alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit ______________________ 

SOUTHERN SNOW MANUFACTURING CO., INC., 

PARASOL FLAVORS, LLC, SIMEON, INC., PLUM

STREET SNOBALLS, THEODORE EISENMANN, 

RAGGS SUPPLY, LP, SPECIAL T ICE CO., INC., 

SNOW INGREDIENTS, INC., VAN'S SNOWBALLS,

Plaintiffs

HANOVER INSURANCECOMPANY,

Plaintiff-Appellant

BANISTER & CO., INC., MILTON G. WENDLING, 

JR., DOTY MANAGEMENT, LLC, JULIE K. DOTY, 

RON ROBINSON,

Counterclaim Defendants

v.

SNOWIZARD HOLDINGS, INC., SNOWIZARD 

EXTRACTS, INC., SNOWIZARD SUPPLIES, INC.,

Defendants

SNOWIZARD, INC., RONALD R. SCIORTINO,

Defendants-Cross-Appellants

______________________ 

2014-1389, 2014-1698

______________________ 

Appeals from the United States District Court for the 

Eastern District of Louisiana in Nos. 2:06-cv-09170-NJB-
 

SS, 2:09-cv-3394-NJB-SS, 2:10-cv-0791-NJB-SS, 2:11-cv1499-NJB-SS, Judge Nannette Jolivette Brown.

______________________ 

JUDGMENT

______________________ 

JOHN WILLIAM WATERS, JR., Bienvenu, Foster, Ryan & 

O’Bannon, LLC, New Orleans, LA, argued for plaintiffappellant. 

JACK EDWARD MORRIS, Attorney at Law, Metairie, LA, 

argued for defendants-cross-appellants. 

______________________ 

THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is

ORDERED and ADJUDGED: 

 PER CURIAM (PROST, Chief Judge, CLEVENGER and 

MOORE, Circuit Judges).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

Each party shall bear its own costs.

 ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT

 July 13, 2015 /s/ Daniel E. O’Toole 

 Date Daniel E. O’Toole 

 Clerk of Court
FIFTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

Case No. 5D2023-1990 

L.T. Case No. 2020-CF-1603

_____________________________

CHRISTOPHER K. PLEDGER,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Clay County,

Hon. Don H. Lester, Judge.

Matthew J. Metz, Public Defender, and Susan A. Fagan, Assistant 

Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Julian E. Markham,

Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

August 13, 2024

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

EDWARDS, C.J., and WALLIS and MACIVER, JJ., concur.
2

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________
Exhibit 10.1 Schedule 4.21 Subordianted Debt






SCHEDULE 4.21


The Borrower's $57.5 million aggregate principal amount of 3.25% Convertible Senior Subordinated Notes due 2017, issued pursuant to the Indenture, dated September 11, 2012, among the Borrower, the guarantors named therein and U.S. Bank National Association, as trustee.
The Borrower's $86.3 million aggregate principal amount of 3.0% Convertible Senior Subordinated Notes due 2018, issued pursuant to the Indenture, dated March 11, 2013, among the Borrower, the guarantors named therein and U.S. Bank National Association, as trustee.
#### RIORDAN v. FERGUSON, Federal Housing Administrator (INTER-COUNTY TITLE GUARANTY & MORTGAGE CO., Third Party Defendant).

District Court, S. D. New York.

Feb. 10, 1942.

See also, D.C., 42 F.Supp. 47.

Herbert Noble, Jr., of New York City, for plaintiff.

Mathias F. Correa, U. S. Atty., of New York City (Arnold C. Stream, Asst. U. S. Atty., of New York City, of counsel), for third party plaintiff.

Mitchell & Phelan, of New York City (James G. Mitchell, of New York City, of counsel), for third party defendant.

MANDELBAUM, District Judge.

This is an executor’s suit to foreclose a mortgage on certain property owned by the Federal Housing Administrator (the party defendant). The defendant, Inter-County Title Guaranty & Mortgage Company insured the title to the premises.

Plaintiff has moved to strike out certain interrogatories propounded to him by Inter-County Title Guaranty & Mortgage Company, the defendant herein.

*350The Objections to Interrogatories 7 to 11 Inclusive.

