alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Regina Marie WHITLEY, Individually and on behalf of Chance Whitley (D) v. STATE of Louisiana, through the BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY AGRICULTURAL MECHANICAL COLLEGE, on behalf of the Medical Center of Louisiana at New Orleans-University Campus.

No. 2011-CC-0040.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

March 4, 2011.

In re LSU A & M Board of Supervisors; Medical Center of Louisiana at New Orleans-University Campus; State of Louisiana et al.; —Defendant(s); Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Civil District Court Div. I, No. 2007-14119; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2010-C-1198.

Granted.
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1648 Introduced in House (IH)]

110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1648

  To prohibit the Secretary of Agriculture from closing Farm Service 
    Agency offices in Appomattox, Virginia, and Lunenburg, Virginia.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 22, 2007

  Mr. Goode introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                        Committee on Agriculture

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To prohibit the Secretary of Agriculture from closing Farm Service 
    Agency offices in Appomattox, Virginia, and Lunenburg, Virginia.

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

SECTION 1. PROHIBITION ON CLOSING CERTAIN OFFICES OF THE FARM SERVICE 
              AGENCY.

    The Secretary of Agriculture may not close or relocate any Farm 
Service Agency office located in Appomattox, Virginia, or Lunenburg, 
Virginia.
                                 <all>
```
#### Randy Lavern SPENCER, Petitioner, v. Patricia Ann SPENCER, Respondent.

No. 1D10-4682.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Dec. 14, 2010.

Randy Lavern Spencer, pro se, Petitioner.

No appearance for Respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The petition for writ of certiorari or belated appeal is denied. This disposition is without prejudice to petitioner’s right to appeal the final judgment.

VAN NORTWICK, LEWIS, and CLARK, JJ., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
This  schedule  contains  summary  financial   information  extracted  from  the
financial statements set forth in the Form 10KSB of On Stage Entertainment, Inc.
and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0001035514
<NAME>                        On Stage Entertainment, Inc.
<MULTIPLIER>                  1,000
       
<S>                                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                  12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-1-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                         1010
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  1265
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    243
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               3316
<PP&E>                                         24130
<DEPRECIATION>                                 4396
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 24089
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          20107
<BONDS>                                        786
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       75
<OTHER-SE>                                     3121
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   24089
<SALES>                                        27847
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               27847
<CGS>                                          8968
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  22228
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               8935
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             1555
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (4871)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (4871)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (4871)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  (0.68)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (0.68)
        

</TABLE>
EX-10.1.G











Exhibit 10.1(g)




SEVENTH AMENDMENT

OF

U.S. BANCORP NON-QUALIFIED RETIREMENT PLAN




     The U.S. Bancorp Non-Qualified Retirement Plan (the “Plan”) is amended in the following
respects:


1. PARTICIPANTS. Effective December 1, 2005, as permitted under Notice 2005-1, Q&A 20, the
Participants listed on Schedule I attached to this amendment shall have their benefits under the
Plan, as identified on such Schedule I, terminated and shall be paid an actuarial equivalent amount
(determined as provided in item 2) in a single lump sum on or before December 31, 2005, such that
the lump sum amount will be included in the participants’ income in 2005. In general, the
Participants included on this schedule are Participants:



(i) who terminated employment with the Company, its affiliates, or predecessors before December 1,
2005,



(ii) who are not in active employment with the Company, its affiliates, or predecessors as of
December 1, 2005,



(iii) who have a benefit under, or have commenced or are receiving a benefit under Section IV or
Section V of the Plan (including the plans listed in individual appendices under Appendix A), and



(iv) whose benefit under the Plan has an actuarial equivalent value equal to or less than $500 per
month (as determined by the Company).



Notwithstanding the foregoing, and for greater clarity, this amendment shall apply only to those
Participants listed on Schedule I attached to this amendment, and only to such participants’
deferred compensation as reflected on such Schedule I. The rights of all other Participants in the
Plan shall not be modified or affected by this amendment.



2. ACTUARIAL EQUIVALENT AMOUNT. The actuarial factors shall be as follows:



(i) The interest rate shall be 5.7%.



(ii) The mortality table shall be the sex distinct UP94 mortality table.



(iii) The present values shall be calculated as of December 1, 2005.



3. PLAN. Effective January 1, 2006, Section 2.22 of the Plan is amended by changing the name of
the plan to be “U.S. BANK NON-QUALIFIED RETIREMENT PLAN”. Other references to the plan name (except
those in Section 1) shall also be changed to reflect the change in the name.



4. SAVINGS CLAUSE. Save and except as expressly amended above, the Plan shall continue in full
force and effect.




1
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the annual
financial statements of the Company for the twelve months ended December 31,
1999 and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such annual financial
statements.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         1034258
<NAME>                        Noble International, Ltd.
<MULTIPLIER>                                       1000
<CURRENCY>                                   US Dollars

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                    12-Mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                           DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                              JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                DEC-31-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                   1.000
<CASH>                                              685
