alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Minton *v.*Moore.

In error.

*Tuesday, August*22.

IF the subject of difference in a suit pending in the Circuit Court be referred to arbitration, the award, if no time for making it be fixed, should be returned to the next term of the Court; and if it be not so returned, the plaintiff may have the cause tried as if no reference had been made.

If neither party, on appeal to the Circuit Court, require a jury, the cause may be tried without a jury, though the amount in controversy exceed 20 dollars. Rev. Code, 1831, p. 318. (Acc. Rev. Stat. 1838, p. 384.)

Dewey, J., having been concerned as counsel, was absent.
##### 



(i)
    
    AT Holdings Corporation (the Company) is merged or consolidated or
reorganized into or with another corporation or other legal person, and as a result of
such merger, consolidation or reorganization less than a majority of the combined
voting power of the then-outstanding securities of such corporation or person
immediately after such transaction are held in the aggregate by the holders of Voting
Stock (as that term is hereafter defined) of the Company immediately prior to such
transaction;(ii)
    
    A majority of the Companys Voting Stock is transferred to a corporation or
other legal person other than the current holders of the Companys Voting Stock;(iii)
    
    The Company sells or otherwise transfers all or substantially all of its
assets to any other corporation or other legal person and less than a majority of the
combined voting power of the then-outstanding securities of such corporation or person
immediately after such sale or transfer is held in the aggregate by the holders of
Voting Stock of the Company immediately prior to such sale or transfer;(iv)
    
    If there is a report filed on Schedule 13D or 14D-1 pursuant to the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (the Act), disclosing that any person (under Section
 Argo-Tech Corporation




---



##### 



13(d)(3) or Section 14(d)(2) of the Act) has become the beneficial owner (under Rule
13d-3) of securities representing 20% or more of the then-outstanding Voting Stock
of the Company; or(v)
    
    The Company shall file a report or proxy statement with the SEC pursuant to the
Act disclosing under Item 1 of Form 8-K thereunder or Item 6(e) of Schedule 14A
thereunder (or any successor schedule, etc.) that a Change in Control of the Company
has or may have occurred or will or may occur in the future pursuant to any
then-existing contract or transaction.
      ARGO-TECH CORPORATIONBy
    /s/ Frances S. St. ClairFrances S. St. ClairIts:
    

    Executive Vice President andChief Financial Officer




/s/ Michael S. LipscombMichael S. Lipscomb
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Abby Graf","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/agraf\/","title":"Crew Flight Test: The Astronauts","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"keMaT03dzd\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/podcasts\/houston-we-have-a-podcast\/crew-flight-test-the-astronauts\/\">Crew Flight Test: The Astronauts<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/podcasts\/houston-we-have-a-podcast\/crew-flight-test-the-astronauts\/embed\/#?secret=keMaT03dzd\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Crew Flight Test: The Astronauts” — NASA\" data-secret=\"keMaT03dzd\" 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\/2024\/04\/332-featured-img.png?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":338}
**INTRODUCTION**

The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania has adopted new Rules 182 and 1182. The Rules are effective October 1, 2016.

**EXPLA NA** **TORY REPORT SEPTEMBER 2014**  These new rules were prompted by the Recommendation of the Interbranch Commission on Juvenile Justice (ICJJ). On page 46 of the ICJJ Report, the ICJJ recommended the need for “masters to be properly educated about the Juvenile Act, child development, and problems unique to the relationship between children and their families.” Further, the ICJJ recommended that the Supreme Court develop mandatory continuing education standards for juvenile masters. See ICJJ Report at pg. 46.
In addition to the recom mended educational requirements by the ICJJ for “delinquency” matters of juvenile court, the Committee believes educational requirements are just as important and necessary for “dependency” matters. The purpose of these rule additions is to provide a m inimum standard for education, experience, and training of masters. Judicial districts are encouraged to provide additional educational and training courses for its masters. **Rules 182 and 1182 -**  **Qualifications of Master** These new rules govern the qual if ications of masters. Prior to presiding over juvenile cases, these attorneys must be a member, in good standing, of the Bar of this Commonwealth, have been licensed to practice law for five consecutive years, and have completed the initial basic traini ng course(s). This basic knowledge of juvenile law and experience as an attorney is essential before an attorney may be appointed as a master. In addition, these attorneys should have experience in diverse cases. It would be beneficial if the attorney handled juvenile cases prior to becoming a master with experience with several different types of allegations and at different stages of the proce ss, including detention or shelter

