alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### GAY v. BREWSTER.

No. 4795.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. Second Circuit.

June 29, 1934.

William C. Boone, of Shreveport, for appellant.

Chris Barnette, of Shreveport, for appellee.

DREW, Judge.

Plaintiff sued for $158.50, alleging same to be the balance due under a verbal contract made with defendant for clearing certain woodlands at Squirrel Point on Cross lake. '

Defendant denied he was indebted to plaintiff in any amount. «

The lower court rejected plaintiff’s demands, and he has appealed.

There is only a question of fact involved in this case. Plaintiff claims the original contract price was $175, and defendant contends it was only $75. Plaintiff further contends that there was a second contract for other clearing under which he was to have received $108.50. Defendant contends the first and only contract covered all the clearing, and substantiated his contention by the production of a receipt, signed by plaintiff, in which the contract price is stated, showing payments made and the balance due, which is also shown to have 'been paid.

The record further discloses that plaintiff did not comply with the contract, and that after he ceased working defendant was forced, in order to complete the clearing, to employ other laborers and pay them the sum of $96.35. Plaintiff’s failure to complete the clearing as called for by the contract would be sufficient to bar his recovery thereunder. However, we are convinced, as was the lower court, that the contract between plaintiff and defendant was as is contended by defendant.

We find no error in the judgment of the lower court, and it is affirmed, with costs.

MILLS, J., recused.
Exhibit 21.1



TWIN RIVER WORLDWIDE HOLDINGS, INC





|Subsidiary Name                                                          |  | State or Other Jurisdiction of Incorporation
|------------------------------------------------------------------------ |  | --------------------------------------------
|Twin River Management Group, Inc.                                        |  | Delaware                                    
|Premier Entertainment Biloxi, LLC d/b/a Hard Rock Hotel & Casino         |  | Delaware                                    
|UTGR, Inc. d/b/a Twin River Casino Hotel                                 |  | Delaware                                    
|Premier Entertainment II, LLC d/b/a Newport Grand                        |  | Delaware                                    
|Mile High USA, Inc.                                                      |  | Delaware                                    
|Twin River – Tiverton, LLC d/b/a Tiverton Casino Hotel                   |  | Delaware                                    
|Premier Entertainment III, LLC d/b/a/ Dover Downs Gaming & Entertainment |  | Delaware
### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FORTHE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ABDUL RAZAKALI, Petitioner,



### v. BARACKH. OBAMA,i et af., ) ) ) ) 

### ) Civil Case No. 10-1020 (RJL) ) ) ) 

### Respondents. )

# h.... FINAL JUDGMENT**(March~,** 2011) For the reasons set forth in this Court's public Memorandum Order ofJanuary 11, 2011 and for the reasons set forth in this Court's Classified Memorandum Opinion of February 28, 2011, it is hereby 

### ORDERED that Petitioner Ali's petition for a writ ofhabeas corpus is 

### DENIED. SO ORDERED.

1 Pursuantto Federal Rule ofCivil Procedure 25(d), ifa public officer named as a party to an action in his official capacity ceases to hold office, the court will automatically substitute that officer's successor. Accordingly, the Court substitutes Barack H. Obama for George W. Bush.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 September 3, 2013

d0826

Order 

Clerk

September 3, 2013

147011

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 147011

COA: 308100

Wayne CC: 11-002717-FH

TONY LEE BOUIE,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the March 14, 2013 

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

persuaded that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America

v. Criminal No. 05-cr-262-01-SM

Maura Wylie

O R D E R

On September 1, 2009, defendant appeared for a “probable

cause” hearing under Fed. R. Crim. P. 32.1 on four alleged

violations of conditions of supervision. The testimony of

Probation Officer Kinnan and Exhibits 1-4 establish that

defendant consumed alcohol, probably committed a crime, and

failed to participate in treatment programs. I therefore find

probable cause to hold her for a revocation hearing. 

Defendant sought bail conditions under Rule 32.1(a)(6). 

Under Rule 32.1(a)(6) defendant bears the burden of establishing

by clear and convincing evidence that she will not flee and that

he poses no danger to any other person or to the community.

Unless and until defendant is mentally assessed and receives

treatment, she is a risk of non-appearance and a danger to

herself and to the community. There are no conditions which are

likely to assure her presence and the safety of the community. 

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the defendant be detained

Case 1:05-cr-00262-SM Document 42 Filed 09/01/09 Page 1 of 2
2

pending trial. 

The defendant is committed to the custody of the Attorney

General or his designated representative for confinement in a

corrections facility separate, to the extent practicable, from

persons awaiting or serving sentences or being held in custody

pending appeal. The defendant shall be afforded a reasonable

opportunity for private consultation with defense counsel. On

order of a court of the United States or on request of an

attorney for the government, the person in charge of the

corrections facility shall deliver the defendant to the United

States Marshal for the purpose of an appearance in connection

with a court proceeding. 

