alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Riverside Millworks Co . Inc.

v.

Jackson Lumber & Millwork Co., Inc . et al.

Civil No. 05-cv-402-JM

ORDER

Pursuant to the court's order dated February 14, 2008, and the failure of corporate

plaintiff to appear by counsel within thirty days, default is hereby entered as to Plaintiffs claims

and the complaint is dismissed.

Counter Defendant Riverside Millworks Co ., Inc. is hereby defaulted for failure to appear

by counsel in all counterclaims, other than Applicators Sales & Service, Inc .'s counterclaim

relating to trade libel (Count III) for which counsel has appeared and remains pending .

A damages hearing will be scheduled upon adjudication of all remaining claims o r

parties.

SO ORDERED.

April I , 2008

cc: Lawrence S. Smith, Esq.

Alfred C . Frawley, Esq .

Peter G. Callaghan, Esq .

Christina J. Moser, Esq.

Thomas H. Shunk, Esq.

Case 1:05-cv-00402-JM Document 108 Filed 04/01/08 Page 1 of 1
Exhibit 10.1


 


 


AMENDMENT NO. 1


TO


MANAGEMENT SERVICES AGREEMENT


 


This Amendment No. 1, dated as of August
1, 2019, to the Management Services Agreement (“Agreement”) made and entered into as of May 12, 2016 (“Effective
Date”) by and among Chicken Soup for the Soul Entertainment Inc. (“Service Recipient”) and Chicken
Soup for the Soul, LLC (“Parent”), and the subsidiaries of Parent listed on Schedule A thereto (collectively
with Parent, the “Service Providers”).


1.       Section
2.2 of the Agreement is hereby deleted in its entirety retroactively to the Effective Date and the section number reserved. No
amounts under Section 2.2 have ever been paid and none have been due or payable.


 


2.       Except
as prescribed by the foregoing, the Agreement remains in full force and effect as is.


 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have
duly executed this Amendment as of the date first above mentioned.


 


	 	CHICKEN SOUP FOR THE SOUL ENTERTAINMENT INC.
	 	 
	 	By: /s/ William J. Rouhana, Jr.
	 	Name: William J. Rouhana, Jr.
	 	Title: Chief Executive Officer
	 	 
	 	CHICKEN SOUP FOR THE SOUL, LLC
	 	 
	 	By: /s/ William J. Rouhana, Jr.
	 	Name: William J. Rouhana, Jr.
	 	Title: Chief Executive Officer
	 	 
	 	CSS Subsidiaries Acting as Service Providers:
	 	 
	 	CHICKEN SOUP FOR THE SOUL DIGITAL, LLC
	 	 
	 	By: /s/ William J. Rouhana, Jr.
	 	Name: William J. Rouhana, Jr.
	 	Title: Chief Executive Officer
	 	 
	 	CHICKEN SOUP FOR THE SOUL PRODUCTIONS, LLC
	 	 
	 	By: /s/ William J. Rouhana, Jr.
	 	Name: William J. Rouhana, Jr.
	 	Title: Executive Chairman
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America

v. Case No. 05-cr-236-01-PB

Shawn Hill

O R D E R

The defendant has moved to continue the March 7, 2006 trial

in the above case, citing the need for additional time to

finalize plea negotiations. The government does not object to a

continuance of the trial date.

Accordingly, in order to allow the parties additional time

to negotiate a plea agreement or properly prepare for trial, the

court will continue the trial from March 7, 2006 to May 2, 2006. 

In agreeing to continue the trial, the court finds pursuant to 18

U.S.C.A. § 3161(h)(8)(A) that for the above-stated reasons, the

ends of justice served in granting a continuance outweigh the

best interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial.

Case 1:05-cr-00236-PB Document 19 Filed 02/28/06 Page 1 of 2
2

The court will hold a final pretrial conference on April 20,

2006 at 4:45 p.m.

SO ORDERED.

/s/Paul Barbadoro

Paul Barbadoro

United States District Judge

February 28, 2006

cc: Terry Ollila, Esq.

