alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
11993.

#### Rountree *v.*The State.

Decided March 8, 1921.

Indictment for burglary; from Floyd superior court — Judge Wright. November 6, 1920.

*Lee J. Langley,*for plaintiff in error.

*O. II. Porter, solicitor-general,*contra.

Luke, J.

1. A ground of a motion for a new trial which complains of the admission of specified testimony must state the name of the witness whose testimony is complained of. *Adams*v. *State,*22 *Ga. App.*252 (95 S. E. 877), and cases cited. Under this ruling the 4th ground of the amendment to the motion for a new trial cannot be considered.

2. The complaint that the court failed to charge upon the law of circumstantial evidence is without merit, since an examination of the court’s charge (sent up in response to an order from this court) shows that the jury were properly instructed upon that subject.

3. Refusal to direct a verdict is never error.

4. The corpus delicti, including the breaking and entering, was sufficiently established by the evidence, which authorized the verdict; and for no reason assigned did the court err in overruling the motion for a new trial.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Broyles, O. J., and Bloodworth, J., concur.*
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

 FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA 

 NORTHERN DIVISION 

SANGERNETTA MASON, : 

 : 

Plaintiff, : 

vs. : CIVIL ACTION 09-0736-WS-M 

 : 

THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, : 

et al., : 

 : 

Defendant. : 

JUDGMENT

It is ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED that this action be and 

is hereby DISMISSED without prejudice. 

DONE this 6th day of July, 2010. 

s/WILLIAM H. STEELE 

CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Case 2:09-cv-00736-WS-M Document 10 Filed 07/06/10 Page 1 of 1
#### Stephen Luis CASTILLO, Plaintiff-Appellant Rodolfo Rivera Munoz, Appellant v. LIMESTONE COUNTY, TEXAS; The State of Texas; The Limestone County Sheriffs Office; Kelly Butler, Limestone County Sheriffs Office Deputy; Flora Flippin; William Flippin, II; John Doe, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 07-50008

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Dec. 26, 2007.

Rodolfo R. Munoz, San Antonio, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellant.

Charles Alfred MacKenzie, Michael W. Dixon, Haley & Olson, Waco, TX, Thomas J. Turner, Office of the Attorney General, Austin, TX, for Defendants-Appellees.

Flora Flippin, Kosse, TX, pro se.

William Flippin, II, Kosse, TX, pro se.

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, STEWART, and ELROD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

*697Appellants appeal the dismissal of Castillo’s, and others’, lawsuit. The district court dismissed most of the claims under Rule 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted; the court abstained from exercising jurisdiction over the request for injunctive relief; and, finally, the court awarded attorneys’ fees to some defendants under 42 U.S.C. § 1988.

This appeal is frivolous. Appellants’ briefs are a rambling diatribe. Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 28(a)(9)(A) requires an appellant’s brief to contain the “appellant’s contentions and the reasons for them, with citations to the authorities and parts of the record on which the appellant relies.” Appellants here offer no cogent argument in their initial brief as to how the district court’s analysis erred, nor do they cite to any relevant case law; Appellants only recite the substance of them historical grievances and reference the allegations from their complaint. By failing to brief adequately any arguments as to how the district court erred, Appellants have abandoned their claims on appeal.1 We therefore AFFIRM the district court’s decision.

Appellants have also filed a motion with this court to “recognize endemic blind racism.” This motion is DENIED.

AFFIRMED; MOTION DENIED.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under *697the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

1

. *See Cinel v. Connick,*15 F.3d 1338, 1345 (5th Cir. 1994) ("An appellant abandons all issues not raised and argued in its initial brief on appeal.... A party who inadequately briefs an issue is considered to have abandoned the claim.”).
Exhibit 10.1 - Amendment to Employment Agreement


Exhibit 10.1


[Cardinal Health, Inc. Letterhead]




August 5, 2015


George S. Barrett
c/o Cardinal Health
7000 Cardinal Place
Dublin, OH 43017




Dear George:


Cardinal Health, Inc. (the “Company”) is pleased to provide you with this letter extending your Employment Agreement with the Company, dated as of September 4, 2012 (the “Agreement”).  This letter modifies the provisions of the Agreement as listed below, with capitalized terms having the meanings ascribed to them in the Agreement:


		
	1.
	Section 2 is amended to provide that the Scheduled End Date is the earlier of the day of the first annual meeting of shareholders of the Company following June 30, 2018 or December 31, 2018.




