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

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1813

To amend title 10, United States Code, to revise the rules under the military

Survivor Benefit Plan for termination of an annuity paid to a surviving

spouse upon remarriage before age 55.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MAY 10, 2001

Mr. MORAN of Kansas introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on Armed Services

A BILL

To amend title 10, United States Code, to revise the rules

under the military Survivor Benefit Plan for termination

of an annuity paid to a surviving spouse upon remarriage

before age 55.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. REVISION TO SPOUSE ANNUITY TERMINATION

4 PROVISIONS UNDER MILITARY SURVIVOR

5 BENEFIT PLAN.

6 (a) LIMITATION ON TERMINATION OF ANNUITY

7 UPON REMARRIAGE BEFORE AGE 55.—Section 1450(b)

8 of title 10, United States Code, is amended—
2

•HR 1813 IH

1 (1) by adding at the end of paragraph (2) the

2 following: ‘‘However, the annuity of a surviving

3 spouse shall not be terminated if the surviving

4 spouse and the person to whom section 1448 of this

5 title applies were married for a period of not less

6 than 10 years during which that person performed

7 service on active duty or, in the case of a person

8 providing a reserve-component annuity, for not less

9 than 10 years that were credited for purposes of re10 serve-component retired pay.’’; and

11 (2) in paragraph (2), by striking ‘‘If’’ and all

12 that follows through ‘‘remarries’’ and inserting ‘‘If

13 an annuity of a surviving spouse or former spouse

14 is terminated under paragraph (2) by reason of re15 marriage’’.

16 (b) APPLICABILITY TO PRIOR TERMINATIONS.—In

17 the case of an annuity paid to a surviving spouse under

18 subchapter II of chapter 73 of title 10, United States

19 Code, that was terminated before the date of the enact20 ment of this Act by reason of the remarriage of the sur21 viving spouse before age 55, the annuity shall be resumed

22 if that annuity would not have been so terminated had

23 the provisions of section 1450(b)(2) of title 10, United

24 States Code, as amended by subsection (a)(1), been in ef25 fect at the time of such remarriage. Any such annuity
3

•HR 1813 IH

1 shall be resumed effective as of the first day of the first

2 month after the date of the enactment of this Act and

3 in the amount that would have been in effect if the annuity

4 had not been so terminated.

Æ
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America

v. Case No. 07-cr-62-PB

Ray McMillan

O R D E R

The defendant, through counsel, has moved to continue the

May 6, 2008 trial in the above case to allow time to negotiate a

plea agreement or prepare for trial. The government does not

object to a continuance of the trial date. 

Accordingly, for the above reasons, the court will continue

the trial from May 6, 2008 to July 8, 2008. 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.

The April 29, 2008 final pretrial conference is continued to

June 23, 2008 at 4:15 p.m.

Case 1:07-cr-00062-PB Document 22 Filed 04/24/08 Page 1 of 2
2

SO ORDERED.

/s/Paul Barbadoro 

Paul Barbadoro

United States District Judge

April 24, 2008

cc: Michael Iacopino, Esq.

Peter Papps, AUSA

United States Probation

United States Marshal

Case 1:07-cr-00062-PB Document 22 Filed 04/24/08 Page 2 of 2
<PAGE>   1
                                 EXHIBIT 10(e)
<PAGE>   2

                        [Delta Air Lines Letterhead]

                 AMENDMENT TO THE DELTA CONNECTION AGREEMENT


         This Amendment ("Amendment") dated this 4th day of March, 1992, amends
the Delta Connection Agreement ("Agreement") dated July 1, 1986, effective
January 1, 1992, between Delta Air Lines, Inc. ("Delta"), whose principal
office is located at Hartsfield Atlanta International Airport, Atlanta, Georgia
30320 and Atlantic Southeast Airlines, Inc. ("ASA"), whose principal office is
located at 1688 Phoenix Parkway, College Park, Georgia 30349.

         WHEREAS, Delta and ASA have entered into a Delta Connection Agreement
and now wish to amend that Agreement;

         NOW, THEREFORE, Delta and ASA agree as follows:

         1.      This Amendment amends the above-referenced agreement and,
except as expressly modified hereby, the Agreement shall remain in full force
and effect and shall govern the performance, obligations and remedies of the
parties.

