subject to the tariff sheets, applicable state regulatory 
agencies, and parties to the proceeding.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest this filing should 
file a motion to intervene or a protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 825 North Capitol Street, NE., Washington, DC 
20426, in accordance with Secs. 385.214 and 385.211 of the Commission's 
Rules and Regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed on or 
before March 10, 1995. Protests will be considered by the Commission in 
determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to 
make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to 
become a party must file a motion to intervene. Copies of this filing 
are on file with the Commission and are available for public inspection 
in the Public Reference Room.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 95-5731 Filed 3-8-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
Exhibit 3.3

CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENTOF
CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATIONOFAPRIA HEALTHCARE GROUP INC.,
a Delaware corporation

Apria Healthcare
Group Inc., a corporation organized and existing under and by virtue of the General
Corporation Law of the State of Delaware (this Corporation), DOES HEREBY CERTIFY:

FIRST: That the Board of
Directors of this Corporation has adopted the following resolution setting forth a
proposed amendment of the Restated Certificate of Incorporation of this Corporation:

| | RESOLVED
FURTHER, that the Restated Certificate of Incorporation of this Corporation be amended
by changing Article VI thereof so that, as amended, Article VI shall read in its entirety
as follows: | 
| | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | 

ARTICLE VI

| | The
business and affairs of the Corporation shall be managed and controlled by a Board of
Directors. The number of directors constituting the Board of Directors shall be fixed,
initially, by the Bylaws of the Corporation; thereafter the number of directors shall be
fixed or altered exclusively by resolutions adopted by the Board of Directors. At each
annual meeting of stockholders, all directors shall be elected to hold office until the
next annual meeting of stockholders. Each director shall hold office until his successor
is elected and qualified or until his earlier resignation. No decrease in the number of
directors shall shorten the term of any incumbent director. Elections of directors need
not be by ballot unless the Bylaws so provide. | 
| | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | 

SECOND: That at the
Corporations  1999  annual  meeting of  stockholders,  a majority of the  outstanding  stock
entitled to vote thereon voted in favor of the amendment.

THIRD: That the above
amendment was duly adopted in accordance  with the applicable  provisions of Section 242 of
the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF,
Apria Healthcare Group Inc. has caused this Certificate to be signed by Philip L. Carter,  its
Chief Executive Officer, as of the 21st day of July, 1999.

| | APRIA HEALTHCARE GROUP INC.By:         
Philip L. Carter        Chief Executive Officer
| | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------