alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1

St. Louis County, Missouri, and St. Louis County Drug Task Force were

dismissed from the case and are no longer parties.

2

The Honorable Stephen N. Limbaugh, Sr., United States District Judge for the

Eastern District of Missouri, now retired.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 08-2358

___________

Kevin L. Chambers, *

*

Appellant, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* Eastern District of Missouri.

Michael Pennycook, Agent, St. Louis *

County Drug Task Force; Unknown * [UNPUBLISHED]

Kelling, Officer; Andria Van Mierlo,1

 *

*

Appellees. *

___________

Submitted: October 2, 2008

Filed: October 27, 2008

___________

Before MELLOY, COLLOTON, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Kevin Chambers appeals the district court’s2

 February 2008 interlocutory order

denying him appointed counsel. Upon review for an abuse of discretion, see Phillips

v. Jasper County Jail, 437 F.3d 791, 794 (8th Cir. 2006) (standard of review), we
-2-

clarify that the district court’s denial of appointed counsel is without prejudice, see

Williams v. Carter, 10 F.3d 563, 567 (8th Cir. 1993) (after denying motion for

appointment of counsel, court “should continue to be alert to the possibility that,

because of procedural complexities or other reasons, later developments in the case

may show either that counsel should be appointed, or that strict procedural

requirements should, in fairness, be relaxed to some degree”), and we affirm the order

as clarified. In addition, Chambers’s “motion for remand” is denied as moot.

______________________________
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 22
- 054 3 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. JUSTIN GUY ZENO SHAWN WOLF MASON,

Defendant and Appellant.

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including March 1 , 2023 , within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

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

January 23 2023

01/23/2023

Case Number: DA 22-0543
Order issued May 27, 2015

S

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

________________________________________

No. 05-14-00554-CR

No. 05-14-00555-CR

________________________________________

JARMAL DEON SPEED, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

O R D E R

Before Justices Bridges, Lang, and Schenck

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, we GRANT the December 12, 2014 motion of 

Nanette Hendrickson for leave to withdraw as appointed counsel on appeal. We DIRECT the 

Clerk of the Court to remove Nanette Hendrickson as counsel of record for appellant. We 

DIRECT the Clerk of the Court to send a copy of this order and all future correspondence to 

Jarmal Deon Speed, TDCJ No. 1926279, Daniel Unit, 938 South FM 1673, Snyder, Texas, 

79549.

/ Douglas S. Lang/

DOUGLAS S. LANG

JUSTICE
NO. 07-01-0174-CR

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILLO

PANEL A

SEPTEMBER 28, 2001

______________________________

CHASITY RENEE UPTON, APPELLANT

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE

_________________________________

FROM THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 2 OF POTTER COUNTY;

NO. 93,213; HONORABLE PAMELA C. SIRMON, JUDGE

_______________________________

Before BOYD, C.J., and REAVIS and JOHNSON, JJ.

Appellant Chasity Renee Upton filed a Motion to Dismiss Appeal on September 24,

2001, averring that she no longer wishes to prosecute her appeal. The Motion to Dismiss

is signed by both appellant and her attorney. 

Without passing on the merits of the case, appellant’s motion for voluntary dismissal

is granted and the appeal is hereby dismissed. Tex. R. App. P. 42.2. Having dismissed
2

the appeal at appellant’s personal request, no motion for rehearing will be entertained and

our mandate will issue forthwith. 

Phil Johnson

 Justice

Do not publish.
### T E X A S C O U R T O F A P P E A L S , T H I R D D I S T R I C T , A T A U S T I N

NO. 03-14-00176- CV
Anthony L eo Sheridan, App ellant

v. The Of fi ce of the At torney G eneral, Appellee

F ROM CO UNTY COURT AT LAW NO . 4, W ILLIAM SO N COUNTY , NO . 12- 0872 -F C2 1

M E M O R A N D U M O PI N I O N Anthony L eo Sherida

n appea ls the trial cour

t’s order adjudicatinghim in contempt for failure to pay court-or dere d child support. Gene rally , a contempt order is revie wable only by
a petition for writ of habea s corpus (if the person in contempt is co n fi n ed ) or a petition for
wr i t o f mandamus (if no confine ment is involved). Hutchins v. State , No. 12-09-00258- CV , 2010 Tex. App. L EXI S 6649, at *3 (Tex. App.—Tyler Aug. 18, 2010, no pet.) (mem. o p .) (citing In re Henry , 154 S.W .3d 594, 596 (Tex. 2005) ; Cadle Co. v

. Lobingier , 50 S.W .3d 662, 671 (Tex. App.—For

t Worth 2001, pet. denied) (c i t i ng In re Long , 984 S.W .2d 623, 625 (Tex. 1999) (orig
. proce eding )))
. Appellate courts do not have jurisdiction to revie w contempt order s on direc t appea l.