         2.      The following provision replaces Article 3(A) of the
                 Agreement:

   
                 Subject to the provisions of Article 6(F) of this agreement,
                 ASA will price and process all passenger air transportation and
                 air freight billings involving Delta through the Airlines
                 Clearing House ("ACH") in accordance with the procedures set
                 forth from time to time in the ACH Manual of Procedure (the
                 "Manual") or as set forth by Delta after 30 days written
                 notification and consultation with ASA.  Without limiting the
                 generality of the foregoing, unless otherwise agreed to by the
                 parties in writing, all Delta flight coupons of source type 010
                 (Lifts) and  020 (Exchanges) issued by ASA and all flight
                 coupons of source type 010 and 020 issued or validated on Delta
                 authorized by ASA, will be priced in accordance with the
                 procedures set forth in the ACH sampling procedures (the
                 "sampling procedures") outlined in Section D of the Manual. Any
                 deviation from the sampling procedures shall be agreed to in
                 writing by the parties.
    


         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this amendment by their
undersigned duly authorized representatives.


ATLANTIC SOUTHEAST AIRLINES, INC.          DELTA AIR LINES, INC.
                                    
                                    
By: /s/ John W. Beiser                     By: /s/ Russ Gariota  
    ---------------------                      ----------------------------
    John W. Beiser                             Russ Gariota
    Senior Vice President                      Assistant Vice President
    Sales and Service                          Sales and Marketing Programs
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America

 v. Case No. 08-cr-129-01 SM

Anthony Rabbia

O R D E R

The defendant, through counsel, has moved to continue the trial scheduled for

July 20, 2010 and the change of plea hearing scheduled for July 16, 2010 for a period

of 45 days, citing a scheduling conflict. The government does object to a continuance

of the trial date.

Accordingly, for the above reasons, the court will continue the trial from July

20, 2010 to September 21, 2010. In agreeing to continue the trial, the court finds

pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(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. The defendant shall file a waiver of speedy trial not

later than July 22, 2010.

Case 1:08-cr-00129-SM Document 61 Filed 07/13/10 Page 1 of 2
Change of Plea: August 26, 2010 at 11:30 AM

or

Final Pretrial Conference: September 10, 2010 at 4:30 PM

Jury Selection: September 21, 2010 at 9:30 AM

SO ORDERED.

July 13, 2010 _________________________

Steven J. McAuliffe

Chief Judge

cc: Counsel of Record

 U. S. Probation

 U. S. Marshal

2

Case 1:08-cr-00129-SM Document 61 Filed 07/13/10 Page 2 of 2
Case 1:08-cv-00367-JM Document 15 Filed 08/04/09 Page 1 of 2
Case 1:08-cv-00367-JM Document 15 Filed 08/04/09 Page 2 of 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America

v. Case No. 08-cr-63-PB

Scott Ledoux

SEALED ORDER

The defendant, through counsel, has moved to continue the

trial scheduled for September 3, 2008, citing the need for

additional time to complete discovery and engage in plea

negotiations. The government does 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 September 3, 2008 to December 2, 2008. 

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 1:08-cr-00063-PB Document 13 Filed 08/25/08 Page 1 of 2
2

The August 27, 2008 final pretrial conference is continued

to November 18, 2008 at 3:15 p.m. 

SO ORDERED.

/s/Paul Barbadoro 

Paul Barbadoro

United States District Judge

August 25, 2008

cc: Jeffrey Levin, Esq.

Michael Zaino, AUSA

United States Probation

United States Marshal

Case 1:08-cr-00063-PB Document 13 Filed 08/25/08 Page 2 of 2
38

C.5. Average Variable Interest Rates on Farm Loans

Percent

Other operating Intermediate non-real- Long-term real

Quarter loans1estate loans estate loans

 Ninth (Minneapolis) Federal Reserve District (MI*, MN, MT, ND, SD, WI*)

2005: Q2... 7.4 7.3 6.9

 Q3... 7.7 7.7 7.2

 Q4... 8.1 8.0 7.6

2006: Q1... 8.3 8.3 7.8

 Q2... 8.7 8.7 8.2

 Q3... 8.9 8.8 8.3

 Q4... 9.0 8.8 8.3

2007: Q1... 8.9 8.8 8.2

 Q2... 8.8 8.7 8.2

 Tenth (Kansas City) Federal Reserve District (CO, KS, MO*, NE, NM*, OK, WY)