It is urged that these interrogatories pertain to the defense of laches; that this defense is insufficient in law, and consequently, the interrogatories propounded are not relevant to the issues. The objections are overruled. This defense, until stricken, is valid. If the defense should subsequently be stricken out, steps may then be taken, either at the trial or prior thereto, to preclude the admission of the answers to these interrogatories into evidence.

The Objections to Interrogatories 44 to 53 Inclusive.

 It is contended that the information sought to be obtained concerns matters of public record which can be obtained by the defendant, and that it is also within the knowledge of the defendant. The objections are overruled. Defendant may make inquiries of the plaintiff with respect to such matters. Nakken Patents Corp. v. Rabinowitz, D.C., 1 F.R.D. 90; Kingsway Press, Inc., v. Farrell Pub. Corp., D.C. 30 F.Supp. 775. As to those matters which the plaintiff cannot readily furnish information and details, he may so state under oath. R.C.A. Mfg. Co., Inc., v. Decca Records, Inc., D.C., 1 F.R.D. 433.

Objections to interrogatories 4, 5 and 6 have been withdrawn.

One other point requires brief discussion. It is submitted by plaintiff’s attorney that the plaintiff is too ill, both physically and mentally to answer any of the interrogatories. That a Miss Patterson, a former bookkeeper of the deceased, be required to answer the questions in lieu of the plaintiff. This request is opposed on the ground that the court lacks power to order this substitution.

I find it unnecessary to pass upon this question since I feel that no competent proof has been presented to satisfy the court that the plaintiff is unable to answer the interrogatories. The plaintiff, however, is not precluded from renewing this phase of the motion upon the submission of proper proof.

The interrogatories are to be answered by the plaintiff within thirty (30) days after the service of an order, with notice of entry thereon, on plaintiff’s attorney.

Settle order on notice.
Exhibit 10.12

First Amendment

This is the first amendment to the Secured Convertible Promissory Note ("Note") dated August 14, 2000 between RevCare, Inc., formerly known as Cypress Financial
Services, Inc. (collectively "RevCare") and Russ Mohrmann, RBA Rem-Care, Inc. and Insource Medical Solutions, LLC (collectively known as "Holder"), wherein Holder agrees to extend the maturity date
from August 14, 2002 to January 2, 2003.

All
other terms and conditions contained in the original Notes remain in full force and effect.

|RevCare, Inc.      |  | Holder                        
|------------------ |  | ------------------------------
|                   |  |                               
|Manuel Occiano
CEO |  | Russ Mohrmann
January 10, 2001

---

QuickLinks
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

In the Matter of : No. 1 83 DB 2022 (No. 16 RST 2023)

:

ELIZABETH REBECCA WILSON : Attorney Registration No. 311551

:

PETITION FOR REINSTATEMENT :

FROM INACTIVE STATUS : ( Out of State )

O R D E R

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 23 rd day of February

, 202 3 , the Report and Recommendation of

Disciplinar y Board Member date d February 15 , 202 3

, is approved and it is ORDERED

that ELIZABETH REBECCA WILSON

, who has been on Inactive Status

, h as

demonstrated that s he has the moral qualifications, competency

, and learning in law

required for admission to practice in the Commonwealth, shall be and is, hereby

reinstated to active status as a member of the Bar of this Commonwealth. The expenses

incurred by the Board in the investigation and processing of this matter shall be paid by

the Petitioner

.
In The

Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

No. 06-18-00168-CR

RANDALL SHANE SABELLA, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 354th District Court

Hunt County, Texas

Trial Court No. 28512

Before Morriss, C.J., Burgess and Stevens, JJ.
2

O RDER

Our review of the clerk’s record in this case indicates that it contains “sensitive data” as 

that phrase is defined in Rule 9.10 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See TEX. R. APP. 

P. 9.10(a). Sensitive data includes “a driver’s license number, passport number, social security 

number, tax identification number or similar government-issued personal identification number.”

TEX. R. APP. P. 9.10(a)(1). The clerk’s record includes a social security number. Rule 9.10(b) 

states, “Unless a court orders otherwise, an electronic or paper filing with the court, including the 

contents of any appendices, must not contain sensitive data.” TEX. R. APP. P. 9.10(b).