This appea l challeng es an order rende red J une 10, 2011, in the 126th J udicial District Court 1 of Travis County , th e Ho n o rable L ora L ivingston, J udg e Presiding. The case was subsequently transfe rre d to Wi lliamson Count y .Texas Animal Health Comm’n v. Nunley , 647 S.W .2d 951, 9 5 2 (T ex . 1983). Acc ording ly , we

dismiss this appeal for

want of jurisdiction. 2

__________________________________________

Melissa Goodwin, Jus tice Be fore Chief Justice Jones, J ustices Rose and Goodw in Dismissed for Want of J urisdiction Filed: Nove mber 14, 2014

S h eridan has filed an application for writ of habea s corpus, In re Sheridan , 2 No. 03-14-00589- CV, which we g rant in an opinion issued this same date
. 2
#### The Standard Wagon Co. *v.*Lowry, surviving partner.

The plaintiff’s debtor being, at the time of the service of the garnishment, in the employment of the garnishee at a fixed rate of compensation per month, which was payable at the end of each month; and the garnishee not being indebted to the debtor at the time-of the service, but being then his creditor for overpayments or advances made to him on general account; and this state of things, by reason of further dealings and advance payments, continuing through several succeeding months, and up to the time the garnishment was answered, at which time there was still a balance in favor of the garnishee, so that he never was at any time after the service of the garnishment indebted to the plaintiff’s debtor in any sum whatever, but during the whole period was his creditor, having paid him in advance for each month’s services before they were rendered, a judgment against the garnishee on these facts was contrary to law, to evidence, and to right. And there being no dispute as to the facts, direction is given that the judgment lie set aside and the garnishee discharged.

June 30, 1894.

Garnishment. Before Judge Lumpkin. Pulton superior court. September term, 1898.

B. P. Abbott, for plaintiff' in error.

Kontz & Conyers, *contra.*

*Judgment reversed.*
## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 01-1304

___________ Taye Sillga, * * Appellant, * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the District v. * of Minnesota. * Fairview University Medical Center, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellee. *

___________ Submitted: October 18, 2001 Filed: October 26, 2001

___________ Before BYE, FAGG, and RILEY, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. In August 1999, Taye Sillga filed this action against his former employer, Fairview University Medical Center, alleging sexual harassment and wrongful termination. In the sixteen months that followed, Sillga did not respond to or initiate any discovery. He also twice refused opposing counsel’s offer to dismiss without prejudice and waive the statute of limitations if the case was refiled within 60 days. In August 2000, Sillga's attorney withdrew, citing Sillga's uncooperative behavior as the reason for withdrawal. In September 2000, Fairview moved to dismiss with prejudice. The district court ordered that unless Sillga found a new lawyer or-2- addressed the merits of the motion to dismiss, the motion would be granted. When Sillga failed to comply and instead requested another extension of 60 days, the district court dismissed the case with prejudice. On appeal, Sillga contends the district court committed clear error in finding he failed to prosecute his case and disregarded court orders. See Rodgers v. Curators of the University of Missouri , 135 F.3d 1216, 1219 (8 thCir. 1998). In support of this contention, Sillga has submitted a motion to supplement the record with his affidavit describing his former attorney's allegedly neglectful conduct. Because Sillga knew of his attorney's conduct during the district court proceedings but did not make his concerns part of the record, the interests of justice do not require us to grant Sillga’s motion to supplement the record. See Miller v. Benson , 51 F.3d 166, 168 (8 th Cir. 1995). Further, Sillga argues the district court abused its discretion in deciding that dismissal with prejudice was the appropriate sanction. See Rodgers , 135 F.3d at 1219. Given Sillga’s failure to prosecute his lawsuit or comply with the district court's orders, we conclude the court acted within its discretion when dismissing Sillga's case with prejudice.
We thus affirm the decision of the district court. A true copy.
Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 94 (Monday, May 18, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 23212]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-11432]