Michael Iacopino, Esq.

United States Probation

United States Marshal

Case 1:05-cr-00236-PB Document 19 Filed 02/28/06 Page 2 of 2
#### Albert PERBOS v. Percy S. BARRELLI and Maryland Casualty Company.

No. 1450.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. First Circuit.

March 4, 1935.

P. M. Milner, of New Orleans, for appellant.

Victor E. Plauehe and B. M. Miller, both of Covington, for appellees.

ELLIOTT, Judge.

This case was by consent consolidated in the lower court and tried with the other case, out of which it grew, entitled Catherine Perbos, Wife of Albert Perbos, v. Percy S. Barrelli and Maryland Casualty Company (La. App.) 159 So. 631.

The result of the case depends upon the conclusion arrived at in the ease mentioned, and we have held in that case that Mrs. Perbos had no right to recover and that judgment in her favor was manifestly erroneous.

For the reasons given in that case, the judgment in the present ease is likewise erroneous, contrary to the law and the evidence, and it is now ordered, adjudged, and decreed that the judgment appealed from herein'be annulled, avoided, and reversed. And it is now ordered that the demand of Albert Perbos against Percy S. Barrelli and Maryland Casualty Company be refused and rejected at his cost.

It is further ordered that Albert Perbos, defendant-appellee, pay the cost in both courts.

MOUTON, not participating.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Stacy L. Feeney, et al.

v. Civil No. 05-cv-461-JD

Edith S. Kressy, et al.

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

In accordance with the provisions of Local Rule 41.1, as neither an agreement for

judgment nor a stipulation for dismissal has been filed, this case is herewith dismissed with 

prejudice.

SO ORDERED.

July 23, 2007 /s/ Joseph A. DiClerico, Jr.

Joseph A. DiClerico, Jr.

United States District Judge

cc: Donald Hebert, Esq.

Michael Murphy, Esq.

Anderson Kressy, Esq.

Cheryl Hieber, Esq.

Andrew Livernois, Esq.

Case 1:05-cv-00461-JD Document 39 Filed 07/23/07 Page 1 of 1
H. J. Res. 82

One Hundred Seventh Congress

of the

United States of America

AT THE SECOND SESSION

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday,

the twenty-third day of January, two thousand and two

Joint Resolution

Recognizing the 91st birthday of Ronald Reagan.

Whereas February 6, 2002, is the 91st birthday of Ronald Wilson

Reagan;

Whereas Ronald Reagan is the first former President ever to attain

the age of 91;

Whereas both Ronald Reagan and his wife Nancy Reagan have

distinguished records of public service to the United States, the

American people, and the international community;

Whereas Ronald Reagan was twice elected by overwhelming margins as President of the United States;

Whereas Ronald Reagan fulfilled his pledge to help restore ‘‘the

great, confident roar of American progress, growth, and optimism’’

and ensure renewed economic prosperity;

Whereas Ronald Reagan’s leadership was instrumental in extending

freedom and democracy around the globe and uniting a world

divided by the Cold War;

Whereas Ronald Reagan is loved and admired by millions of Americans, and by countless others around the world;

Whereas Ronald Reagan’s eloquence united Americans in times

of triumph and tragedy;

Whereas Nancy Reagan not only served as a gracious First Lady

but also led a national crusade against illegal drug use;

Whereas, together Ronald and Nancy Reagan dedicated their lives

to promoting national pride and to bettering the quality of life

in the United States and throughout the world; and

Whereas the thoughts and prayers of the Congress and the country

are with Ronald Reagan in his courageous battle with Alzheimer’s

disease: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the

United States of America in Congress assembled, That the Congress,
H. J. Res. 82—2

on behalf of the American people, extends its birthday greetings

and best wishes to Ronald Reagan on his 91st birthday.

Speaker of the House of Representatives.