<SECURITIES>                                          0
<RECEIVABLES>                                     14088
<ALLOWANCES>                                          0
<INVENTORY>                                        6919
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  92387
<PP&E>                                            54628
<DEPRECIATION>                                        0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   174805
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             20408
<BONDS>                                           24895
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                 0
<PREFERRED>                                           0
<COMMON>                                          27993
<OTHER-SE>                                          513
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     174805
<SALES>                                           85266
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                  85266
<CGS>                                             56438
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                     56438
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  15760
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                      0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 1819
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   11529
<INCOME-TAX>                                       4235
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                7294
<DISCONTINUED>                                     (472)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                       0
<CHANGES>                                             0
<NET-INCOME>                                       6822
<EPS-BASIC>                                        0.94
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      0.87



</TABLE>
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Robert Lee WINFIELD, Jr., Defendant-Appellant.

No. 00-6560.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Dec. 21, 2000.

Decided Jan. 5, 2001.

Robert Lee Winfield, Jr., pro se. Laura P. Tayman, Office of the United States Attorney, Norfolk, VA, for appellee.

Before LUTTIG, MICHAEL, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Robert Lee Winfield, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.2000). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. *See United States v. Winfield,*Nos. CR-95-193; CA-99-294-2 (E.D.Va. Mar. 17, 2000). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*DISMISSED.*
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 187 (Tuesday, September 28, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 59782]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-24297]



[[Page 59782]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF STATE


Waiver of Restriction on Assistance to the Government of Saudi 
Arabia

    Pursuant to section 7086(c)(2) of the Department of State, Foreign 
Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2010 (Division F, 
Pub. L. 111-117) (``the Act''), and Department of State Delegation of 
Authority Number 245-1, I hereby determine that it is important to the 
national interest of the United States to waive the requirements of 
section 7086(c)(1) of the Act with respect to the Government of Saudi 
Arabia, and I hereby waive such restriction.
    This determination shall be reported to the Congress, and published 
in the Federal Register.

    Dated: August 13, 2010.
Jacob J. Lew,
Deputy Secretary of State for Management and Resources.
[FR Doc. 2010-24297 Filed 9-27-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-31-P
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03
- 17
- 00673
- CR

Michael Todd Englert, Appellant

v. The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE 119TH DISTRICT COURT OF TOM GREEN COUNTY NO. B
- 16
- 0824
- SB, TH E HONORABLE JAY K. W EATHERBY, JUDGE PRES IDIN G

O R D E R F O R C L E R K T O P R O V I D E A P P E L L A T E R E C O R D TO A P P E L L A N T

PER CURIAM

Appellant’s court

- appointed counsel has filed a motion to withdraw supported by a brief concluding that the instant appeal is fr ivolous and without merit. See Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967). Appellant’s counsel has certified to the Court that he provided copies of the motion and brief to appellant, advised appellant of his right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se response, and supplied appellant with a form motion for
pro se access to the appellate record. See Kelly v. State , 436 S.W.3d 313, 319

- 20 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014). Appellant has timely filed the motion requesting access to the appellate reco rd with this Court. Appellant’s pro se motion is granted. We hereby direct the clerk of the trial
court to provide a copy of the reporter’s record and clerk’s record to appellant, and to providewritten verification to this Court of the date and manner in which the appellate record was

provided, on or before April 16, 2018

. See id. at 321.

It is ordered on April 6, 2018

.

Before Chief Justice Rose, Justices Goodwin and Field Do Not Publish
Document Headings

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

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Postal Regulatory Commission

# FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION OF PREVIOUS ANNOUNCEMENT:

75 FR 4429 (January 27, 2010).

# PREVIOUSLY ANNOUNCED TIME AND DATE:

Wednesday, February 3, 2010 at 11 a.m.

# CHANGES IN THE MEETING:

The Commission is adding item no. 13-discussion of confidential commercial information relative to a potential Commission contract (closed) to its February meeting agenda. This action is being taken pursuant to a determination of the Commission, by recorded vote, as to the need for the change in the agenda, the status of the new agenda item, and the inability to provide earlier notice. There is a related General Counsel certification as to the appropriateness of closing agenda item no. 13 to public observation.

# CONTACT PERSON FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:

                        Stephen L. Sharfman, General Counsel, Postal Regulatory Commission, at 202-789-6820 or                         *stephen.sharfman@prc.gov*.                    

*Dated:*                         February 1, 2010.                    

Shoshana M. Grove,

*Secretary*.                    

[FR Doc. 2010-2450 Filed 2-1-E8; 4:15 pm]

BILLING CODE 7710-FW-S
#### James MERCER v. NABORS DRILLING USA, LP.

No. 2011-C-0591.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 20, 2011.

In re Nabors Drilling USA LP; —Defendant; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review Office of Workers’ Compensation District 2, No. 09-07201; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. 10-1092.

Granted and remanded to the court of appeal for reconsideration in *light of City of DeQuincy v. Henry,*10-0070 (La.3/15/11), 62 So.3d 43.
EXHIBIT 21.1

LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES OF JOURNAL REGISTER COMPANY

