alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
- 796 -

Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets

296 Nebraska Reports

STATE v. SCHIESSER

Cite as 296 Neb. 796

State of Nebraska, appellee, v. 

Michael R. Schiesser, appellant.

___ N.W.2d ___

Filed June 2, 2017. No. S-16-115.

Petition for further review from the Court of Appeals, 

Inbody, Riedmann, and Bishop, Judges, on appeal thereto from 

the District Court for Lancaster County, Lori A. Maret, Judge. 

Judgment of Court of Appeals affirmed.

John S. Berry, of Berry Law Firm, for appellant.

Douglas J. Peterson, Attorney General, Melissa R. Vincent, 

and, on brief, George R. Love for appellee.

Heavican, C.J., Wright, Miller-Lerman, Cassel, Stacy, 

Kelch, and Funke, JJ.

Per Curiam.

Having reviewed the briefs and record and having heard 

oral arguments, we conclude on further review that the decision of the Nebraska Court of Appeals in State v. Schiesser, 24 

Neb. App. 407, 888 N.W.2d 736 (2016), is correct, and accordingly, we affirm the decision of the Court of Appeals which 

affirmed the judgment of the district court.

Affirmed.

Nebraska Supreme Court Online Library

www.nebraska.gov/apps-courts-epub/

08/11/2017 12:09 AM CDT
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Frank M. Valenti, Appellant.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Westchester County (Lange, J.), rendered May 23, 1986, convicting him of criminal possession of stolen property in the first degree (eight counts) and scheme to defraud in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution *(see, People v Contes,*60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence *(see,*CPL 470.15 [5]).

Further, the defendant’s claim that the court committed reversible error by permitting jurors to take notes during its supplemental instructions is unpreserved for appellate review. In any event, because the court issued an appropriate cautionary instruction, the note taking was permissible *(see, People v Tucker,*153 AD2d 164; *People v DiLuca,*85 AD2d 439).

The defendant’s other contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Mangano, P. J., Rubin, Rosenblatt and Miller, JJ., concur.
**IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVA NIA** 

IN RE: MODIFICATION OF THE MAGISTERIAL DISTRICTS WI THIN THE 32 nd J UDICIAL DISTRICT OF THE COMMON WEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA : : : : NO. 395 MAGISTERIAL RULES DOCKET **ORDER PER CURIA** **M AN**  **D NOW,** this 2 6 th day of February, 201 6 , upon consideration of the Request of the President Judge of Thirty- second Judicial District ( Delaware County) to eliminate Magisterial District 32 - 1 -26 and reconfigure Magisterial Districts 32 - 1 -27, 32 - 1 - 33, 32 - 1 - 34, 32 - 1 - 35, 32 -2 -43, 32 -2 -47, 32 -2 - 51 and 32 -2 - 52 of the Thirty- second Judicial District ( Delaware County) of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, it is hereby ORDERED AND DECREED that the Request is granted. The judgeship for Magisterial District 32 - 1 -26 shall not appear on the ballot for the 2017 municipal election. This Order is effective January 1, 2017

. Said Magisterial Districts shall be as follows : Magisterial District 32 - 1 -27 Magisterial District Judge David Hamilton Lang Marple Township (Wa rds 2, 5, 6, and 7) Radnor Township (Voting Districts 4, 5, and 7) Magisterial District 32 - 1 - 33 Magisterial District Judge Harry J. Karapalides Millbourne Borough Upper Darby Township (Voting Districts 5 - 1, 5 - 7, 5 - 10, 6 - 1, 6 -2, 6 - 3, 6 -4, 6 - 10, 6 - 12, 7 -2, 7 - 3, 7 -4, 7 - 5, 7 - 6, 7 - 8 and 7 - 10 ) Magisterial District 32 - 1 - 34 Magisterial District Judge Robert J. Radano Upper Darby Township (Voting Districts 1 - 1, 1 -2, 1 - 3, 1 - 8, 3 -2, 3 -4, 3 - 6, 3 - 7, 3 - 8, 3 - 9, 3 - 10 , 4 - 1 and 4 -4 )- 2 -