2005: Q2... 7.7 7.5 7.0

 Q3... 8.1 7.9 7.3

 Q4... 8.4 8.2 7.6

2006: Q1... 8.6 8.4 7.9

 Q2... 9.0 8.8 8.2

 Q3... 9.1 8.9 8.4

 Q4... 9.2 8.9 8.3

2007: Q1... 9.1 8.8 8.3

 Q2... 9.1 8.8 8.2

 Twelfth (San Francisco) Federal Reserve District (AL, AZ, CA, HI, ID, NV, OR, UT, WA)

2005: Q2... 7.4 7.7 7.5

 Q3... 7.9 8.0 7.8

 Q4... 8.8 8.8 8.5

2006: Q1... 8.9 9.0 8.6

 Q2... 9.1 9.1 8.7

 Q3... 9.3 9.3 8.8

 Q4... 9.4 9.4 8.8

2007: Q1... 9.2 9.3 8.6

 Q2... 9.4 9.5 9.3

 1. Loans used primarily to finance such items as current crop production expenses and the care and

feeding of livestock (including poultry).

 * State falls only partly within the indicated Reserve District.

 n.a. Not available.

 Source. Federal Reserve Bank quarterly surveys of agricultural credit conditions at commercial banks.
CHRIS DANIEL

H ARRIS C OUNTY D ISTRICT C LERK

1201 Franklin  P.O. B OX 4651  H OUSTON

, T EXAS 77210

- 4651

S:FormsLib \ Crim \ PostTrial \ Appeal Page 1 of 1 REV. 01

- 08

- 03 December 31, 2015

1st Court of Appeals CauseNo. 140772201010

301 FANNIN STREET, ROOM 208 262 ND DIISTRICT COURT

HOU STON, TX 77002

DER R ICK DESHAWN GILBERT

Vs.

The State of Texas

Dear Sir or Madam:

Please be advised that the defendant in the above styled and numbered cause received his/her

statement(s) of facts on 12/14/2015

.

Trusting this information will prove helpful, I remain.....

Sincerely,

By : s/s Paula Gibson , Deputy

Criminal Post Trial
203 La. 998

#### CITY OF NEW ORLEANS v. Pietro and Joseph CEREVALLO et al.

No. 36675.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

June 21, 1943.

Francis P. Burns and Leo L. Dubourg, both of New Orleans, for plaintiff and appellant.

Salvador T. Cristina and James E. Cour-tin, both of New Orleans, for defendants and appellants.

PONDER, Justice.

For the reasons assigned in the case of City of New Orleans v. Larroux et al., consolidated with three other cases, 14 So.2d 812, this day handed down; it is ordered *815that the judgment of the lower court is amended so as to award the defendant $400 per acre for the lands taken. As thus amended, the judgment of the lower court is affirmed. Cost of this appeal is to be paid by appellees.
##### 



Exhibit 32.1 105




---



##### 



Exhibit 32.1 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2003 I, Lawrence M. Kimbrough, state and attest that I am the President and Chief
Executive Officer of First Charter Corporation (the Company). I hereby
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that  
    
    the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the annual period ended
December 31, 2003 containing financial statements (the periodic report) fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, and  
    
    the information contained in the periodic report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company for the periods presented. /s/ Lawrence M. KimbroughName: Lawrence M. KimbroughTitle: President and Chief Executive OfficerDate: March 10, 2004
 106
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Melvin Graham

v. Civil No. 08-cv-315-PB

NH Supreme Court, et al.

O R D E R

Plaintiff’s request to proceed in forma pauperis is granted,

but pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915, as amended, the filing fee must

be paid as follows: the sum of $7.23 is due no later than

September 11, 2008. In addition, 20% of each preceding month’s

income credited to plaintiff’s account to be remitted by the

Northern NH Correctional Facility when the amount in the account

exceeds $10.00 until the sum of $350.00 has been paid. Failure

to pay the fee as ordered will result in dismissal of the action

without prejudice. In all other respects plaintiff’s request for

in forma pauperis has been granted. 

SO ORDERED.