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AND STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                      23,160,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                5,278,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                 (154,000)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            28,284,000
<PP&E>                                     280,616,000
<DEPRECIATION>                            (12,697,000)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             350,816,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       22,496,000
<BONDS>                                    202,509,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                      100,689,000
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        90,000
<OTHER-SE>                                  35,270,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               350,816,000
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            66,853,000
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               55,051,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           8,532,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              3,270,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 3,270,000
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.08)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.08)


</TABLE>
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America

 v. Case No. 06-cr-8-01-SM

John Carney

O R D E R

Defendant's assented-to motion to continue the trial (document no. 16) is granted.

Trial has been rescheduled for the March 2007 trial period. Defendant shall file a Waiver

of Speedy Trial Rights not later than October 23, 2006. On the filing of such waiver, his

continuance shall be effective.

The court finds that the ends of justice served by granting a continuance outweigh

the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial, 18 U.S.C. §

3161(h)(8)(B)(iv), in that failure to grant a continuance would unreasonably deny the

defendant the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation taking into account the

exercise of due diligence under the circumstances.

Case 1:06-cr-00008-SM Document 18 Filed 10/12/06 Page 1 of 2
2

Final Pretrial Conference: February 26, 2007 at 3:30 PM 

Jury Selection: March 6, 2007 at 9:30 AM

SO ORDERED.

October 12, 2006 _________________________

Steven J. McAuliffe

Chief Judge

cc: Mark Irish, Esq.

 John Gillen, Esq.

 John Goggin, Esq.

 Keith Higgins, Esq. 

 U. S. Probation

 U. S. Marshal

Case 1:06-cr-00008-SM Document 18 Filed 10/12/06 Page 2 of 2
| 1.   | to                the best of our knowledge, the Report fully complies with the requirements                of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;                and |
|----------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 2.   | to                the best of our knowledge, the information contained in the Report                fairly                presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results                of                operations of Registrant. |
|----------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date:                August 14, 2008 | /s/                Burton Katz         |
|--------------------------------------|----------------------------------------|
|                                 | Burton                Katz             |
|                                 | Chief                Executive Officer |
|                                 |                                   |
| Date:                August 14, 2008 | /s/Andrew              Zaref           |
|                                 | Andrew                Zaref            |
|                                 | Chief                Financial Officer |

----
AMENDMENT TO 1998 LEVERAGED INCENTIVE AWARD
                   -------------------------------------------


This  Amendment  effective  as of October 1, 1998, by and between Ralston Purina
Company,  a Missouri corporation (the "Company") and___________,  ("Executive"),
to  the  1998  Leveraged Incentive Plan Award  (the "1998 LIP Award") granted to
the  Executive  on  October  1,  1998.

WHEREAS,  Company adopted the 1998 Leveraged Incentive Plan effective October 1,
1998,  (the  "1998 LIP") to provide intermediate incentive awards to certain key
executives;

WHEREAS,  Company  granted Executive a 1998 LIP Award effective October 1, 1998,
payable  September  30,  2001,  in  accordance  with  the terms of the 1998 LIP;

WHEREAS,  the  1998 LIP Award is subject to a mandatory deferral in the event it
is  not  deductible  compensation  for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2001
because  of  the million dollar deduction limitation set forth in Section 162(m)
of  the  Internal  Revenue  Code  (the  "Code");

WHEREAS,  on  November  18,  1999,  the  Company  adopted an Executive Incentive
Compensation  Plan  (the  "Executive  Incentive  Plan")  to  be  presented  to
shareholders  of  the  Company  for  approval  at  the January  27, 2000, Annual
Shareholder  Meeting,  for the purpose of qualifying annual incentive awards and
intermediate  incentive  awards  to certain key executives as "performance-based
compensation",  defined under Code Section 162(m) exempt from the million dollar
deduction  limitation.

WHEREAS,  the  Company  has  designed  the  Executive  Incentive  Plan  to  be
retroactively  effective  with  respect to the 1998 LIP Award granted Executive;
and,

WHEREAS,  the  1998  LIP  Award  will  qualify as performance-based compensation
exempt  from  the  million  dollar  deduction and no longer subject to mandatory
deferral  if subject to the terms and conditions of the Executive Incentive Plan
as  ultimately  approved  by  shareholders.