Magisterial District 32 - 1 - 35 Magisterial District Judge Ann Berardocco Upper Darby Township (Voting Districts 1 -4, 1 - 5, 1 - 6, 1 - 7, 1 - 9, 3 - 1, 3 - 3, 3 - 5, 3 - 11, 4 -2, 4 - 3, 4 - 5, 4 - 6, 4 - 7, 4 - 8, 4 - 9. 4 - 10, 4 - 11, 5 - 3 and 5 - 8 ) Magisterial District 32 -2 -43 Magisterial District Judge Leon Hunter , I II Newtown Township Radnor Township (Voting Districts 1, 2, 3, and 6) Magisterial District 32 -2 -47 Magisterial District Judge W

. Keith Wi lliams East Lansdowne Borough Lansdowne Borough Yeadon Borough Magisterial District 32 -2 - 51 Magisterial District Judge Christopher R. Mattox Upper Darby Township (Voting Districts 5 -2, 5 -4, 5 - 5, 5 - 6, 5 - 9, 6 - 5, 6 - 6, 6 - 7, 6 - 8, 6 - 9, 6 - 11, 7 - 1, 7 - 6, 7 - 7, 7 - 9 and 7 - 1 1 ) Magisterial District 32 -2 - 52 Magisterial District Judge Kelly A. Micozzie -Aguirre Aldan Borough Clifton Heights Borough Upper Darby Township (Voting Districts 2 - 1, 2 -2, 2 - 3, 2 -4, 2 - 5, 2 - 6, and 2 - 7) Justice Eakin did not participate in the consideration or decision of this matter.
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 6926 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 6926

  To prohibit the use of Federal funds to purchase at-home tests for 
  SARS-CoV-2 that are imported from, or manufactured in, the People's 
                           Republic of China.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 3, 2022

     Mrs. Harshbarger (for herself, Mr. Gohmert, Mr. Gimenez, Mr. 
Reschenthaler, Mr. Gaetz, Mrs. Miller-Meeks, Mr. Babin, Mr. Brooks, Mr. 
 Waltz, Mr. Posey, Mr. Ellzey, Mr. Weber of Texas, Mr. Balderson, Mr. 
 Tiffany, and Mr. DesJarlais) introduced the following bill; which was 
            referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To prohibit the use of Federal funds to purchase at-home tests for 
  SARS-CoV-2 that are imported from, or manufactured in, the People's 
                           Republic of China.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``No Taxpayer Dollars for Communist 
China COVID Tests Act''.

SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON USING FEDERAL FUNDS TO PURCHASE CERTAIN TESTS.

    Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no Federal funds may be 
used to purchase any at-home test for SARS-CoV-2 that is imported from 
the People's Republic of China, or that was manufactured, in whole or 
in part, in the People's Republic of China.
                                 <all>
```
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A22A1105. DWAYNE COTTON v. THE STATE.

After entering a guilty plea, Dwayne Cotton filed a motion for an out-of-time

appeal. The trial court denied the motion, and Cotton filed this appeal. The State has

filed a “motion to dismiss appeal,” which, in substance, requests that we vacate the

trial court’s order and remand with instructions to dismiss the motion.

InCook v. State, the Supreme Court determined that a trial court lacks authority

to grant an out-of-time appeal. Cook v. State, ___ Ga. ___, ___ (5) (Case No.

S21A1270, decided March 15, 2022). Cotton, therefore, “had no right to file a motion

for an out-of-time appeal in the trial court; his remedy, if any lies, in habeas corpus.”

Rutledge v. State, ___ Ga. ___, ___ (Case No. S21A1036, decided March 15, 2022).

Rather than denying Cotton’s motion, the trial courtshould have dismissed it. See id.

Accordingly, the State’s motion is GRANTED, the trial court’s order denying the

motion for an out-of-time appeal is hereby VACATED, and this case is hereby

REMANDED to the trial court, which is DIRECTED to enter an order dismissing the

motion for an out-of-time appeal. 

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________

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.

April 14, 2022

04/14/2022
Exhibit
10.427


 


ASSIGNMENT OF
PURCHASE AGREEMENT


 


For good and
valuable consideration the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby
acknowledged, the undersigned, INLAND REAL ESTATE ACQUISITIONS, INC., an
Illinois corporation, (“Assignor”) hereby assigns to INLAND WESTERN BAKERSFIELD
CALLOWAY, L.L.C., a Delaware limited liability company, (“Assignee”) all of its
right, title and interest in that certain Purchase Agreement (the “Purchase
Agreement”) dated September 2, 2004 by and between Assignor, as Buyer, and
Donahue Shriber Realty Group, L.P., a Delaware limited partnership, as Seller,
for purchase and sale of certain real property commonly known as Plaza at
Riverlakes, Bakersfield, California (the “Property”).


 


By execution
hereof by Assignee, Assignee hereby accept the assignment and assumes all of
the obligations of Assignor under the Purchase Agreement.


 


This
Assignment is effective as of October 21, 2004.


 


	
  ASSIGNOR:

  	
   

  	
  INLAND REAL ESTATE ACQUISITIONS, INC.

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  By:

  	
  /s/ [ILLEGIBLE]

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
  SR VP

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  ASSIGNEE:

  	
   

  	
  INLAND WESTERN BAKERSFIELD 

  CALLOWAY, L.L.C.

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  By:

  	
  Inland Western Retail Real Estate Trust,
  Inc.

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  By:

  	
  /s/ Valerie Medina

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  Its:

  	
  Asst. Secretary
Exhibit 10.2 - Fourth Amendment - McLane






Exhibit 10.2
    
FOURTH Amendment to Distribution Service Agreement


This Fourth Amendment to Distribution Service Agreement is entered into effective as of March 31, 2014 (“Effective Date”) by and between The Pantry, Inc. (“Pantry”), and McLane Company, Inc. (“McLane”), and amends the Distribution Service Agreement between them dated August 1, 2008 and all amendments thereto (as previously amended, the “Agreement”).


		
	1.
	Defined Terms.  Each Capitalized term used in this amendment without definition has the meaning given to that term in the Agreement.




		
	2.
	Amendments.  Effective as of the date first written above: 




(a)Section 4 of the agreement is amended to include the following:


4.7    [***].  McLane shall [***] consistent with  the terms of the Distribution Service Agreement between the parties signed on March 25, 2014, to be paid within ten (10) calendar days following each McLane 4-week accounting period.


4.8    [***].   McLane shall [***].


(b)Section 6.1 is deleted in its entirety and replaced by the following:


6.1. Term.  The Term of this agreement will continue until first day of the first McLane accounting period that begins [***] the terms of the Distribution Service Agreement between the parties signed on March 25, 2014.


		
	(c)
	Miscellaneous.  




(a)This amendment is limited as specified and does not constitute a modification, amendment or waiver of any other provision of the Agreement. Except as specifically amended by this amendment, the Agreement remains in full force and effect and is hereby ratified and confirmed.


(b)This amendment may be executed in counterparts, each of which is to be deemed an original, and all of which constitute one and the same instrument.  Further, this document may be executed by facsimile signature, and Pantry and McLane hereby acknowledge their intent to be bound by the facsimile signatures as if they are original signatures.


(c)The governing law, jurisdiction, venue and forum provisions of Section 7.16 of the Agreement are incorporated into and govern this amendment. 


(d)The parties hereby represent and warrant to one another that the person executing this amendment on behalf of said party has been duly authorized to execute and deliver this amendment and this amendment is binding upon said party in accordance with the terms hereof.












_________________
[***]  Confidential treatment requested pursuant to a request for confidential treatment filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Omitted portions have been filed separately with the Commission.











The parties have entered into this amendment as of the date first written above.


	
		
	The Pantry, Inc.


By:  _/s/ Dennis Hatchell_____________


Name:_President and CEO____________


Title:_ Dennis Hatchell_______________


Date: _3/25/14_________________________
	McLane Company, Inc.


By:  _/s/ Stuart Clark_________________


Name:_Stuart Clark__________________


Title:_VP Trade Relations_____________


Date: _3.25.2014____________________
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
Potomac Edison Company
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> 0

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                          14,394
<SECURITIES>                                     5,556
<RECEIVABLES>                                  589,285
<ALLOWANCES>                                  (31,555)
<INVENTORY>                                    141,532
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               882,985
<PP&E>                                       9,383,322
<DEPRECIATION>                               3,918,549
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               7,405,663
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,537,251