/s/ Justo Arenas

Justo Arenas

United States Magistrate Judge

Date: August 11, 2008

cc: Melvin Graham, pro se

 Bonnie S. Reed, Financial Administrator

 Northern NH Correctional Facility, Inmate Accounts

Case 1:08-cv-00315-PB Document 3 Filed 08/11/08 Page 1 of 1
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . 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 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_____________________ No. 97-40306

_____________________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v. JUAN DIAZ-ESPINOSA, Defendant-Appellant.

_________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Corpus Christi (C-95-CR-244-2)

_________________________________________________________________ February 4, 1998 Before KING, EMILIO M. GARZA, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * We have read the briefs, reviewed the relevant portions of the record and heard oral argument. As counsel for the government pointed out in detail at oral argument, the defendant did not file a written objection to the PSR or offer any sworn testimony rebutting the relevant portion of the PSR. Under the circumstances, the district court did not err in denying the defendant a sentence reduction for acceptance of responsibility.2

The district court’s judgment of conviction and sentence are AFFIRMED.
<PAGE>   1
Confidential Treatment requested by ASA Holdings, Inc., File No. 333-13071

                                 EXHIBIT 10(b)

                    Confidential treatment has been applied
                    for with respect to certain provisions
                    of this Exhibit, which provisions have 
                    been omitted from this Exhibit, marked 
                    with an asterisk [*] and filed separately
                    with the SEC
<PAGE>   2

                        [Delta Air Lines Letterhead]

February 19, 1987

                                      

Mr. John Beiser
Senior Vice President - Sales and Service
Atlantic Southeast Airlines, Inc.
General Offices
1688 Phoenix Parkway
College Park, Georgia 30349

RE: Delta Connection Agreement

Dear John:
   
Our July 1, 1986 Delta Connection Agreement provides that ASA will reimburse
Delta at Delta's applicable [*                    ] when billing for sales by
travel agents.

In conjunction with our Delta [*                         ]to the Orient, Delta
will pay a [*          ] commission to travel agencies and others ticketing such
packages.  While we want to offer these package tours on the services of ASA, we
are willing to allow ASA to reimburse us for [*                              ].
Accordingly, this letter confirms that, notwithstanding Article 3(B) of our
Delta Connection Agreement; ASA will reimburse Delta at an [*          ] for the
ASA portion of the applicable ticket for Delta [*        ]  to the Orient,
[*           ].

Payment of said amount will not otherwise affect the interline settlement or
processing of tickets between our companies, as set forth in Article 3(A) of the
Delta Connection Agreement.
    

If this is acceptable, please sign in the space provided below and return one
copy of this letter to me.




                                     Very truly yours,
                                  
                                  
                                     /s/ W. Whitley Hawkins                  
                                     -------------------------------
                                     W. Whitley Hawkins
                                     Senior Vice President-Marketing
                                  

Agreed to and accepted by
Atlantic Southeast Airlines, Inc.

By:     /s/ John W. Beiser                            
        --------------------------------------
Title:  Senior Vice President-Sales & Services
COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA

Present: Judges Benton, Coleman and Willis

HUBERT CHAMBERS

v. Record No. 1414-96-3 MEMORANDUM OPINION * PER CURIAM BRIDGEPORT PIEDMONT MANUFACTURING SEPTEMBER 24, 1996 COMPANY AND HARTFORD UNDERWRITERS INSURANCE COMPANY

FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION (Robert E. Evans, on brief), for appellant. Appellant submitting on brief. (Gregory P. Cochran; Caskie & Frost, on brief), for appellees. Appellees submitting on brief.

Hubert Chambers contends that the Workers' Compensation Commission erred in finding that his tendinitis was not an occupational "disease" under the Workers' Compensation Act. In denying Chambers' claim, the commission relied upon the Supreme Court's holding that "job-related impairments resulting from cumulative trauma caused by repetitive motion, however labeled or however defined, are, as a matter of law, not compensable under the present provisions of the Act." Stenrich

Group v. Jemmott , 251 Va. 186, 199, 467 S.E.2d 795, 802 (1996). The evidence proved that Chambers had "a cumulative repetitive overuse tendonitis syndrome." Thus, we agree with the commission's ruling that Jemmott is dispositive of this issue. Accordingly, we affirm the commission's decision.

* Pursuant to Code § 17-116.010 this opinion is not designated for publication.Affirmed

.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Corey Stinson

v. Civil No. 08-cv-00356-JL

Bessette Et Boudreau,

Inc, et al

O R D E R

The Preliminary Pretrial Conference currently scheduled for

April 14, 2009 at 2:00 p.m. will include a substantive,

meaningful discussion of the parties’ claims and defenses. 