NOW  THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and the mutual covenants herein
contained,  the  Company  and  the  Executive  agree  as  follows:

The  1998  Leveraged  Incentive  Plan  Award  (the  "1998 LIP Award") granted to
Executive as of October 1, 1998 by the Company, is hereby amended, retroactively
effective  as  of  October  1,  1998,  to  be  governed  solely by the terms and
conditions  of  the  Executive Incentive Compensation Plan as of October 1, 1998
with respect to the 1998 LIP Award, and no longer to be subject to the terms and
conditions  of  the  1998  Leveraged  Incentive  Plan.

IN  WITNESS  WHEREOF,  the  parties hereto have caused this Amendment to be duly
executed  as  of  December  8,  1999.


EXECUTIVE                      RALSTON  PURINA COMPANY


-------------------           by C. S. SOMMER
                                 ----------------------
                                 C.S. Sommer
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 95-7902
JOHN HERMAN PLATH, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus DAVID BE ASLEY, Governor; MICHAEL B. MOORE, Director, Department of Corrections; SERGEANT FOSTER; PRIS MACK, Deputy Warden; SERGEANT JOHNSON, Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. G. Ross Anderson, Jr., District Judge. (CA-95-2985-6-3AK) Submitted: May 16, 1996 Decided: May 30, 1996 Before RUSSELL, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed as modified by unpublished per curiam opinion. John Herman Plath, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals the district court's orders dismissing his42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) complaint and denying his motion for reconsideration. The district court assessed a filing fee in accordance with Evans v. Croom , 650 F.2d 521 (4th Cir. 1981), cert. denied , 454 U.S. 1153 (1982), and dismissed the case when Appellant failed to comply with the fee order. Finding no abuse of discretion, we affirm the district court's orders. However, we modify the dismissal order to reflect that the dismissal is without prejudice. We deny Appellant's motion for appointment of counsel and grant his motion to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. We dispense withoral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA

GLADYS CARY,

Plaintiff, 

vs. 

SANOFI U.S. SERVICES INC., and SANOFIAVENTIS U.S. LLC,

Defendants.

8:23CV230

ORDER ON JOINT STIPULATION OF 

DISMISSAL

This case is before the Court on the parties’ Joint Stipulation of Dismissal, signed by 

counsel for all parties. Filing 44. The parties stipulate to dismissal of this action with prejudice, 

with each party to bear its own costs, because all claims have been settled and resolved. 

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED that the parties’ Joint Stipulation of Dismissal, Filing 44, is granted. This 

case is dismissed with prejudice, with each party to bear its own costs.

Dated this 20th day of February, 2024.

BY THE COURT:  

_________________________

Brian C. Buescher 

United States District Judge

8:23-cv-00230-BCB-JMD Doc # 45 Filed: 02/20/24 Page 1 of 1 - Page ID # 740
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 02-40267 

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Plaintiff - Appellee

v.

JOSE ANTONIO SANTOS-MORENO

Defendant - Appellant

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. L-01-CR-1073-ALL

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

January 27, 2003

Before KING, Chief Judge, and DeMOSS and BENAVIDES, Circuit

Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Jose Antonio Santos-Moreno (“Santos”) appeals his guiltyplea conviction and sentence for being an alien unlawfully found

in the United States after deportation pursuant to 8 U.S.C.

§ 1326. He argues that the magistrate judge lacked jurisdiction

to accept his guilty plea, that his indictment was defective

under Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000), and that his
No. 02-40267

-2-

prior cocaine-possession conviction was not an aggravated felony

for purposes of U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(C)(2001).

Santos consented to entry of his plea by a magistrate judge

and did not object in the district court; he therefore waived any

procedural error in that regard. See United States v. BolivarMunoz, 313 F.3d 253, 255 (5th Cir. 2002). Santos concedes that

his Apprendi argument is foreclosed by United States v.