- care hearings, adjudicatory hearings, transfer or permanency hearings, dispositional hearings, and dispositional review hearings. After the initial training requirement has been met, attorneys are required to continue their legal education by attending a mandatory course(s) offered by the Juvenile Court Judges’ Commission or the Office of Children and Families in the Courts. Because masters are judicial officers, this requirement is an additional requirement to the Pa.R .C.L.E. because it mandates education specifically in juvenile delinquency or dependency law; whereas the Pa.R.C.L.E. do not mandate specific training areas. See paragraph (B). Six hours of this specific education must be completed every two years.2

Howe ver, these hours will count towards the twelve hours of continuing legal education mandated each year by Pa.R.C.L.E. 105. Pursuant to paragraph (C), attorneys must attest that they have met the requirements of this rule prior to appointment as master to preside over juvenile matters. Every two years after the initial appointment as master, masters must submit a new affidavit attesting that they have met the continuing education requirements of paragraph (B).
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE Northern District of Illinois − CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 6.3.3

Eastern Division

Biscuit Cafe Inc., et al.

Plaintiff,

v. Case No.: 1:20−cv−02514

Honorable Andrea R. Wood

Society Insurance, Inc.

Defendant.

NOTIFICATION OF DOCKET ENTRY

This docket entry was made by the Clerk on Monday, July 6, 2020:

 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Andrea R. Wood: The initial status hearing

set for 7/8/2020 will proceed by telephone conference. To ensure public access to court

proceedings, members of the public and media may call in to listen to telephonic hearings.

The call−in number is (888) 557−8511 and the access code is 3547847. Counsel of record

will receive an email 30 minutes prior to the start of the telephonic hearing with

instructions to join the call. Persons granted remote access to proceedings are reminded of

the general prohibition against photographing, recording, and rebroadcasting of court

proceedings. Violation of these prohibitions may result in sanctions, including removal of

court−issued media credentials, restricted entry to future hearings, denial of entry to future

hearings, or any other sanctions deemed necessary by the Court. Mailed notice(dal, )

ATTENTION: This notice is being sent pursuant to Rule 77(d) of the Federal Rules of

Civil Procedure or Rule 49(c) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. It was

generated by CM/ECF, the automated docketing system used to maintain the civil and

criminal dockets of this District. If a minute order or other document is enclosed, please

refer to it for additional information.

For scheduled events, motion practices, recent opinions and other information, visit our

web site at www.ilnd.uscourts.gov.

Case: 1:20-cv-02514 Document #: 36 Filed: 07/06/20 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:646
9788.

#### Alley *v.*Elliott-Madison Company.

Wade, C. J.

1. “The plaintiff in certiorari shall cause written notice to be given to the opposite party in interest, his agent, or attorney, of the sanction of the writ of certiorari, and also the time and place of hearing, at least ten days before the sitting of the court to which the same shall be returnable, and in default of such notice (unless prevented by unavoidable cause) the certiorari shall be dismissed.” Civil Code, § 5190.

2. While it has been held that the following acknowledgment, endorsed on the petition and signed by counsel for the defendant in certiorari, ' was sufficient evidence that he “not only waived written notice of the time and place of hearing, but also received due and legal notice of the judge’s sanction,” to wit: “Due and legal service of the within petition for certiorari and certiorari acknowledged; notice of time and place of hearing waived” *(Asher*v. *Cape,*95 *Ga.*31, 22 S. E. 41), in this case no written notice was given to the opposite party in interest, his agent, or attorney, of the sanction of the'writ of ‘certiorari and of the time and place of hearing, and the only acknowledgment or waiver of notice made by counsel for the defendant in certiorari was the following: “Due and legal notice of the sanction of the writ of certiorari in the foregoing ease acknowledged.” No reference whatever was made therein to “the time and place of hearing,” and the acknowledgement of notice of'the sanction of the writ was therefore insufficient to prevent the dismissal of the certiorari upon motion. The cases of *McAlister*v. *State,*77 *Ga.*599 (3 S. E. 163), and *American Bonding*
      *498& *Surety Co. v.*Adams, 124 *Ga.*510 (52 S. E. 622), are not in conflict with this ruling.