<BONDS>                                      2,566,783
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                     74,000
<COMMON>                                       153,045
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,561,457<F1>
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 7,405,663
<SALES>                                      1,058,458
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,058,458
<CGS>                                          779,051
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  891,383
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 1,260
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              55,410
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                115,170
<INCOME-TAX>                                    39,075
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             76,095
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    76,095
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.69
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.69
<FN>
<F1>Includes $398,407 for treasure stock (at cost) and $1,801 other comprehensive
income.
</FN>


</TABLE>
Unassociated Document



	 	
      Exhibit
      10.24








	 	
      February
      11, 2005
	 









Mr.
Andrew H. Tisch

667
Madison Avenue

New York,
New York 10021




Dear Mr.
Tisch:




Reference
is made to your Employment Agreement with Loews Corporation (the “Company”),
dated January 1, 1999, as amended by agreements dated
as of
January
1, 2002, January
1, 2003 and as
of January
1, 2004 (the
“Employment Agreement”).




This will
confirm our agreement that the Employment Agreement is amended as
follows:




1.
Term
of Employment. The
period of your employment under and pursuant to the Employment Agreement is
hereby extended for an additional period through and including March 31,
2007 upon
all the terms, conditions and provisions of the Employment Agreement, as hereby
amended.




2.
Compensation. You
shall be paid as basic compensation (the “Basic Compensation”) for your services
to the Company and its subsidiaries under and pursuant to the Employment
Agreement a salary at the rate of Nine Hundred
Seventy-Five
Thousand
($975,000)
Dollars per annum through
March 31,
2007. Basic
Compensation shall be payable in accordance with the Company’s customary payroll
practices as in effect from time to time, and shall be subject to such increases
as the Board of Directors of the Company, in its sole discretion, may from time
to time determine.




3.
Incentive
Compensation Plan. In
addition to receipt of Basic Compensation under the Employment Agreement, you
shall participate in the Incentive Compensation Plan for Executive Officers of
the Company (the “Compensation Plan”) and shall be eligible to receive incentive
compensation under the Compensation Plan as may be awarded in accordance with
its terms.




4.
Other
Compensation. The
compensation provided pursuant to this Letter Agreement shall be exclusive of
compensation and fees, if any, to which you may be entitled as an officer or
director of a subsidiary of the Company.




Except as
herein modified or amended, the Employment Agreement shall remain in full force
and effect.

 

 




 




















Mr.
Andrew H. Tisch

As of
February 11, 2005

Page
2







If the
foregoing is in accordance with your understanding, would you please sign the
enclosed duplicate copy of this Letter Agreement at the place indicated below
and return the same to us for our records.





	 	 	
      Very
      truly yours,
	 
	 	 	 	 
	 	 	
      LOEWS
      CORPORATION
	 
	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 
	 	
      By:
	
      /s/
      Gary W. Garson
	 
	 	 	
      Gary
      W. Garson
	 
	 	 	
      Senior
      Vice President
	 







	
      ACCEPTED
      AND AGREED TO:
	 
	 	 
	
      /s/
      Andrew H. Tisch
	 
	
      Andrew
      H. Tisch
	 








 







2
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned officer of Globalink, Ltd. (the "Company"), hereby
certifies, to such officer's knowledge, that the Company's Annual
Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008 (the "Report")
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Report
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Company.

                                 /s/Robin Young
                                 ----------------------
                                 Robin Young
                                 Chief Executive Officer

May 25, 2010

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

The undersigned officer of Globalink, Ltd. (the "Company"), hereby
certifies, to such officer's knowledge, that the Company's Annual
Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008 (the "Report")
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Report
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Company.

                                 /s/Ben Choi
                                 ----------------------
                                 Ben Choi
                                 Chief Financial Officer

May 25, 2010
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### Food and Drug Administration

# AGENCY:

Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

                        The meeting of the Pulmonary-Allergy Drugs Advisory Committee scheduled for February 20, 2008, is cancelled. This meeting was announced in the                         **Federal Register**                         of December 21, 2007 (72 FR 72737).                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Teresa A. Watkins, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (HFD-21), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane (for express delivery, rm. 1093), Rockville, MD 20857, 301-827-7001, FAX: 301-827-6776, e-mail:                         *Teresa.Watkins@fda.hhs.gov*, or FDA Advisory Committee Information Line, 1-800-741-8138 (301-443-0572 in the Washington, DC area), code 3014512545. Please call the Information Line for up-to-date information on this meeting.                    

Dated: January 29, 2008.

Randall W. Lutter,

Deputy Commissioner for Policy.

[FR Doc. E8-1959 Filed 2-1-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4160-01-S
Exhibit 32.1
 
 Certification of Principal Executive Officer
 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 Annual Report of Alamo Energy Corp. a Nevada corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ending April 30, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), Allan Millmaker, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certifies to the best of his knowledge, 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 result of operations of the Company.
 
 A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Alamo Energy Corp., and will be retained by Alamo Energy Corp. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
 
 
 /s/ Allan MillmakerAllan Millmaker

Chief Executive Officer

April 21, 2011