alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 178 (Friday, September 12, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 53054]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-21278]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50-443-LA; ASLBP No. 08-872-02-LA-BD01]


FPL Energy Seabrook LLC; Establishment of Atomic Safety and 
Licensing Board

    Pursuant to delegation by the Commission dated December 29, 1972, 
published in the Federal Register, 37 FR 28,710 (1972), and the 
Commission's regulations, see 10 CFR 2.104, 2.300, 2.303, 2.309, 2.311, 
2.318, and 2.321, notice is hereby given that an Atomic Safety and 
Licensing Board (Board) is being established to preside over the 
following proceeding:

FPL Energy Seabrook LLC

(Seabrook Station, Unit 1)

    This proceeding involves a license amendment request from FPL 
Energy Seabrook LLC proposing a revision to the Technical 
Specifications for Seabrook Station, Unit 1 in Rockingham County, New 
Hampshire. In response to an August 26, 2008 Notice of Consideration of 
Issuance of Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses, Proposed No 
Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for a 
Hearing (73 FR 50,356, 50,361), a request for hearing has been 
submitted by Thomas Saporito on behalf of himself and Saporito Energy 
Consultants.
    The Board is comprised of the following administrative judges:
    William J. Froehlich, Chairman, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 
Panel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001.
    E. Roy Hawkens, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, U.S. 
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001.
    Thomas S. Elleman, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, U.S. 
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001.
    All correspondence, documents, and other materials shall be filed 
in accordance with the NRC E-Filing rule, which the NRC promulgated in 
August 2007 (72 FR 49,139).

    Issued at Rockville, Maryland, this 8th day of September 2008.
E. Roy Hawkens,
Chief Administrative Judge, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel.
[FR Doc. E8-21278 Filed 9-11-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
PITTSBURGH & WEST VIRGINIA RAILROAD
                              FORM 10-Q
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITION

(Dollars in Thousands)

                                                     Unaudited
                                                  Six months ended
                                                       June 30    

                                                  1998      1997
<S>                                               <C>       <C>
Source of Cash:
     Net income                                   $413      $414

     Decrease in accounts payable                   (6)       (6)

          Cash provided from operations           $407      $408


Use of Cash:

     Dividends paid                                408       408

     Increase (decrease) in cash                  $ (1)     $ (-)
</TABLE>

Notes:

     (1)  The foregoing interim financial statements are unaudited but, 
          in the opinion of management, reflect all adjustments
          necessary for a fair presentation of the results of operations
          for the interim periods.

     (2)  Registrant has elected to be treated for tax purposes as a
          real estate investment trust. As such, the Trust is exempt
          from paying federal corporate income tax on any income that is
          distributed to shareholders. It has been Registrant's policy
          to distribute annually all of its ordinary taxable income.
          Consequently, no provision has been made for federal income
          tax.
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING

MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

OF FLORIDA

SECOND DISTRICT

PEGGY ANN HOWARD, DOC #158812, )

)

Appellant, )

)

v. ) Case No. 2D18-1066

)

STATE OF FLORIDA, )

)

Appellee. )

)

Opinion filed September 4, 2019.

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Polk 

County; Wayne Durden, Judge.

Howard L. Dimmig, II, Public Defender, and

Tosha Cohen, Assistant Public Defender, 

Bartow, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, 

Tallahassee, and Linsey SimsBohnenstiehl, Assistant Attorney General, 

Tampa, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. 

NORTHCUTT, LUCAS, and SALARIO, JJ., Concur.
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER ON MOTION

Cause Number: 01-12-00462-CR

Trial Court Cause 

Number: 18938

Style: Kenneth Dale Childers, Jr.

v The State of Texas

Date motion filed*: March 27, 2013

Type of motion:

Motion for Extension of Time to File Appellant's Pro Se Brief or Response to Anders 

Brief

Party filing motion: Appellant

Document to be filed: Pro se response

Is appeal accelerated? Yes No

If motion to extend time:

Original due date: February 4, 2013

Number of previous extensions granted: 1

Date Requested: May 6, 2013

Ordered that motion is:

 Granted

If document is to be filed, document due: May 6, 2013

Absent extraordinary circumstances, the Court will not grant additional motions to extend time

The Court will not grant additional motions to extend time.