		
	2.
	Section 3(b)(i) is amended to provide that the Annual Base Salary shall be at a rate of not less than $1,320,000.




		
	3.
	Section 3(b)(ii) is amended to provide that the Target Bonus shall be no less than 150% of your Annual Base Salary.




		
	4.
	Section 3(b)(iii) is amended to provide that the target value of the annual long-term incentive award described therein is $9,500,000.




All other provisions of the Agreement remain in full force and effect.   
    
Please confirm your agreement by signing and returning a copy of this letter to Carole Watkins, Chief Human Resources Officer of the Company, at the Company’s executive offices.  









	
							
	 
	 
	 
	Sincerely,

	 
	 
	 
	 CARDINAL HEALTH, INC

	 
	 
	 
	 

	 
	 
	 
	 
	By:
	/s/ David P. King 

	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	David P. King

	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	Chairman of the Human Resources and Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors

	 
	 
	 
	 
	Date: August 5, 2015








I agree with and accept the foregoing terms.


	
							
	/s/ George S. Barrett
	 
	 
	 

	George S. Barrett
	 
	 
	 

	Date: August 5, 2015
	 
	 
	 







2
```

                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.52

SUMMARY OF ORAL AMENDMENT TO LETTER OF AGREEMENT OF EMPLOYMENT, DATED AUGUST 6,
2003, WITH MONICA SCHULZE-HODGES

Effective, June 15, 2004 and March 22, 2005, Register.com, Inc. amended Ms.
Schulze-Hodges' letter agreement to provide increases to her base salary of
$10,000 and $6,000, respectively, bringing her total base compensation under
Section 2 of her Letter Agreement of Employment, dated as of August 6, 2003 to
$206,000.

Register.com, Inc. further amended Section 3 of Ms. Schulze-Hodges' letter
agreement to modify her bonus eligibility for the year ended December 31, 2004
purusant to which she received a bonus for such year of $106,681.
```
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

June 5, 2024

No. 04

- 23

- 00447

- CR

EX PARTE Hugo Armando ULLOA MON T EJO

From the County Court

, Kinney County, Texas

Trial Court No. 14043CR

Honorable Susan D. Reed , Judge Presiding

ORDER

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, we DISMISS Hugo Armando Ulloa Montejo’s appeal of the denial of his application for pretrial writ of habeas corpus for want of jurisdiction. We further consider Ulloa Montejo’s appeal as a petition for writ of mandamus and

DENY his request for mandamus relief WITHOUT PREJUDICE

. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 52.8(a).

It is so ORDERED on June 5, 2024

.

_____________________________ Patricia O. Alvarez , Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said

court on this 5th day of June, 2024

.

_____________________________ Luz Estrada , Chief Deputy Clerk
#### John Phillips, Appellant, v Katharine T. Carter, Respondent.

[872 NYS2d 22]

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Ira Gammerman, J.H.O.), entered January 2, 2008, which granted defendant’s motion to dismiss the amended complaint, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Plaintiffs claim of tortious interference with prospective economic advantage is insufficient as a matter of law because the allegations in the amended complaint fail to establish that defendant acted solely to harm plaintiff by unlawful means beyond mere self-interest or other economic considerations *(Carvel Corp. v Noonan,*3 NY3d 182 [2004]; *Jacobs v Continuum Health Partners,*7 AD3d 312 [2004]). The allegations in the amended complaint clearly establish that plaintiff had a fee dispute with defendant, and that defendant was advancing her own self-interest in urging a third party, described in the complaint as an “occasional associate” of defendant, not to conduct business with plaintiff until the fee dispute was resolved.

