alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Stacy Holtz","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/stacy-a-holtznasa-gov\/","title":"CCP Boeing CST-100 Starliner Processing","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"AYqZRIaSC8\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/image-detail\/amf-ksc-20191102-ph-boe01_0001\/\">CCP Boeing CST-100 Starliner Processing<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/image-detail\/amf-ksc-20191102-ph-boe01_0001\/embed\/#?secret=AYqZRIaSC8\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“CCP Boeing CST-100 Starliner Processing” — NASA\" data-secret=\"AYqZRIaSC8\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/images-assets.nasa.gov\/image\/KSC-20191102-PH-BOE01_0001\/KSC-20191102-PH-BOE01_0001~orig.jpg?w=600&h=1150&fit=clip&crop=faces%2Cfocalpoint","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":1150}
QuickLinks
 -- Click here to rapidly navigate through this document

 
 

Exhibit 10(e)    
  


FIFTH AMENDMENT TO SPLIT DOLLAR LIFE INSURANCE AGREEMENT

COLLATERAL ASSIGNMENT PLAN  


        This Amendment relates to that certain Split Dollar Life Insurance Agreement made as of the 13th day of June, 1980 between CITY NATIONAL BANK and THE GOLDSMITH
1980 INSURANCE TRUST (the "Agreement") and shall hereby amend paragraph 7 thereof to provide that the Agreement shall terminate on May 15, 1998. 


        Except
as amended by the foregoing, the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect and without any other change. 


        The
Agreement is made and agreed to as of this 15th day of May, 1995. 



	THE GOLDSMITH 1980 INSURANCE TRUST	 	CITY NATIONAL BANK
	

By	
 	

/s/  BRUCE LEIGH GOLDSMITH      
 Bruce Leigh Goldsmith

Trustee	
 	

By	
 	

/s/  RICHARD SHEEHAN, JR.      

	 	 	 	 	Its	 	Senior Vice President

	

By	
 	

/s/  RUSSELL DAVID GOLDSMITH      
 Russell David Goldsmith

Trustee	
 	

 	
 	

 
	
CITY NATIONAL BANK	
 	

 	
 	

 
	

By	
 	

/s/  GREG CUSTER      
 Greg Custer, Assistant Trust Officer

Trustee	
 	

 	
 	

 











QuickLinks


Exhibit 10(e)
Case 2:15-mj-01880-JFM Document 4 Filed 12/02/15 Page 1 of 3
Case 2:15-mj-01880-JFM Document 4 Filed 12/02/15 Page 2 of 3
Case 2:15-mj-01880-JFM Document 4 Filed 12/02/15 Page 3 of 3
**Exhibit 31.2**
**CERTIFICATION**
I, Gregory S. Madar, certify that:
 1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of WebsterPreferred Capital Corporation;  2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessaryto make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under whichsuch statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;  3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all materialrespects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flowsof the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;  4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (asdefined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for theregistrant and have:
 (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, orcaused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designedunder our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by other others within thoseentities, particularly during the period in which this report isbeing prepared;  (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’sdisclosure controls and procedures and presented in this reportour conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controlsand procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this reportbased on such evaluation; and  (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting that occurred during theregistrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourthfiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect,the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.
 5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, basedon our most recent evaluation of internal control over financialreporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of theregistrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):
 (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses inthe design or operation of internal control over financialreporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and  (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involvesmanagement or other employees who have a significant role in theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting.      Date: November 5, 2004
#### Jones *v.*Buntin.

If the different charges against a clerk for taking unlawful fees, amount toge». ther to the sum necessary to give the Circuit Court jurisdiction, the demand may be sued for in that Court.

APPEAL from the *Knox*Circuit Court.

Scott, J.

Declaration in debt on the statute against *Buntin,*for charging and receiving unlawful fees for services as clerk of the *Knox*Circuit Court. General demurrer to the declaration sustained, and judgment for the defendant. The objection to the declaration is, that there are different fees charged to have been unlawfully demanded and received by the appellee, all united in one suit; when, if each item had been made the foundation of a separate suit, they would all have been cognizable by a justice of the peace. We can see neither reason nor precedent in support of this objection. The judgment must be reversed.