 Denied

 Dismissed (e.g., want of jurisdiction, moot)

 Other: _____________________________________ 

Judge's signature: /s/ Justice Michael Massengale

 Acting individually Acting for the Court

Panel consists of

Date: March 29, 2013
Electronically Filed

Intermediate Court of Appeals

CAAP-12-0000675

31-OCT-2013

09:32 AM
I

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1109

To preserve and protect the free choice of individual employees to form,

join, or assist labor organizations, or to refrain from such activities.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MARCH 20, 2001

Mr. GOODLATTE (for himself, Mr. ARMEY, Mr. BACHUS, Mr. BALLENGER,

Mr. BARTON of Texas, Mrs. BONO, Mr. CANTOR, Mr. COX, Mr.

CULBERSON, Mr. CUNNINGHAM, Mr. DEMINT, Mr. DOOLITTLE, Mr.

FLAKE, Mr. FLETCHER, Mr. HEFLEY, Mr. HILLEARY, Mr. ISAKSON, Mr.

KOLBE, Mr. MILLER of Florida, Mr. NETHERCUTT, Mr. NORWOOD, Mr.

PAUL, Mr. RYUN of Kansas, Mr. SESSIONS, Mr. SPENCE, Mr.

TANCREDO, Mr. WICKER, Mr. WOLF, Mr. ISTOOK, and Mr. GOODE) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Education and the Workforce

A BILL

To preserve and protect the free choice of individual employees to form, join, or assist labor organizations, or to

refrain from such activities.

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 ‘‘National Right-to5 Work Act’’.
2

•HR 1109 IH

1 SEC. 2. AMENDMENTS TO THE NATIONAL LABOR RELA2 TIONS ACT.

3 (a) Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act

4 (the ‘‘Act’’) (29 U.S.C. 157) is amended by striking ‘‘ex5 cept to’’ and all that follows through ‘‘authorized in sec6 tion 8(a)(3)’’.

7 (b) Section 8(a) of the Act (29 U.S.C. 158(a)) is

8 amended by striking ‘‘: Provided, That’’ and all that fol9 lows through ‘‘retaining membership’’ in paragraph (3).

10 (c) Section 8(b) of the Act (29 U.S.C. 158(b)) is

11 amended by striking ‘‘or to discriminate’’ and all that fol12 lows through ‘‘retaining membership’’ in paragraph (2)

13 and by striking ‘‘covered by an agreement authorized

14 under subsection (a)(3) of this section’’ in paragraph (5).

15 (d) Section 8(f) of the Act (29 U.S.C. 158(f)) is

16 amended by striking clause (2) and by redesignating

17 clauses (3) and (4) as (2) and (3), respectively.

18 SEC. 3. AMENDMENT TO THE RAILWAY LABOR ACT.

19 Section 2 of the Railway Labor Act (45 U.S.C. 152)

20 is amended by striking paragraph Eleventh.

Æ
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Ronald C. Goodnough, Appellant.

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant contends that the People failed, as a matter of law, to disprove beyond a reasonable doubt that he was acting solely as an agent of a police informer and that the trial court should have granted his dismissal motion at the close of proof. We disagree. In our view, the trial court properly submitted this issue to the jury to decide as a question of fact in determining whether defendant was guilty of criminal sale of marihuana *(see, People v Lam Lek Chong,*45 NY2d 64, 73-75, *cert denied*439 US 935; *People v Roche,*45 NY2d 78, 85-86, *cert denied*439 US 958; *People v Torres,*150 AD2d 816, *lv denied*74 NY2d 820). Additionally, whether defendant was ácting as the buyer’s agent is not a defense to a possession charge *(see, People v Lam Lek Chong, supra,*at 74). (Appeal from judgment of Jefferson County Court, Clary, J.—criminal sale of marihuana, third degree.) Presents—Boomer, J. P., Green, Pine, Davis and Lowery, JJ.
Case 1:02-cv-00360-SM   Document 79   Filed 10/11/05   Page 1 of 1
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

July Term 2014

NORREL SUTHERLAND and NADINA SUTHERLAND,

Appellants,

v.

BRIAN ALLISON, DEPUTY PEREZ and RIC L. BRADSHAW, in his 

official capacity as SHERIFF OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA,

Appellees.

No. 4D13-1573

[September 17, 2014]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm 

Beach County; Jeffrey Dana Gillen, Judge; L.T. Case No. 

502009CA017039XX.

G. William Allen, Jr., Fort Lauderdale, for appellants.

Harriet R. Lewis and Gary Oldehoff of Lewis, Stroud & Deutsch, P.L., 

Boca Raton, for appellee Ric L. Bradshaw.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See Amador v. Fla. Bd. of Regents ex rel. Fla. Int’l Univ., 830 

So. 2d 120 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002).