SO ORDERED.

_________________________________

James R. Muirhead

United States Magistrate Judge

Date: September 1, 2009

cc: Bjorne Lange

 Robert Kinsella, Esq.

 U.S. Marshal

 U.S. Probation

Case 1:05-cr-00262-SM Document 42 Filed 09/01/09 Page 2 of 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America

v. Case No. 06-cr-92-PB

Derrick Jennings, et al.

O R D E R

The defendant has moved to continue the May 1, 2007 trial in

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

issues concerning prior convictions in the State of New York. 

The government and co-defendant Samuel Ogot, do not object to a

continuance of the trial date.

Accordingly, for the above reason and to allow the parties

additional time to properly prepare for trial, the court will

continue the trial from May 1, 2007 to August 21, 2007. 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 defendants in a speedy

trial.

Case 1:06-cr-00092-PB Document 31 Filed 04/18/07 Page 1 of 2
2

The court will hold a final pretrial conference on July 23,

2007 at 4:00 p.m.

SO ORDERED.

/s/Paul Barbadoro 

Paul Barbadoro

United States District Judge

April 18, 2007

cc: Michael Iacopino, Esq.

Donald Kennedy, Esq.

Terry Ollila, AUSA

United States Probation

United States Marshal

Case 1:06-cr-00092-PB Document 31 Filed 04/18/07 Page 2 of 2
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1183 Engrossed in House (EH)]

  1st Session

                               H. R. 1183

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
at 113 South Main Street in Sylvania, Georgia, as the ``G. Elliot Hagan 
                        Post Office Building''.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
107th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1183

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
at 113 South Main Street in Sylvania, Georgia, as the ``G. Elliot Hagan 
                        Post Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

    The facility of the United States Postal Service located at 113 
South Main Street in Sylvania, Georgia, shall be known and designated 
as the ``G. Elliot Hagan Post Office Building''.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the facility referred to in section 1 
shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``G. Elliot Hagan Post Office 
Building''.