*Per Curiam.*

The judgment is reversed with costs. Cause *323remanded, with directions to permit the defendant to withdraw his demurrer, &c.

Judah, for the appellant.

*Tabbs,*for the appellee,
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Michael Len Ray,

Plaintiff,

v.

C. R. Bard Inc. and Bard Peripheral 

Vascular, Inc.,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

MDL Case No. 2:15-md-02641-DGC

Civil Action No. CV-17-04401-PHX-DGC

WAIVER OF THE SERVICE OF SUMMONS

To: Freese & Goss PLLC - Birmingham, AL

(Name of plaintiff’s attorney or unrepresented plaintiff)

I have received your request to waive service of a summons in this action along with a copy of the complaint, two 

copies of this waiver form, and a prepaid means of returning one signed copy of the form to you.

I, or the entity I represent, agree to save the expense of serving a summons and complaint in this case.

I understand that I, or the entity I represent, will keep all defenses or objections to the lawsuit, the court’s 

jurisdiction, and the venue of the action, but that I waive any objections to the absence of a summons or of service.

I also understand that I, or the entity I represent, must file and serve an answer or a motion under Rule 12 within 

60 days from 1/23/2018, the date when this request was sent (or 90 days if it was sent outside the United States). If I fail 

to do so, a default judgment will be entered against me or the entity I represent.

Date: February 1, 2018 /s/ Richard B. North, Jr.

Signature of the attorney or unrepresented party

C. R. Bard, Inc. and Bard Peripheral

Vascular, Inc.

Printed name of parties waiving service of 

summons

Richard B. North, Jr. (Ga. Bar No. 545599)

Printed Name

Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough, LLP

201 17th St., NW, Suite 1700, Atlantic Station, Atlanta, GA 30363

Address

richard.north@nelsonmullins.com

E-mail Address

(404) 322-6155

Telephone number

Duty to Avoid Unnecessary Expenses of Serving a Summons

Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires certain defendants to cooperate in saving unnecessary expenses of serving a 

summons and complaint. A defendant who is located in the United States and who fails to return a signed waiver of service requested by a plaintiff 

located in the United States will be required to pay the expenses of service, unless the defendant shows good cause for the failure. 

Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 9902 Filed 02/01/18 Page 1 of 2
2

“Good cause” does not include a belief that the lawsuit is groundless, or that it has been brought in an improper venue, or that the court has 

no jurisdiction over this matter or over the defendant or the defendant’s property. 

If the waiver is signed and returned, you can still make these and all other defenses and objections, but you cannot object to the absence of 

a summons or of service. 

If you waive service, then you must, within the time specified on the waiver form, serve an answer or a motion under Rule 12 on the 

plaintiff and file a copy with the court. By signing and returning the waiver form, you are allowed more time to respond than if a summons had been 

served.

Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 9902 Filed 02/01/18 Page 2 of 2
#### Bates, Appellant, *v.*Flath, Appellee.

(No. 4174

Decided February 3, 1947.)

*Mr. Clarence P. Ducey*and *Mr. Joseph C. Gribbin,*for appellant.

*Messrs. Welles, Kelsey, F.uller, Cobourn d> Earring-ton,*for appellee.

*189Carpenter, J.

Plaintiff was a passenger in an automobile which, collided with the automobile of defendant at a highway intersection, and in this action she seeks damages .for personal injuries sustained. The answer admitted the collision, and that plaintiff was an occupant of the automobile.' The verdict and judgment were for the defendant, and this appeal on questions of law followed.

At the outset of the evidence concerning the collision, plaintiff called the defendant for cross-examination. Objections were made and sustained to all questions about what happened or what the defendant did as he approached the intersection. To illustrate, some of the questions were:

“Did your car skid before the collision with the Bates car?”

“When did you realize there was going to be a - •collision between your car and the Bates’ car?”

“How fast were you driving at the time of the collision?”

“Did you see the plaintiff’s car before you collided with it?”