WARNER, CONNER and KLINGENSMITH, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
#### Richard Martin, Appellant, v Niagara Frontier Hockey Corporation, Also Known as Buffalo Sabres Hockey Team, et al., Respondents, et al., Defendants.

(Appeal No. 2.)

Order and judgment unanimously affirmed without costs. Same opinion by Green, J., as in *Martin v Casagrande,*([appeal No. 1] 159 AD2d 26 [decided herewith]). (Appeal from order and judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County, Gossel, J. —summary judgment.) Present—Boomer, J. P., Green, Pine, Davis and Lowery, JJ.
EXHIBIT
      32.1




CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO


SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002




In
      connection with the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Porta Systems Corp. (the
      “Company”) for the period ended September 30, 2008, as filed with the Securities
      and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Edward B.
      Kornfeld, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
      do
      hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge and belief that:




(1) the
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and




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


Dated:
                November 14, 2008
            
            
            By
            /s/
                Edward B. KornfeldEdward
              B. Kornfeld
              Chief
                Executive Officerand
                Chief Financial Officer




This
      certification accompanies each Report pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
      of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley
      Act
      of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of §18 of the Securities
      Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.




A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
      2002 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and
      furnished upon request.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Alfredo Hamilton, Appellant.

Appeals by the defendant from two judgments of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Maraño, J.), both rendered June 8, 1988, convicting him of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree under indictment No. 4916/86, and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree under indictment No. 10608/87, respectively, upon his pleas of guilty, and imposing sentences.

Ordered that the judgments are affirmed.

We have reviewed the record and agree with the defendant’s assigned counsel that there are no meritorious issues which could be raised on appeal. Counsel’s application for leave to withdraw as counsel is granted *(see, Anders v California,*386 US 738; *People v Paige,*54 AD2d 631; *cf., People v Gonzalez,*47 NY2d 606). Mangano, P. J., Kunzeman, Kooper, Sullivan and O’Brien, JJ., concur.
#### AIRTH v. CITY OF LIVE OAK et al.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Aug. 3, 1936.

A. C. Johnson, of Live Oak, for appellant.

Alfred T. Airth, of Live Oak, for appel-lees.

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a decree dismissing a bill of complaint seeking to enjoin the issue of $37,000 of water revenue certificates by the city of Live Oak, Fla., without an approving vote of the freeholder electors of the city, as required by section 6, article 9 of the Constitution of Florida, as amended in 1930; the purpose of the issue being for improvements to the existing waterworks system of, the city of Live Oak.

The water revenue certificates are to be paid solely from the revenue derived from the operation of the said waterworks system, and not otherwise.

The decree dismissing the bill of complaint should be affirmed upon the authority of State ex rel. v. City of Miami, 113 Fla. 280, 52 So. 6; State v. City of Daytona Beach, 118 Fla. 29, 158 So. 300; Boykin v. Town of River Junction (Fla.) 169 So. 492; State ex rel. City of Vero Beach v. MacConnell (Fla.) 169 So. 628; Williams v. Town of Dunnellon (Fla.) 169 So. 631; Bradley v. City of Homestead (Fla.) 169 So. 639; and other like cases filed at this term.

Affirmed.

WHITFIELD, C. J., and TERRELL, BROWN, BUFORD, and DAVIS, JJ., concur.

ELLIS, P. J.,

concurs upon the principle announced in his specially concurring opinion in the case of State ex rel. City of Vero Beach v. MacConnell (Fla.) 169 So. 628, this day filed.
* Pursuant to Local Rule 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 Local Rule 47.5.4. 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FIFTH CIRCUIT

_________________

No. 96-60281

(Summary Calendar)

_________________

WILLIE HENRY JONES,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

STEWART MURPHY, Individually and in his

official capacity as Commissioner of the

Mississippi Department of Corrections, et al.,

Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court

For the Northern District of Mississippi

(4:94-CV-316-S-D)

September 26, 1996

Before DAVIS, EMILIO M. GARZA, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Willie Henry Jones, #40413, appeals from the district court’s

order dismissing his civil rights suit for failure to exhaust

administrative remedies and failure to comply with an order of the

court pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). Prisoners ordered to
-2-

exhaust remedies must do so even if they perceive the prison

grievance system to be inadequate. See Marsh v. Jones, 53 F.3d

707, 710 (5th Cir. 1995). The district court did not abuse its

discretion in dismissing Jones’ suit for failure to comply with the

magistrate judge’s stay order.