            Passed the House of Representatives June 5, 2001.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
```
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Diana Robinson, Appellant.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Pitaro, J.), rendered August 15, 1989, convicting her of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the second degree, upon her plea of guilty, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing, of that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress physical evidence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

A package containing cocaine was seized from the defendant as a result of a United States Customs inspector’s thorough pat-down search of her in a private room in the Customs area of John F. Kennedy International airport. This airport search was the functional equivalent of a border search *(see, People v McKeown,*146 AD2d 716, 717). A Customs inspector who performs a thorough pat-down search as part of her border-patrolling activities must have some suspicion of criminal activity justifying the intrusion, which "need only be real and *429based upon legitimate factors” *(People v Luna,*73 NY2d 173, 179). In this case, the defendant was traveling alone, without any checked luggage, and had disembarked from a flight originating in Jamaica—a country known to be a source of illegal drugs. The defendant informed the Customs inspector that she would only be staying in New York for 3 or 4 days and her passport revealed that she had made a prior trip from Jamaica within a relatively short period of time. The defendant was also in a hurry to leave the Customs area and appeared nervous to the eye of a well-trained, experienced Customs inspector. This conduct furnished the Customs inspector with a bona fide, articulable suspicion, justifying the minimally intrusive pat-down search leading to the discovery of the drugs *(see, People v Luna, supra; People v Rivera,*143 AD2d 783; *People v Materon,*107 AD2d 408).

We have reviewed the defendant’s remaining contention and find it to be without merit. Mangano, P. J., Bracken, Rubin and Rosenblatt, JJ., concur.
EX-10.25





 Exhibit 10.25 

FIRST AMENDMENT TO STANDARD INDUSTRIAL/COMMERCIAL MULTI-TENANT LEASE – NET DATED JANUARY 13, 2012 BY AND BETWEEN RGS PROPERTIES, AS LESSOR AND EXAGEN
DIAGNOSTICS, INC., AS LESSEE, FOR THE PREMISES LOCATED AT 1261 LIBERTY WAY, SUITE C, CALIFORNIA. 
 Lessor and Lessee mutually agree to amend the lease
as follows effective December 1, 2013: 
 Paragraph 1.2 (Premises): 

The premises shall be expanded to include suite C and suite B for a combined size of approximately 14,438 SF. 

Paragraph 1.2 (b) (Parking): 
 Parking spaces
shall be increased to twenty nine (29) unreserved spaces. 
 Paragraph 1.6 (Lessee’s share of Common Area Operating Expenses): 

This share shall be increased to fifty two point one four percent (52.14%) 

Paragraph 1.7 (c) (Security Deposit): 
 Upon
execution of this addendum, Lessee shall pay Lessor $5,700 as increased security deposit. The new total combined security deposit will be $13,200.00. 

Paragraph 50 (Rent Schedule): 
 Base Rent shall be
as follows: 
  

			
	 Dates
	  	 Base Rent

	December 1, 2013 - January 31, 2014	  	$8,806.74 per month
	February 1, 2014 - January 31, 2015	  	$8,968.68 per month
	February 1, 2015 - January 31, 2016	  	$9,237.72 per month
	February 1, 2016 - January 31, 2017	  	$9,514.85 per month

 Paragraph 56 (HVAC): 

This paragraph shall apply to the expansion space in suite B the same as it did to suite C when the original lease was executed. Additionally, and prior to
delivery of the Expansion Premises, Lessor shall hire a licensed HVAC contractor to inspect and service all HVAC units, make repairs as necessary, and provide Lessee a copy of report(s), reasonably acceptable to Lessee, ensuring the units are in
good operating condition. 
 Paragraph 61 (Lessor Improvements to Expansion Premises): 

Lessor, at Lessor’s sole cost shall complete the following improvements. 

a) Create an opening/passage way between suites B & C. 

b) Paint suite B existing office areas in Lessee selected color. 

c) Steam clean carpets in suite B. 

d) Remove tree in front of suite C and replace with a small palm tree. 

Paragraph 62 (Carpet Replacement): 
 Lessee, at
Lessee’ s sole expense, may elect to replace carpet in the office area of suite B. If Lessee elects to replace carpet, Lessor shall reimburse this carpet with an allowance not to exceed $12,000 if Lessee













 
exercises their option to extend the lease. This allowance shall be applied as a rent credit of $4,000 per month in the first three (3) months of the extension lease term. 

Option(s) to Extend: 
 Lessee’s Option to Extend,
outlined in Paragraph 61 of the original Lease, shall hereby be expanded to include the Expansion Premises, Suite C. 
 All other terms and conditions of
the existing Lease shall remain in full force and effect. 
 This addendum shall automatically expire if not executed by Lessor and Lessee on or
before November 19, 2013. 
 AGREED AND ACCEPTED: 
  

									
	LESSOR:	 		 	LESSEE:
	RGS Properties	 		 	Exagen Diagnostics, Inc.
					
	By:	 	



	 		 	By:	 	




					
	By:	 	



	 		 	Title:	 	 
		 		 		 		 	CEO
					
	Date:	 	11/21/13	 		 	Date:	 	11/20/13
IIA

Calendar No. 368

107TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. J. RES. 87

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MAY 9, 2002

Received; read twice and placed on the calendar pursuant to 42 U.S.C.

10135(d)(5)(A)

JOINT RESOLUTION

Approving the site at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, for the development of a repository for the disposal of high-level

radioactive waste and spent nuclear fuel, pursuant to

the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982.

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

HJ 87 PCS

1 That there hereby is approved the site at Yucca Mountain,

2 Nevada, for a repository, with respect to which a notice

3 of disapproval was submitted by the Governor of the State

4 of Nevada on April 8, 2002.

Passed the House of Representatives May 8, 2002.

Attest: JEFF TRANDAHL,

Clerk.

Calendar No. 368

107TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. J. RES. 87

JOINT RESOLUTION

Approving the site at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, for

the development of a repository for the disposalof high-level radioactive waste and spent nuclearfuel, pursuant to the Nuclear Waste Policy Actof 1982.

MAY 9, 2002

Received; read twice and placed on the calendar pursuant

to 42 U.S.C. 10135(d)(5)(A)
#### Charles HEATH, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Supreme Court of Florida. Division A.

Feb. 9, 1954.

Appeal from Criminal Court of Record, Dade County; Ben C. Willard, Judge.

Affirmed.