[[Page 23212]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-63,754]


Lane Funiture Industries, Inc., Including Workers whose UI Wages 
Were Paid by Action Transport, Belden, MS; Amended Certification 
Regarding Eligibility To Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance and 
Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance

    In accordance with Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 
2273), and Section 246 of the Trade Act of 1974 (26 U.S.C. 2813), as 
amended, the Department of Labor issued a Certification Regarding 
Eligibility to Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance and Alternative 
Trade Adjustment Assistance on August 20, 2008, applicable to workers 
of Lane Furniture Industries, Inc., Belden, Mississippi. The notice was 
published in the Federal Register on September 3, 2008 (73 FR 51529).
    At the request of the company official, the Department reviewed the 
certification for workers of the subject firm. The workers were engaged 
in the production of upholstered furniture.
    New information provided to the Department shows that some workers 
of the subject firm were former workers from Action Transport that were 
hired permanently by the subject firm. These workers had their wages 
reported under the Unemployment Insurance (UI) tax account for Action 
Transport.
    Accordingly, the Department is amending this certification to 
properly reflect this matter.
    The intent of the Department's certification is to include all 
workers of Lane Furniture Industries, Inc. who were adversely affected 
by increased imports of upholstered furniture.
    The amended notice applicable to TA-W-63,754 is hereby issued as 
follows:

    ``All workers of Lane Furniture Industries, Inc., including 
workers whose wages were paid by Action Transport, Belden, 
Mississippi, who became totally or partially separated from 
employment on or after July 28, 2007, through August 20, 2010, are 
eligible to apply for adjustment assistance under Section 223 of the 
Trade Act of 1974, and are also eligible to apply for alternative 
trade adjustment assistance under Section 246 of the Trade Act of 
1974.''

    Signed at Washington, DC, this 1st day of May 2009.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E9-11432 Filed 5-15-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.1
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  1.
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934; and2.
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
  By: /s/ IAN G. COCKWELLIan G. CockwellPresident and Chief Executive OfficerBy: /s/ PAUL G. KERRIGANPaul G. KerriganExecutive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
##### 



UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
 Washington, D.C. 20549
 FORM 8-K
 CURRENT REPORT
Pursuant to Section 13 OR 15(d) of The Securities Exchange Act of 1934
  INCO LIMITED
  CANADA
    
    1-1143
    
    98-0000676(Province or other jurisdiction of
incorporation or organization)
    
    (Commission File Number)
    
    (I.R.S. Employer Identification
Number (if applicable))
 145 King Street West, Suite 1500,
Toronto, Ontario M5H 4B7
(416) 361-7511
 Form 8-K
 þ
 o
 o
 o




---



##### 



Item 1.01 Entry into a Material Definitive Agreement.
     Important Legal Information




---



##### 



Item 9.01 Financial Statements and Exhibits.
 2.1
    
    Fourth Amending Agreement, dated May 13, 2006, between Inco Limited and Falconbridge Limited.




---



##### 



SIGNATURES
  INCO LIMITEDBy:
    
    /s/ Simon A. FishSimon A. FishExecutive Vice-President, General Counsel and
SecretaryDate: May 15, 2006




---



##### 



EXHIBIT INDEX
 Exhibit No.
    
    Description of Exhibit2.1
    
    Fourth Amending Agreement, dated May 13, 2006, between Inco Limited and Falconbridge Limited.
#### Jaiden Diaz, an Infant, by His Mother and Natural Guardian, Melissa Diaz, et al., Respondents, v Lilly Alcira Reinersman, as Administratrix of the Estate of Gerald T. Reinersman, M.D., Deceased, et al., Appellants.

[973 NYS2d 919]

*617Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Laura G. Douglas, J.), entered June 8, 2012, which, insofar as appealed from, denied defendants’ cross motion for summary judgment and, upon re-argument, denied defendants’ earlier cross motion to compel disclosure, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The motion court providently exercised its discretion in considering arguments addressed for the first time on reply, in support of reargument, to which defendants had an opportunity to respond *(see Rostant v Swersky,*79 AD3d 456 [1st Dept 2010]). Upon reargument, defendants’ failure to annex “an affirmation that counsel has conferred with counsel for the opposing party in a good faith effort to resolve the issues raised by the motion” (22 NYCRR 202.7 [a]) was properly found to warrant denial of the cross motion to compel *(see Molyneaux v City of New York,*64 AD3d 406 [1st Dept 2009]).