The court justified its action in sustaining objections to those and other such questions by saying:

“It is your own case. You cannot go into it on cross-examination of the adverse party.”

Section 11497, General Code, reads:

“At the instance of the adverse party, a party may be examined as if under cross-examination, either •orally, or by deposition, like any other witness. * * * The party calling for such examination shall not thereby be concluded but may rebut it by counter testimony. ” ■

Thus the plaintiff was given a positive right, and if the admissions of the defendant in any degree contributed to prove plaintiff’s case, she was entitled to *190such examination and its denial to her was prejudicial error.

Speaking of our practice under this statute, Judge Stephenson, in the opinion in *Clark*v. *Stewart,*126 Ohio St., 263, 270, 185 N. E., 71, said:

“This was cross-examination of a party and it is not error for the trial court to indulge counsel in a liberal scope, under such circumstances, if the testimony sought to be adduced by the questions has even a remote tendency to prove or disprove any issue made by the pleadings. ’ ’

The plaintiff in the instant case gave up further effort to cross-examine the defendant and proceeded with her other witnesses.

Other errors incident to the trial and the charge to the jury are assigned, but in view of the fact that the judgment must be reversed and a new trial had when the record will be different than this one, the court deems it unnecessary to determine such other assigned errors.

For the reasons stated, the judgment is reversed and the cause remanded for a new trial.

*Judgment reversed.*

Stuart and Conn, JJ., concur.
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"NASA","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/nasamigrate\/","title":"Supersonic Aircraft Model","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"819cYHc4sE\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/image-detail\/supersonic-aircraft-model-3\/\">Supersonic Aircraft Model<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/image-detail\/supersonic-aircraft-model-3\/embed\/#?secret=819cYHc4sE\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Supersonic Aircraft Model” — NASA\" data-secret=\"819cYHc4sE\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/744249main_2013_01177_full.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":480}
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA Supreme Court Case No. DA 22

- 0577

THE FRIENDS OF LAKE FIVE, INC. ][ ][ Appellee/Plain tiffs/Petitioners, ][ ][ WA RD E. “MICK” TALEFF, ][ ][ Appellee/Intervenor, ][ ][

- vs - ][ **ORDER GRANTING APPELLEE** ][ **FRIENDS OF LAKE FIVE, INC.’s** FLATHEAD COUNTY COMMISSION, and ][ **FIRST MOTION FOR** FLATHEAD COUNTY , MONTANA, ][ **EXTENSION OF TIME** ][ Appellees/Respondents, ][ ][

- vs - ][ ][ SUSAN DIETZ, Individually and as ][ Trustee of the G & M TRUST, ][ ][ Appellant/Defendant/Respondent. ][ Pursuant to authority granted under Rule 26(1), M.R.App.P. (2021), Appellee, Friends of Lake Five, Inc.’s, Unopposed First Motion for Extension of Time is Granted and Appellee may file and serve its re sponsive brief on or before Monday, May1, 2023.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

March 21 2023

03/21/2023

Case Number: DA 22-0577
Case 2:15-mj-01905-JFM Document 4 Filed 12/08/15 Page 1 of 3
Case 2:15-mj-01905-JFM Document 4 Filed 12/08/15 Page 2 of 3
Case 2:15-mj-01905-JFM Document 4 Filed 12/08/15 Page 3 of 3
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Be th Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein,

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.

May 20, 2015

t0513 

# Order

Clerk May 20, 2015

150182

MCLAREN HEALTH CARE CORPORATION,

BA RBARA ANN KARMANOS CANCER

INSTITUTE and BARBARA ANN

KARMANOS CANCER HOSPITAL, d/b/a

KARMANOS CANCER CENTER,

Plaintiffs/Counter

- Defendants

- Appellants,

v SC: 150182

COA: 320846

Oakland CC: 2013

- 137031

- CB

DETROIT MEDICAL CENTER,

Defendant/Counter

- Plaintiff

- Appellee.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the August 21, 2014

order 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.
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential. 

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit

__________________________ 

RICHARD REBSTOCK, 

Claimant-Appellant, 

v.