Exhibit (10)(a)

    

    

    

    

    

    

    Consent of Ernst & Young LLP, Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

    

    

    

    

    We consent to the reference to our firm under the caption “Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm” in
      Post-Effective Amendment No. 39 to the 1933 Act Registration Statement (Form N-4 No. 333-141752) and Amendment No. 501 to the 1940 Act Registration Statement (Form N-4 No. 811-09763),
      and to the use therein of our reports dated (a) April 1, 2019, with respect to the financial statements of Lincoln Life & Annuity
      Company of New York and (b) April 16, 2019, with respect to the financial statements of Lincoln New York Account N For Variable Annuities for the registration of interests in a separate account under individual flexible payment deferred variable annuity contracts.

    

    

                /s/ Ernst & Young LLP

    

    

    Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

    August 22, 2019
Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the 

Atlantic and Maryland Reporters. Users are requested to notify the Clerk of the 

Court of any formal errors so that corrections may be made before the bound

volumes go to press.

No. 17-BG-570

IN RE CHRISTOPHER W. POVERMAN

2014 DDN 315

An Administratively Suspended Member of the

Bar of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Bar Reg. No. 437053

BEFORE: Beckwith, Associate Judge, and Nebeker and Steadman, Senior Judges.

O R D E R

(Filed – September 28, 2017)

On consideration of the certified order of the Maryland Court of Appeals 

indefinitely suspending respondent from the practice of law in the state of 

Maryland with the right to apply for reinstatement after no less than one year; this 

court’s June 9, 2017, order temporarily suspending respondent in this case and 

directing him to show cause why functionally equivalent reciprocal discipline 

should not be imposed; the statement of Disciplinary Counsel regarding reciprocal 

discipline; and it appearing that respondent did not file a response to this court’s 

show cause order or file the required D.C. Bar R. XI, § 14 (g) affidavit, it is 

ORDERED that Christopher W. Poverman is hereby suspended from the 

practice of law in the District of Columbia for one year with reinstatement subject 

to a fitness requirement. See In re Sibley, 990 A.2d 483, 487-88 (D.C. 2010) 

(explaining that the presumption of identical discipline in D.C. Bar R. XI, § 11 (c) 

will prevail except in “rare” cases); In re Cole, 809 A.2d 1226, 1227 n.3 (D.C. 

2002) (explaining that in unopposed reciprocal matters the “imposition of identical 

discipline should be close to automatic”). For purposes of eligibility to petition for 

reinstatement, the suspension will not begin to run until such time as respondent 

files a D.C. Bar R. XI, § 14 (g) affidavit. 

PER CURIAM
Case 1:05-cr-00079-SM   Document 22   Filed 01/03/06   Page 1 of 2

Case 1:05-cr-00079-SM   Document 22   Filed 01/03/06   Page 2 of 2
Exhibit 31.1



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

SECTION 302(A) OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT
OF 2002



I, Charley Changmin Yoon, certify that:



1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports
on Form 10-D required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of Hyundai Auto Receivables Trust
2018-B (the “Exchange Act periodic reports”);



2. Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports,
taken as a whole, do not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the
statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period
covered by this report;



3. Based on my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicing
and other information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is included in the Exchange
Act periodic reports;



4. Based on my knowledge and the servicer compliance statement
required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicer
has fulfilled its obligations under the servicing agreement in all material respects; and



5. All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing
criteria for asset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria
for asset-backed securities required to be included in this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act
Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwise disclosed in this report. Any material
instances of noncompliance described in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.



In giving the certifications above, I have
reasonably relied on information provided to me by the following unaffiliated party: Citibank, N.A.



Date: March 15, 2019



| | By: | /s/ Charley Changmin Yoon                                    
| | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------
| |     | Name: Charley Changmin Yoon                                  
| |     | Title:  President and Secretary                              
| |     | (senior officer in charge of securitization of the depositor)
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk's Office, Atlanta, February 16, 2021.

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, February 16, 2021

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order

A21D0190. JOHN F. CARY, II v. SHEILAH CARY.

Upon consideration of the Application for Discretionary Appeal, it is ordered that it be 

hereby DENIED.

LC NUMBERS:

17107008
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America

v. Case No. 05-cr-117-01-PB

Richard Hawes

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 April 4,

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-00117-PB Document 19 Filed 02/17/06 Page 1 of 2
2

The February 22, 2006 final pretrial conference is continued

until March 24, at 4:15 p.m.

SO ORDERED.

/s/Paul Barbadoro 

Paul Barbadoro

United States District Judge

February 17, 2006

cc: Bjorn Lange, Esq.

Helen Fitzgibbon, Esq.

United States Probation

United States Marshal

Case 1:05-cr-00117-PB Document 19 Filed 02/17/06 Page 2 of 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America

v. Criminal No. 05-cr-241-04-JD

Sothear Kim

O R D E R

The assented to motion to reschedule jury trial (document no.

201) filed by defendant is granted. Trial is also continued as to

co-defendant Virak Tin unless an objection is filed on or before

June 18, 2007.

Defendant shall file a waiver of speedy trial rights within 10

days. 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. § 3131(h)(8)(B)(iv), for the

reasons set forth in the motion.

SO ORDERED.

/s/ Joseph A. DiClerico, Jr.

Joseph A. DiClerico, Jr.

United States District Judge

Date: June 15, 2007

cc: Counsel of Record

U.S. Marshal

U.S. Probation

Case 1:05-cr-00241-JD Document 206 Filed 06/15/07 Page 1 of 1