Nor does the amended complaint allege facts showing that defendant’s conduct was otherwise unlawful *(cf. Carvel Corp.,*3 NY3d at 189). While the complaint alleges defendant falsely told the third party that plaintiff had breached his contract and “could not be trusted as a contract partner,” it fails to state a claim for defamation, the only possible tort on the facts alleged. The factual allegations demonstrate that defendant’s statements were either true or unactionable opinion *(see Manfredonia v Weiss,*37 AD3d 286 [2007]; *Silverman v Clark,*35 AD3d 1, 12-13 [2006]). Concur—Mazzarelli, J.E, Friedman, Buckley, Acosta and Freedman, JJ.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

DERIC LAVELLE MAY, :

Plaintiff, :

vs. : CIVIL ACTION 15-0201-WS-C

DR. PAMELA BARBER, et al., :

 Defendant(s). :

ORDER

After due and proper consideration of all portions of this file deemed relevant to 

the issue raised, and there having been no objections filed, the Report and 

Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge made under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) is 

ADOPTED as the opinion of this Court. It is ORDERED that this action be and is 

hereby DISMISSED without prejudice, prior to service of process, pursuant to 28 

U.S.C. § 1915(g).

The Clerk is DIRECTED to send to the Commissioner of the Alabama 

Department of Corrections a copy of the Report and Recommendation recommending 

the dismissal of this action, this Order adopting the Report and Recommendation, and 

the Judgment dismissing this action. 

DONE this 28th day of April, 2016.

s/WILLIAM H. STEELE

CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:15-cv-00201-WS-C Document 6 Filed 04/28/16 Page 1 of 1
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
COMPANY'S CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AND STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO THE COMPANY'S 1ST QUARTER 10-Q FOR
1999.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> USD
       
<S>                                        <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                    3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                           5,759
<SECURITIES>                                    11,393
<RECEIVABLES>                                   45,355
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,115
<INVENTORY>                                     46,286
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               115,014
<PP&E>                                          31,584
<DEPRECIATION>                                  14,291
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 146,524
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           33,595
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           141
<OTHER-SE>                                     112,788
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   146,524
<SALES>                                         44,541
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                50,362
<CGS>                                           24,634
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   29,118
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                14,858
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   6
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  6,568
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,299
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              4,269
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     4,269
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .33
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .32
        

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000840459
<NAME> AEI REAL ESTATE FUND XVIII LTD PARTNERSHIP

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                         612,291
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   12,085
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               624,376
<PP&E>                                      16,443,629
<DEPRECIATION>                             (2,361,451)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              14,706,961
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          398,662
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                  14,308,299
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                14,706,961
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,447,685
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  639,348
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                954,925
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            954,925
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   954,925
<EPS-BASIC>                                      45.42
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    45.42


</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-7227

R. B. BOYD,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

STEPHEN M. DEWALT, Warden, Federal Prison

Camp; UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; DEPARTMENT OF

JUSTICE, Federal Bureau of Prisons,

Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, District

Judge. (CA-02-12-5-H)

Submitted: December 19, 2002 Decided: December 31, 2002

Before WILKINS and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

R. B. Boyd, Appellant Pro Se. Rudolf A. Renfer, Jr., Assistant

United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

R.B. Boyd, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court’s

order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2241

(2000). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.

Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See

Boyd v. Dewalt, No. CA-02-12-5-H (E.D.N.C. July 17, 2002). 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.

AFFIRMED
Exhibit 23.1 Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm The Board of Directors and Stockholder