We have considered appellants’ remaining arguments and find them unavailing. Concur — Tom, J.P., Andrias, Saxe, Freedman and Richter, JJ.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

EASTERN DISTRICT 

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, 

 Respondent 

 v. 

WILLIAM HLUSHMANUK, 

 Petitioner 

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 541 EAL 2015 

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Superior Court 

ORDER 

PER CURIAM 

AND NOW, this 22nd day of December, 2015, the Petition for Allowance of 

Appeal is DENIED.
Dated:  3/27/2008                                                                       By: /s/  E. Todd Whittemore                                                                  Title:Executive Vice President, Master ServicingAurora Loan Services LLC,   as Master ServicerI, E. Todd Whittemore, certify that:1.  I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of Lehman XS Trust, Series 2007-4N (the "Exchange Act periodic reports");2.  Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do 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;3.  Based on my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and other information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;4.  I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the servicers and based on my knowledge and the compliance reviews conducted in preparing the servicer compliance statements required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicers have fulfilled their obligations under the servicing agreements in all material respects; and5.  All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwise disclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliance described in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.E. Todd Whittemore**Exhibit 31 : Rule 13a-14(d)/15d-14(d) Certifications**(Senior Officer in charge of the servicing function of Aurora Loan Services LLC, in its capacity as master servicer)Name:In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties:Countrywide Home Loans Servicing LP, as ServicerDeutsche Bank National Trust Company, as CustodianGMAC Bank, as Sub-Contractor for Residential Funding Company, LLCGMAC Mortgage, LLC, as Subservicer for Residential Funding Company, LLCIndyMac Bank, F.S.B., as ServicerNewport Management Corporation, as Sub-Contractor for IndyMac Bank, F.S.B.Residential Funding Company, LLC, as ServicerU.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee, Paying Agent and CustodianWells Fargo Bank, N.A., as Custodian
EX-35.3
(logo) CHASE


SERVICER COMPLIANCE STATEMENT


RE: BNC Mortgage Loan Trust 2007-l Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates. Series
2007-1: This Securitization Servicing Agreement (this "Agreement"), entered into
as of the 1st day of February, 2007, by and among Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc.,
a Delaware corporation (the "Seller"), JPMorgan Chase Bank, National
Association, a national banking association (the "Servicer"), Aurora Loan
Services LLC, as master servicer (the "Master Servicer") and acknowledged by
U.S. Bank National Association, as trustee (the "Trustee") under the Trust
Agreement

The undersigned, a duly authorized officer of JPMorgan Chase Bank, National
Association, as servicer (the "Servicer") pursuant to the BNC Mortgage Loan
Trust 2007-1 Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2007-1 (The
"Agreement"), does hereby certify that:

(1) A review of the activities of the Servicer during the calendar year ending
December 31, 2007 and of the performance of the Servicer under the Agreement has
been made under my supervision; and

(2) To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has
fulfilled all its obligations under the Agreement in all material respects
throughout such year.

Date: 02/28/2008

JPMorgan Chase Bank,
National Association,
as Servicer

By: /s/ David Lowman
Name: David Lowman
Title: Executive Vice President
EXHIBIT 31.2

CERTIFICATIONS

I, Perry J. Grace, certify that:

1.	I have reviewed this quarterly on Form 10-Q of ZiLOG, Inc.;

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;

3.	Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all
material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in
this report;

4.	The registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and
procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

(a)	Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed
under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made
known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

(b)	Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our
conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based
on such evaluation; and

(c)	Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the
registrant's most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal
control over financial reporting; and

5.	The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over
financial reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of directors (or person performing the
equivalent functions):

(a)	All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting
which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information;
and

(b)	Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the
registrant's internal control over financial reporting.



|                       |                          
|---------------------- | -------------------------
|Date: February 9, 2007 | By:    /s/ Perry J. Grace

| |                                           
| | ------------------------------------------
| |                                           
| | Perry J. Grace                            
| | Vice President and Chief Financial Officer

---