The following is a list of the corporations that are subsidiaries of Journal Register Company, a Delaware corporation. If indented, the corporation listed is a wholly-owned subsidiary of the corporation under which it is listed. The names of all subsidiaries more than two levels removed from Journal Register Company have been omitted and are included in the number of owned subsidiaries of their most immediate direct or indirect parent company listed below.

|                             |  |  |                       |  |          |                                                   |  |  |  |  |         |  |
|-----------------------------|--|--|-----------------------|--|----------|---------------------------------------------------|--|--|--|--|---------|--|
| Name of Corporation         |  |  | State ofIncorporation |  |          | Number of OwnedSubsidiaries (Direct and Indirect) |
| Journal Register East, Inc. |  |  |                       |  | Delaware |                                                   |  |  |  |  | 38      |  |
| Chanry Media, Inc.          |  |  |                       |  | Delaware |                                                   |  |  |  |  | 8       |  |
| Register Company, Inc.      |  |  |                       |  | Delaware |                                                   |  |  |  |  | — |  |
| JRC.com, LLC                |  |  |                       |  | Delaware |                                                   |  |  |  |  | — |  |
|                             |

----
EX-4.12






Exhibit 4.12



The following is a summary of amendments to the Ford Motor Company Savings and Stock Investment
Plan for Salaried Employees, effective September 30, 2008:





	 	•	 	The Fidelity Dividend Growth Fund was closed to new monies (contributions, loan
repayments and exchanges) effective May 19, 2008 and removed from the investment
line-up effective September 30, 2008. Any assets remaining in the Fund as of 4:00
p.m., ET, on this date were reallocated to the Vanguard Institutional Index
Fund-Institutional Plus Shares.
#### In re Mark G. MURPHEY.

No. 2011-OB-0837.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

June 24, 2011.

*965ORDER

Considering the April 25, 2011 letter submitted to the court by Mark G. Mur-phey, advising that he wishes to voluntarily withdraw from the practice of law, and construing the letter as a petition for voluntary resignation from the practice of law,

IT IS ORDERED that the petition be and hereby is denied. However, petitioner may re-file his petition pursuant to Supreme Court Rule XVIII, § 5.

/s/ Jeffrey P. Victory /s/ Justice, Supreme Court of Louisiana
#### In re KITE RV, L.L.C.

No. 2011-CC-1992.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Dec. 16, 2011.

In re Kite, Jeff; — Other; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Calcasieu, 14th Judicial District Court Div. H, No. 2008-2682; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. CW 11-00911.

Denied.
#### In re Edward L. BOUDREAUX, III.

No. 2011-OB-0201.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Feb. 2, 2011.

PER CURIAM*

After reviewing the evidence and considering the law, we conclude petitioner, Edward L. Boudreaux, III, is immediately eligible to be conditionally admitted to the practice of law in Louisiana, subject to a probationary period of two years. The probationary period shall commence from the date petitioner, the Office of Disciplinary Counsel, and the probation monitor execute a formal probation plan. During the probationary period, petitioner shall comply with all of the terms and conditions of the consent agreement executed by him with the Louisiana Supreme Court Committee on Bar Admissions, and such other conditions as may be imposed upon him by the Office of Disciplinary Counsel. Should petitioner fail to make a good faith effort to satisfy these conditions, or should he commit any misconduct during the period of probation, his conditional right to practice may be terminated or he may be subjected to other discipline pursuant to the Rules for Lawyer Disciplinary Enforcement.

CONDITIONAL ADMISSION GRANTED.

*

 Chief Justice Kimball not participating in the opinion.
#### STATE ex rel. Phanord BILLY v. STATE of Louisiana.

No. 2010-KH-0620.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

March 4, 2011.

In re Billy, Phanord; —Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. P, No. 01-6415; to the *472Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 09-KH-951.

Denied. La.C.Cr.P. art. 980.8; *State ex rel. Glover v. State,*93-2830 (La.9/5/95), 660 So.2d 1189.
<TABLE> <S> <C>
                       

<ARTICLE>                    5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD ENDED MARCH 31, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY
BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                        <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>              3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                             DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                                JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                  MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                          1,138,000
<SECURITIES>                                            0
<RECEIVABLES>                                     310,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                            0<F1>
<INVENTORY>                                        84,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                1,611,000
<PP&E>                                          4,574,000<F2>
<DEPRECIATION>                                          0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  6,820,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             877,000
<BONDS>                                         1,239,000<F3>
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                   0
<PREFERRED>                                             0
<COMMON>                                           63,000
<OTHER-SE>                                      4,641,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    6,820,000
<SALES>                                           304,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                1,775,000
<CGS>                                             334,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                           0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                1,584,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                        0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 42,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (464,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                            0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (464,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                          0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                         0
<CHANGES>                                               0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (464,000)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        (.08)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        (.08)

<FN>
<F1>  Notes and accounts receivable - trade are reported net of allowances for
      doubtful accounts in the Balance Sheet.

<F2>  Property, plant, and equipment are reported net of accumulated
      depreciation in the Balance Sheet.

<F3>  Excludes current portion.
</FN>
        


</TABLE>