Rule 9.10(g) provides, “A court may also order that a document be filed under seal in paper 

form or electronic form, without redaction.” TEX. R. APP. P. 9.10(g). Therefore, because the 

clerk’s record contains sensitive data, we order the clerk of this Court or her appointee, in 

accordance with Rule 9.10(g), to seal the electronically filed clerk’s record in this case.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

BY THE COURT

Date: April 1, 2019
_________________________________________ 

 

 

 

________________________________________ 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

April 2, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 134751(62) Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman,

 Justices 

SHERITA WHITE and DERRICK WHITE, 

Plaintiffs-Appellees, 

 SC: 134751 

v COA: 272114 

Oakland CC: 2005-064307-NI 

TAYLOR DISTRIBUTING COMPANY, INC., 

PENSKE TRUCK LEASING COMPANY, L.P., 

and JAMES J. BIRKENHEUER,

Defendants-Appellants. 

On order of the Chief Justice, the motion by defendants-appellants for leave to 

exceed the page limitation on their reply brief is GRANTED. 

I, Corbin R. Davis, 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. 

April 2, 2008 

 Clerk
NUMBER 13-13-00626-CR

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

DEDRICK ROY BONNER, Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee.

On appeal from the 24th District Court 

of Victoria County, Texas.

ORDER TO FILE APPELLATE BRIEF

Before Justices Garza, Benavides, and Perkes

Order Per Curiam

This cause is currently before the Court on appellant's second unopposed 

extension of time to file the brief. The reporter’s record was filed on January 7, 2014, 

and appellant’s brief was originally due to be filed thirty days thereafter. See Tex. R. 

App. P. 38.6(a). This Court has previously granted appellant one extension of time 
2

totaling 111 days to file the brief, and appellant now seeks an additional 45 days, until 

July 14, 2014, to file the brief. 

The Court GRANTS appellant’s second unopposed motion to file the brief and 

ORDERS the Honorable Jerry L. Clark to file the brief on or before July 14, 2014. The 

Court looks with disfavor on the delay caused by counsel’s failure to timely file a brief in 

this matter. No further extensions will be granted absent exigent circumstances. If 

counsel fails to file the brief within the specified period of time, the Court will act 

appropriately to ensure that appellant's rights are protected. See id. R. 38.8(b)(4). The 

Clerk of this Court is ORDERED to serve a copy of this order on the Honorable Jerry L. 

Clark by certified mail, return receipt requested.

PER CURIAM

Do not publish.

TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).

Delivered and filed the

10th day of June, 2014.
@conference{1211596,
  author = {Wendell Piez},
  title = {A Generic STS Viewer on the Web},
  year = {2023},
  month = {2023-06-13 04:06:00},
  publisher = {Journal Article Tag Suite Conference (JATS-Con) Proceedings, Bethesda, MD, US},
  url = {https://tsapps.nist.gov/publication/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=936737},
  language = {en},
}
# United States Court **of Appeals**  **f or the Fifth Circuit** 

**____________** No. 23
- 40447 Summary Calendar

**____________ United States of America,**  Plaintiff

— Appellee **,** versus **Jorge Gomez Lopez,** Defendant

— Appellant **.**

**______________________________** Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 4:20
- CR
- 321 - 2

**_____________________ _________**  Before **King, Haynes,** and **Graves,** Circuit Judges **. Per Curiam**  **:** ***** The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Jorge Gomez Lopez has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores , 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Lopez has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the rel evant portions of the record reflected therein. We

**_____________________** * This opinion is not designated for publication. See **5th Cir .**  **R .**  47.5. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED December 13, 2023 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 23-40447 Document: 00517000583 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/13/2023No. 23
- 40447

2 concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is **GRANTED** , counsel is excused from further respo nsibilities herein, and the appeal is **DISMISSED** . See **5th Cir. R.** 42.2 . Case: 23-40447 Document: 00517000583 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/13/2023
#### Kerry Hatch, Respondent, v Edward Hatch, Appellant.