ERIC K. SHINSEKI, SECRETARY OF VETERANS 

AFFAIRS, 

Respondent-Appellee. 

__________________________ 

2012-7169

__________________________ 

Appeal from the United States Court of Appeals for 

Veterans Claims in 12-1171, Judge Robert N. Davis. 

__________________________ 

ON MOTION

__________________________ 

O R D E R

Richard Rebstock submits a “motion to proceed” and a 

“motion to affirm petition.” The government responds to 

the motion to affirm.

To the extent that his motions seek immediate consideration of his case, Rebstock’s appeal is under consideration by the court and a disposition will issue in due 

Case: 12-7169 Document: 35 Page: 1 Filed: 03/13/2013
RICHARD REBSTOCK v. SHINSEKI 2

course. Thus no motion is necessary. To the extent 

Rebstock is arguing the merits of his case, those arguments belong in his brief, not motions. Nonetheless, the 

court will construe the motion to affirm as a request for 

supplemental briefing.

Upon consideration thereof, 

IT IS ORDERED THAT: 

(1) Rebstock’s motions are denied. 

(2) The motion to affirm is deemed supplemental 

briefing. Copies shall be transmitted to the merits panel 

assigned to the case.

FOR THE COURT

 /s/ Jan Horbaly 

 Jan Horbaly

 Clerk

s23 

Case: 12-7169 Document: 35 Page: 2 Filed: 03/13/2013
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Freddie Boston,

Plaintiff,

v.

C. R. Bard Inc. and Bard Peripheral 

Vascular, Inc.,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

MDL Case No. 2:15-md-02641-DGC

Civil Action No. CV-17-03812-PHX-DGC

WAIVER OF THE SERVICE OF SUMMONS

To: Johnson Law Group

(Name of plaintiff’s attorney or unrepresented plaintiff)

I have received your request to waive service of a summons in this action along with a copy of the complaint, two 

copies of this waiver form, and a prepaid means of returning one signed copy of the form to you.

I, or the entity I represent, agree to save the expense of serving a summons and complaint in this case.

I understand that I, or the entity I represent, will keep all defenses or objections to the lawsuit, the court’s 

jurisdiction, and the venue of the action, but that I waive any objections to the absence of a summons or of service.

I also understand that I, or the entity I represent, must file and serve an answer or a motion under Rule 12 within 

60 days from 10/17/2017, the date when this request was sent (or 90 days if it was sent outside the United States). If I fail 

to do so, a default judgment will be entered against me or the entity I represent.

Date: October 26, 2017 /s/ Richard B. North, Jr.

Signature of the attorney or unrepresented party

C. R. Bard, Inc. and Bard Peripheral

Vascular, Inc.

Printed name of parties waiving service of 

summons

Richard B. North, Jr. (Ga. Bar No. 545599)

Printed Name

Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough, LLP

201 17th St., NW, Suite 1700, Atlantic Station, Atlanta, GA 30363

Address

richard.north@nelsonmullins.com

E-mail Address

(404) 322-6155

Telephone number

Duty to Avoid Unnecessary Expenses of Serving a Summons

Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires certain defendants to cooperate in saving unnecessary expenses of serving a 

summons and complaint. A defendant who is located in the United States and who fails to return a signed waiver of service requested by a plaintiff 

located in the United States will be required to pay the expenses of service, unless the defendant shows good cause for the failure. 

Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 8454 Filed 10/30/17 Page 1 of 2
2

“Good cause” does not include a belief that the lawsuit is groundless, or that it has been brought in an improper venue, or that the court has 

no jurisdiction over this matter or over the defendant or the defendant’s property. 

If the waiver is signed and returned, you can still make these and all other defenses and objections, but you cannot object to the absence of 

a summons or of service. 

If you waive service, then you must, within the time specified on the waiver form, serve an answer or a motion under Rule 12 on the 

plaintiff and file a copy with the court. By signing and returning the waiver form, you are allowed more time to respond than if a summons had been 

served.

Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 8454 Filed 10/30/17 Page 2 of 2