Rodriguez-Montelongo, 263 F.3d 429, 434 (5th Cir. 2001), and

states that he raises the issue only to preserve it for possible

Supreme Court review. The issue is foreclosed. Santos’

challenge to the adjustment of his offense level under U.S.S.G. §

2L1.2(b)(1)(C)(2001) is without merit. See United States v.

Caicedo-Cuero, 312 F.3d 697, 706-11 (5th Cir. 2002).

AFFIRMED.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Modesto Cintron

v. Case No. 05-cv-329-PB

United States of America

O R D E R

 I intended to sentence the defendant to 57 months of

imprisonment. While I was willing to recommend that the

defendant be given the opportunity to participate in the

Intensive Confinement Program ("ICP"), I understood that it would

be up to the Bureau of Prisons ("BOP") to decide whether to

assign the defendant to the program. I would not have given the

defendant a different sentence even if I had been informed at

sentencing that the BOP would not assign the defendant to the 

ICP because the program was going to be eliminated. Because the

premise that underlies the defendant's motion is false, his

motion is denied. 

 SO ORDERED.

/s/Paul Barbadoro 

Paul Barbadoro

United States District Judge

October 27, 2005

cc: Glenn Geiger, Esq.

Donald Feith, Esq.

Terry Ollila, Esq. 

Case 1:05-cv-00329-PB Document 8 Filed 10/27/05 Page 1 of 1
Exhibit 99.1

                                                      Frontier Communications
                                                      3 High Ridge Park
                                                      Stamford, CT  06905
                                                      203.614.5600
                                                      www.frontieronline.com

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE


Contact
David Whitehouse
Senior Vice President & Treasurer
203.614.5708


    Frontier Communications Corporation to Participate in Analyst Conference

Stamford,  Conn., November 7, 2008 - Frontier Communications  Corporation (NYSE:
FTR) is scheduled  to  participate  in the upcoming  Bank of America 2008 Credit
Conference  in Orlando,  Florida.  David  Whitehouse,  Senior  Vice  President &
Treasurer is scheduled to present on Thursday,  November 20, 2008,  at 2:00 p.m.
eastern time.

Bank of America will provide a webcast of the Frontier presentation via Veracast
Communications at the following URL:

http://www.veracast.com/webcasts/bas/credit08/id98110289.cfm.
------------------------------------------------------------

The webcast replay will become  available one hour after  conclusion of the live
event and will expire on December 5, 2008.

About Frontier Communications:
Frontier  Communications  Corporation (NYSE: FTR) is one of the nation's largest
rural  local  exchange  carriers.  We offer  local and  long-distance  telephone
service,   Internet  access,  wireless  Internet  access,  digital  phone,  DISH
satellite TV and more. We operate in 24 states. More information is available at
www.frontieronline.com
----------------------



                                       ###
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff, 

vs. 

PERRION BLUFORD,

Defendant.

4:23CR3056

ORDER

After a review of the record, I find that the above-named defendant is 

eligible for appointment of counsel pursuant to the Criminal Justice Act, 18 

U.S.C. §3006A, and Amended Criminal Justice Act Plan for the District of 

Nebraska.

IT IS ORDERED that Douglas L. Kerns is appointed as attorney of record 

for the above-named defendant in this matter and shall forthwith file an 

appearance in this matter.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Federal Public Defender’s Office shall 

forthwith provide counsel with a draft appointment order (CJA Form 20) bearing 

the name and other identifying information of the CJA Panel attorney identified in 

accordance with the Criminal Justice Act Plan for this district.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk shall provide a copy of this 

order to the Federal Public Defender for the District of Nebraska and Douglas L. 

Kerns.

DATED this 23rd day of May, 2023.

BY THE COURT:

s/ Cheryl R. Zwart

United States Magistrate Judge

4:23-cr-03056-JMG-CRZ Doc # 13 Filed: 05/23/23 Page 1 of 1 - Page ID # 26