AFFIRMED.
#### Nichol *v.*Tolhurst et al.

*(No. 24441*

Decided November 22, *1933.)*

*Mr. G. A. Resek, Mr. William A. Miller*and *Mr. II. II. Hoppe,*for plaintiff in error.

*Mr. J. J. Smythe,*city solicitor, and *Messrs. Andrews, Hadden & Burton,*for defendants in error.

It is ordered and adjudged that said petition in error be, and the same is hereby, dismissed for the reason no debatable constitutional question is involved in said cause.

*Petition in error dismissed.*

Weygandt, C. J., Allen, Stephenson, Jones, Matthias, Bevis and Zimmerman, JJ., concur.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Carmen Marquez-Marin

v. Case No. 05-ds-247-SM

Attorney General of

the United States

ORDER

Re: Document No. 59, Assented-to Motion for Order Referring

Post-Trial Matters to Magistrate Judge Bowler

Ruling: Denied, without prejudice. After conducting a

hearing by telephone conference call, it appears that the parties

now have a clear understanding of what the judgment ordering

reinstatement requires. Plaintiff and the government agreed to a

one month delay in reinstatement after judgment, for the benefit of

both parties. Thereafter, plaintiff was not reinstated for another

four months, and, was not paid during that time. While the

government suggests that it could not reinstate her without first

conducting another security investigation, the delay associated

with that process is entirely attributable to the government -

after all, the government wrongfully terminated plaintiff in the

first place, and had it not acted wrongfully, no deprivation would

have accompanied the security investigation. Plaintiff is

entitled to all pay and benefits that would have accrued to her

benefit during that four month period, until the time her pay and

benefits were actually restored and paid. If further proceedings

are required to enforce the judgment, and no reasonable grounds

exist for noncompliance, sanctions will be imposed. 

 

Steven J. McAuliffe

Chief Judge

Date: January 28, 2010

cc: Judith Berkan, Esq. 

Carole Fernandez, Esq. 

Case 1:05-ds-00247-SM Document 60 Filed 01/28/10 Page 1 of 1
----

| Date:  May 6, 2010 | /s/ Donald R. Shassian                               |
|------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------|
|                         | Donald R. Shassian                                   |
|                         | Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |
|                         |                                                 |
|What's New · 
   What's Next · 
   Site Map · 
   A-Z Index ·
   Careers ·
   RSS ·
   All Videos ·
   Current FAQs ·
   Contact Us |  | Search  Advanced Search | 
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | ----------------------- | 

Aboutthe Fed
    News& Events
    MonetaryPolicy
    BankingInformation& Regulation
    PaymentSystems
    EconomicResearch& Data
    Consumer Information
    CommunityDevelopment
    ReportingForms
    Publications


skip to content 
 Home Economic Research & Data Statistical Releases and Historical Data
 DDP Print
   Industrial Production and Capacity Utilization - G.17 Current Release
  Release Dates
  Monthly Supplement
  Annual Revision
  Data Download
  About
  Announcements
  Technical Q&As
 Annual Revision (400 KB PDF) (ASCII)  Table 4 [1]
 Item
Revised Growth Rates
Difference betweenrevised and earlier rates(percentage points)2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012Total IP
-3.4
-11.3
5.7
3.4
3.6
.2
.1
.3
-.7
-.1MARKET GROUPConsumer goods
-4.9
-6.9
1.1
1.5
1.5
.0
.0
.0
-.8
.0Durable
-11.2
-16.7
7.3
5.0
8.3
.0
.0
-.9
-2.2
.1Nondurable
-2.8
-3.9
-.5
.6
-.2
.0
.0
.2
-.4
.2Business equipment
-2.3
-18.1
8.3
5.6
8.2
.1
.1
.1
-2.6
-1.8Defense and space equipment
7.0
-4.3
7.5
-3.6
5.2
.0
-.1
3.5
-6.3
1.4Construction supplies
-9.3
-22.9
3.6
3.0
5.3
.0
.1
-.2
-2.5
.6Business supplies
-4.0
-10.4
2.3
1.1
1.5
.1
.2
.2
-.2
-.4Materials
-2.4
-11.3
8.8
4.7
4.1
.3
.2
.4
.1
.1Non-energy
-4.4
-16.6
11.7
5.3
4.1
.4
.5
.7
.4
.1Energy
.9
-2.4
4.2
3.8
4.2
.2
-.3
.1
-.4
.1INDUSTRY GROUPManufacturing[2]
-4.7
-13.6
6.1
3.4
3.9
.2
.2
.3
-.9
-.2Manufacturing (NAICS)
-4.6
-13.6
6.6
3.6
4.2
.2
.2
.4
-1.2
-.2Durable manufacturing
-3.4
-18.6
11.0
6.8
7.1
.4
.4
.7
-.9
-.4Nondurable manufacturing
-5.9
-7.7
2.2
.2
1.1
.0
.0
.0
-1.4
.0Other manufacturing (non-NAICS)
-6.5
-13.7
-5.3
-2.1
-3.5
-.2
.1
-.1
4.2
-.3Mining
1.2
-5.4
5.2
6.1
6.2
.2
-.3
.1
-.2
.6Utilities
-.1
-2.5
3.6
-.2
-2.1
.0
.0
.1
.1
-.3     Return to table   Return to table                 Return to top
   Home Economic research and data
 Accessibility Contact Us Disclaimer  Linking Policy FOIA
 PDF Reader
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