XM Satellite Radio Holdings Inc. We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements (No. 333-158135, No. 333-152548, No.
139869, No. 333-130949, No. 333-127169, No. 333-115695, No. 333-108387, No. 333-104406, No. 333-85847, No. 333-65602,
and No. 333-64344) on Forms S-3, in the registration statement (No. 333-144845) on Form S-4, and in the registration
statements (No. 333-160386, No. 333-159206, No. 333-158156, No. 333-156441, No. 333-152574, No. 333-149186, No.
333-142726, No. 333-139214, No. 333-133277, No. 333-125118, No. 333-119479, No. 333-111221, No. 333-106020, No.
333-101515, No. 333-100083, No. 333-81914, No. 333-74752, No. 333-65473, No. 333-62818, No. 333-47954, No. 333-31362,
and No. 333-15085 on Forms S-8 of Sirius XM Radio Inc.; and in the registration statement (No. 333-93529) on Form S-1,
in the registration statements (No. 333-130812, No. 333-127270, No. 333-121417, No. 333-121415, No. 333-115326, No.
333-114178, No. 333-106824, No. 333-102966, No. 333-102964, No. 333-89132, No. 333-85804, and No. 333-47570) on Forms
S-3, in the registration statements (No. 333-136131-03, No. 333-115323-01 and No. 333-106823-01) on Forms S-4, and in
the registration statements (No. 333-143460, No. 333-106827, No. 333-97611, No. 333-92049, No. 333-65022, No. 333-65020
and No. 333-42590) on Forms S-8 of XM Satellite Radio Holdings Inc. and subsidiaries of our report dated February 25,
2010, with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of XM Satellite Radio Holdings Inc. as of December 31, 2009 and
2008, and the related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders deficit and comprehensive loss, and cash
flows for the year ended December 31, 2009 and period from August 1, 2008 to December 31, 2008 (Successor periods), and
from January 1, 2008 to July 31, 2008 and for the year ended December 31, 2007 (Predecessor periods), and the related
financial statement schedule, and our report dated February 25, 2010, with respect to the effectiveness of internal
control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2009, which reports appear in the December 31, 2009 annual report
on Form 10-K of XM Satellite Radio Holdings Inc. /s/ KPMG LLP McLean, VA

February 25, 2010
Exhibit 31.2

MANAGEMENT CERTIFICATION

I, James E.
Harris, certify that:



|1. | I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q/A, Amendment No. 1, of Coca-Cola Bottling Co. Consolidated; and
|-- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|2. | Based on my knowledge, this report does 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.
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                     |  |  |  |                                                                   
|-------------------- |  |  |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------
|Date: August 3, 2015 |  |  |  | /s/ James E. Harris                                               
|                     |  |  |  | James E. Harris                                                   
|                     |  |  |  | Senior Vice President, Shared Services and
Chief Financial Officer
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2100 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2100

 To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for District of 
   Columbia, Federal Payment for Judicial Commissions, Commission on 
         Judicial Disabilities and Tenure for fiscal year 2024.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 29, 2023

Mr. Biggs (for himself, Mr. Rosendale, Mr. Gaetz, Mr. Good of Virginia, 
   Mr. Roy, and Mr. Crane) introduced the following bill; which was 
       referred to the Committee on Oversight and Accountability

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for District of 
   Columbia, Federal Payment for Judicial Commissions, Commission on 
         Judicial Disabilities and Tenure for fiscal year 2024.

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

SECTION 1. LIMITATION ON AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FOR DISTRICT OF 
              COLUMBIA, FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR JUDICIAL COMMISSIONS, 
              COMMISSION ON JUDICIAL DISABILITIES AND TENURE FOR FISCAL 
              YEAR 2024.

    Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, amounts authorized 
to be appropriated or otherwise available for District of Columbia, 
Federal Payment for Judicial Commissions, Commission on Judicial 
Disabilities and Tenure for fiscal year 2024 may not exceed $295,000.
                                 <all>
```
**Exhibit** **23.1**








**CONSENT
      OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**











We
      consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on
      Form
      S-8 (No. 333-120141) and Form S-3 (File No. 333-115364) of Cytomedix, Inc.
      of
      our report dated February 23, 2007 (except as to Notes 2, 11, 12 and 13 which
      are as of November 13, 2007), with respect to the balance sheet of Cytomedix,
      Inc. as of December 31, 2006 and the related statements of operations,
      stockholders’ equity, and cash flows for each of the years in the two-year
      period ended December 31, 2006 and the schedule appearing under Item 15(a)(2)
      for 2006 and 2005, which appears on page 26 in this 2007 annual report on Form
      10-K for the year ended December 31, 2007.








/s/
      L J
      Soldinger Associates, LLC





Deer
      Park, Illinois


March
      25,
      2008