Decided July 11, 1918.

Certiorari; from Fulton superior court—Judge Bell. April 8, 1918.

*B. B. Jackson,*for plaintiff in error.

*Emile Breibenbucher, M. Eerzberg,*contra.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Jenkins and*Luke, *JJ., concur.*
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> BD
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
unaudited Consolidated Balance Sheet as of June 30, 1999 and the unaudited
Consolidated Statement of Operations for the six months ended June 30,
1999, which are contained in the body of the accompanying Form 10-Q and is
qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>

<MULTIPLIER>                               1,000

<S>                                        <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                              6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                          38,094
<RECEIVABLES>                                   49,963
<SECURITIES-RESALE>                                  0
<SECURITIES-BORROWED>                                0
<INSTRUMENTS-OWNED>                            131,894
<PP&E>                                           6,516
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 231,721
<SHORT-TERM>                                         0
<PAYABLES>                                      39,600
<REPOS-SOLD>                                         0
<SECURITIES-LOANED>                                  0
<INSTRUMENTS-SOLD>                               2,630
<LONG-TERM>                                      1,639
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       208,680
<OTHER-SE>                                     (20,828)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   231,721
<TRADING-REVENUE>                               12,865
<INTEREST-DIVIDENDS>                             4,919
<COMMISSIONS>                                    6,568
<INVESTMENT-BANKING-REVENUES>                   21,113
<FEE-REVENUE>                                    4,859
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,001
<COMPENSATION>                                  36,347
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  5,894
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       5,894
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     5,894
<EPS-BASIC>                                     0.12
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.12



</TABLE>
IV

House Calendar No. 94

105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. RES. 238

[Report No. 105–263]

Waiving points of order against the conference report to accompany the

bill (H.R. 2209) making appropriations for the Legislative Branch for

the fiscal year ending September 30, 1998, and for other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

SEPTEMBER 23, 1997

Mr. MCINNIS, from the Committee on Rules, reported the following resolution;

which was referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed

RESOLUTION

Waiving points of order against the conference report to

accompany the bill (H.R. 2209) making appropriations

for the Legislative Branch for the fiscal year ending

September 30, 1998, and for other purposes.

1 Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it

2 shall be in order to consider the conference report to ac3 company the bill (H.R. 2209) making appropriations for

4 the Legislative Branch for the fiscal year ending Septem5 ber 30, 1998, and for other purposes. All points of order
2

HRES 238 RH

1 against the conference report and against its consideration

2 are waived.

House Calendar No. 94

105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. RES. 238

[Report No. 105–263]

RESOLUTION

Waiving points of order against the conference reother purposes. fiscal year ending September 30, 1998, and for appropriations for the Legislative Branch for the port to accompany the bill (H.R. 2209) making

SEPTEMBER 23, 1997

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be

printed
9773.

#### Hicks *v.*Lindsey.

Luke, J.

1. Where a petition for certiorari is sanctioned by the judge of the superior court and duly served upon the trial court, requiring an answer thereto, and the presiding judge of the trial court answers that because of the length of time since trial of the case he can not and does not remember the evidence adduced before him on the trial of the case, and can not and does not by such answer verify the truth of the testimony as set out in the petition for certiorari, the judge of the superior court can do nothing other than overrule the certiorari. The ordinary of Berrien county, whose judgment is complained of in the petition for certiorari, states in' his answer that he can not and does not remember the testimony adduced on the trial of the case. At whatever disadvantage the petitioner may be placed, no exception or traverse, to such an answer can avail him anything. *Colbert*v. *State.*118 *Ga.*302 (45 S. E. 403); *Gilmore*v. *Georgian Co.,*17 *Ga. App.*759 (88 S. E. 416).