March 29, 2019

No. 04-18-00666-CV

Rebecca JO STEVENS,

Appellant

v.

Joseph “Harry” SHAFFIELD, III, and Jane Holinka, as Attorney-in-Fact for Joseph “Harry”

Shaffield, III,

Appellees

From the 451st Judicial District Court, Kendall County, Texas

Trial Court No. 17-553

Honorable Bill R. Palmer, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

This court’s mandate in this appeal issued on February 5, 2019. On March 27, 2019, a 

motion for leave to withdraw as attorney of record was filed. The motion is DISMISSED FOR 

LACK OF JURISDICTION. See TEX. R. APP. P. 18, 19.

It is so ORDERED on this 29th day of March, 2019.

PER CURIAM 

 ATTESTED TO: ________________________

 KEITH E. HOTTLE,

 Clerk of Court
SERVICER COMPLIANCE STATEMENT OF


TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORPORATION





I, Cindy Wang, certify that:





(a) A review of Toyota Motor Credit Corporation’s activities
      and of its performance under the Sale and Servicing Agreement, dated as of August 22, 2018 (the “Sale and Servicing Agreement”), among Toyota Auto Finance Receivables LLC, as seller, Toyota Motor Credit Corporation, as servicer (in such capacity, the
      “Servicer”) and sponsor, and Toyota Auto Receivables 2018-C Owner Trust, as issuer, during the period from August 22, 2018 to December 31, 2018 has been made under my supervision.





(b) To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the
      Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Sale and Servicing Agreement in all material respects throughout the aforementioned period.





March 21, 2019





By:  /s/ Cindy Wang


Cindy Wang


Group Vice President - Treasury


Toyota Motor Credit Corporation, as Servicer of Toyota Auto Receivables 2018-C Owner Trust
EXHIBIT 35.2

                    SERVICER COMPLIANCE STATEMENT (ITEM 1123)

                           HOMECOMINGS FINANCIAL, LLC

                RASC SERIES 2006-KS4 TRUST (THE "ISSUING ENTITY")

The undersigned,  a duly authorized  officer of Homecomings  Financial,  LLC, as
servicer (the "Servicer") pursuant to the applicable  servicing agreement,  does
hereby certify that:

1. A review of the  Servicer's  activities  during  the  period  covered  by the
Issuing Entity's report on Form 10-K and of the Servicer's performance under the
applicable servicing agreement has been made under my supervision.

2. To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has fulfilled
all of its obligations under the applicable  servicing agreement in all material
respects throughout such period.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has duly executed this Certificate this 26th
day of March 2007.

By:  /s/ Anthony N. Renzi
     Name: Anthony N. Renzi
     Title: Managing Director
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

John A. Baldi

v. Civil No. 04-cv-466-PB

John T. Broderick, Jr., et al.

O R D E R

 Pending a ruling on the motion to quash subpoenas, the

depositions of Chief Justice Broderick, Justice Dalianis, Justice

McGuire and Justice Fitzgerald are stayed. 

SO ORDERED.

____________________________________

James R. Muirhead

United States Magistrate Judge

Date: April 25, 2006

cc: John A. Baldi, pro se

 Daniel J. Mullen, Esq.

 Brian J.S. Cullen, Esq.

 John A. Curran, Esq.

 Charles A. Russell, Esq.

Case 1:04-cv-00466-PB Document 90 Filed 04/25/06 Page 1 of 1