Counsel are expected to be prepared to engage in an open,

cooperative discussion in good faith. Counsel are reminded of

the obligations imposed by Fed. R. Civ. P. 11(b)(3) and (4), and

should be prepared to explain the factual basis underlying any

claims or defenses they have pleaded.

Each party shall be represented at the Preliminary Pretrial

Conference by counsel authorized to bind the party on all

matters.

To the extent that the substance of this order constitutes a

departure from the customary Preliminary Pretrial practice to

Case 1:08-cv-00356-JL Document 12 Filed 04/08/09 Page 1 of 2
2

which counsel are accustomed, the court apologizes for the short

notice, and will bear this in mind at the conference.

SO ORDERED.

____________________________

Joseph N. Laplante

United States District Judge

Dated: April 14, 2009

cc: Philip R. Waystack, Jr., Esq.

Jonathan S. Frizzell, Esq.

Marc R. Scheer, Esq.

Case 1:08-cv-00356-JL Document 12 Filed 04/08/09 Page 2 of 2
**Exhibit — 23.2****CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**     We consent to the incorporation by reference in the followingRegistration Statements:          (1) Registration Statement (Form S-8    No. 333-116414) pertaining to the Milacron Inc. 2004    Long-term Incentive Plan,           (2) Registration Statements (Forms S-8    Nos. 333-115948 and 333-115949) pertaining to the Milacron    Inc. Retirement Savings Plan,           (3) Registration Statement (Form S-8    No. 33-56403) pertaining to the Milacron Inc. 1994    Long-term Incentive Plan,           (4) Registration Statement (Form S-8    No. 333-69194) pertaining to the Milacron Inc. 1997    Long-term Incentive Plan, and           (5) Registration Statement (Form S-8    No. 333-74426) pertaining to the Milacron Inc. Plan for the    Deferral of Directors’ Compensation,           (6) Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-127600)    pertaining to the Milacron Inc. Director Deferred Compensation    Planof our report dated March 25, 2005 (except for the footnotetitled Restatement of Financial Statements, as to which the dateis October 10, 2005), with respect to the consolidatedfinancial statements and financial statement schedule listed inItem 15(c), and of our report dated June 28, 2005(except for the second paragraph under Review of Complex andJudgmental Accounting Issues, as to which the date isOctober 10, 2005), with respect to Milacron Inc.management’s assessment of the effectiveness of internalcontrol over financial reporting, and the effectiveness ofinternal control over financial reporting of Milacron Inc.,included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K), as amended byAmendment No. 1 and Amendment No. 2, ofMilacron Inc.     /s/ Ernst & Young    LLP    Cincinnati, OhioOctober 11, 2005
Case 1:05-cv-00079-SM   Document 42   Filed 09/01/06   Page 1 of 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Dorothy Harvey

v. Civil No. 08-cv-92-JM

Jeffrey Wheatley

Andrea Wheatley

Steven Wheatley

O R D E R

The motion for reconsideration (document no. 18) is granted.

Settlement approved. The unpaid medical bills of $2,145.00,

Massachusetts lien of $423.64 and attorney expenses of $3,009.62

are to be paid. Counsel fees of $75,000 are allowed. The

balance, $219,421.74, is to be distributed to the R.J.H.

Irrevocable Trust, which is to fund two annuities described in

the Petition for Approval of Minor’s Settlement. Counsel for the

minor shall be responsible for the settlement funds until said

funds have been deposited in the Trust’s Account.

Upon approval of this settlement, Fifteen Thousand and

00/100 ($15,000.00) will be distributed directly into the Trust. 

Thereafter, a deposit of approximately Sixty Six Thousand Nine

Hundred Thirty-four and 40/100 ($66,934.40) will be placed in an

Case 1:08-cv-00092-JM Document 19 Filed 04/28/09 Page 1 of 2
2

Immediate Annuity and the remainder of the settlement proceeds

will be placed in a Deferred Annuity.

Approval is conditional upon compliance with this Order with

respect to payment of bills and deposit of funds in accordance

with this Order.

SO ORDERED.

____________________________________

James R. Muirhead

United States Magistrate Judge

Date: April 28, 2009

cc: Peter J. Perroni, Esq.

Case 1:08-cv-00092-JM Document 19 Filed 04/28/09 Page 2 of 2