2. The only question passed upon in this case, in view of the note of the judge in the matter of taxing costs, is the question raised upon the *675judgment overruling the certiorari. The court did not err in overruling the certiorari.

Decided October 15, 1918.

Certiorari; from Berrien superior court—Judge Thomas. April 19, 1918. (See former decision, *21 Ga. App.*319.)

*B. A. Hendricks,*for plaintiff in error. *J. P. Knight*contra.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Wade, O. J., and Jenlcins, J., concur.*
9098.

#### Hancock *v.*Kennedy.

Decided April 9, 1918.

ítule for contempt; .from Wilcox superior court—Judge Crum. June 18, 1917.

*M. B. Gannon, Bldridge Outls,*for plaintiff in error.

*J. T.*Hill, contra.

Jenkins, J.

1. Proceedings for contempt are of two classes, punitive and remedial. A proceeding of the former class is intended to punish the offender for a past act of omission or commission which has disturbed the regular proceedings of the court, interfered with its proper func-' tioning, resisted its authority, or reflected contempt upon it, and the authorized penalty in such a case is that prescribed by section 4849 (5) of the Civil Code of 1910; the latter or remedial proceeding is instituted to preserve and enforce the rights of private parties, and may be resorted to as a means of compelling obedience to such court orders or duties as the offenders may wilfully or fraudulently fail or refuse to perform; and in such cases of continuing contempt it is within the power of competent courts to imprison the refractory party until he shall have obeyed the precept. Cobb v. *Black,*34 *Ga.*162, 166 (2); *Ryan*v. *Kingsbery,*89 *Ga.*228 (4) (15 S. E. 302); *Drakeford v. Adams,*98 *Ga.*722, 724 (25 S. E. 833); *Tindall*v. *Nisbet,*113 *Ga.*1114 (4, *b),*1115 (39 S. E 450, 55 L. R. A. 225).

2. Under both the pleadings and the evidence in this case, the proceeding was punitive in its nature, and sought to charge the respondent clerk with past and completed acts of omission and commission in the performance of his official duties; the pleadings negative any charge, and the proof any act, of a continuing breach of official duty, such as it lay within the power of respondent to rectify. The judgment as entered by the court was therefore illegal.

*Judgment ■reversed.*

*Wade, O. J., and Luke, J., concur.*
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WESTERN DISTRICT

VITO A. PELINO,

Appellant

v.

JOHN E. WETZEL AND ROBERT 

GILMORE,

Appellees

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 10 WAP 2020

Appeal from the Order of the 

Commonwealth Court entered April 

20, 2020 at No. 92 MD 2019.

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 20th day of January, 2021, the Order of the Commonwealth Court 

is AFFIRMED.
IV

House Calendar No. 41

105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. RES. 160

[Report No. 105–117]

Waiving points of order against the conference report to accompany the

concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 84) establishing the congressional

budget for the United States Government for fiscal year 1998 and

setting forth appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal years 1999, 2000,

2001, and 2002.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JUNE 4, 1997

Mr. SOLOMON, from the Committee on Rules, reported the following resolution; which was referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed

RESOLUTION

Waiving points of order against the conference report to

accompany the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 84)

establishing the congressional budget for the United

States Government for fiscal year 1998 and setting forth

appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal years 1999, 2000,

2001, and 2002.

1 Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it

2 shall be in order to consider the conference report to ac3 company the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 84) es-
2

HRES 160 RH

1 tablishing the congressional budget for the United States

2 Government for fiscal year 1998 and setting forth appro3 priate budgetary levels for fiscal years 1999, 2000, 2001,

4 and 2002. All points of order against the conference report

5 and against its consideration are waived. The conference

6 report shall be considered as read. The conference report

7 shall be debatable for one hour equally divided and con8 trolled by chairman and ranking minority member of the

9 Committee on the Budget.

House Calendar No. 41

105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. RES. 160

[Report No. 105–117]

RESOLUTION

Waiving points of order against the conference re2001, and 2002. budgetary levels for fiscal years 1999, 2000, cal year 1998 and setting forth appropriate budget for the United States Government for fis- Con. Res. 84) establishing the congressional port to accompany the concurrent resolution (H.

JUNE 4, 1997

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be

printed