[975 NYS2d 890]

In a matrimonial action in which the parties were divorced by judgment dated December 14, 2010, the defendant appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Connolly, J.), entered April 11, 2012, as granted that branch of the plaintiffs cross motion which was for an award of counsel fees pursuant to Domestic Relations Law § 238, and denied that branch of his motion which was for the same relief as to him.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, under the circumstances of this case, the Supreme Court providently exercised *581its discretion in denying that branch of his motion which was for an award of counsel fees and granting that branch of the plaintiff’s motion which was for an award of counsel fees, in light of the defendant’s recalcitrance and obstructionist tactics, which unnecessarily delayed the proceedings and increased the legal fees incurred by the plaintiff *(see*Domestic Relations Law § 238; *Le v Le,*82 AD3d 846 [2011]; *Schiffer v Schiffer,*55 AD3d 714, 715 [2008]). Rivera, J.E, Hall, Roman and Miller, JJ., concur.
THE STATE OF TEXAS

M A N D A T E

*********************************************

TO THE 7TH DISTRICT COURT OF SMITH COUNTY, GREETING:

Before our Court of Appeals for the 12th Court of Appeals District of Texas, on the 20th

day of May, 2015, the cause upon appeal to revise or reverse your judgment between

DWAYNE SPANGLER, Appellant

NO. 12-14-00195-CR; Trial Court No. 007-1553-13

Opinion by James T. Worthen, Chief Justice.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

was determined; and therein our said Court made its order in these words:

“THIS CAUSE came on to be heard on the appellate record and the briefs filed herein; 

and the same being inspected, it is the opinion of the Court that the trial court’s judgment below 

should be modified and, as modified, affirmed.

It is therefore ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED that the trial court’s judgment 

below, along with its attached order to withdraw funds, be modified to reflect that Appellant 

owes court costs in the amount of $318.00; and as modified, the trial court’s judgment is 

affirmed; and that this decision be certified to the trial court below for observance.”

WHEREAS, WE COMMAND YOU to observe the order of our said Court of Appeals 

for the Twelfth Court of Appeals District of Texas in this behalf, and in all things have it duly 

recognized, obeyed, and executed.

WITNESS, THE HONORABLE JAMES T. WORTHEN, Chief Justice of our Court 

of Appeals for the Twelfth Court of Appeals District, with the Seal thereof affixed, at the City of 

Tyler, this the 15th day of July, 2015.

CATHY S. LUSK, CLERK

By: _______________________________

Chef Deputy Clerk
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Teofilo Lopez, Also Known as Garcia Lopez, Also Known as Isidoro Garcia, Appellant.

Submitted August 5, 2013;

decided August 22, 2013

Motion for assignment of counsel granted and Steven Banks, Esq., The Legal Aid Society, 199 Water Street, New York, NY 10038 assigned as counsel to the appellant on the appeal herein.

Judge Abdus-Salaam taking no part.
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
No. 1D 17

- 3894

_____________________________
M ARIO T. C OTO , Appellant,

v.

C. H ODGSON , Warden, Columbia Correctional Institution
, Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Columbia County

. Paul S. Bryan , Judge

. November 6, 2018

P ER C URIAM

.
A FFIRMED

. W ETHERELL , R OWE , and W INOKUR , JJ., concur

.

_____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331

.

_____________________________2 Mario T. Coto, pro se
, Appellant.

Beverly Brewster, Assistant General Counsel, Florida Department of Corrections, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
COURT OF APPEALS

	SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	FORT WORTH

					NO. 2-07-239-CR

REBECCA ELAINE YEARY			          			APPELLANT

	V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS	STATE

	----------

	FROM COUNTY CRIMINAL COURT NO. 3 OF DENTON COUNTY

                                                 ----------

		MEMORANDUM OPINION1 AND JUDGMENT	

	----------

	We have considered the “Appellant’s Withdrawal Of Notice Of Appeal.”  The motion complies with rule 42.2(a) of the rules of appellate procedure.  Tex. R. App. P. 42.2(a).  No decision of this court having been delivered before we received this motion, we grant the motion and dismiss the appeal.  See id.; Tex. R. App. P. 43.2(f). 									 														

										PER CURIAM

PANEL D:	HOLMAN, GARDNER, and WALKER, JJ.

DO NOT PUBLISH

Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)

DELIVERED: August 29, 2007
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<RESTATED>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                          86,065
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                          12,481
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                               104,959
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                    651,808
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                         518,519
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                           512,514
<LOANS>                                      2,966,814
<ALLOWANCE>                                     35,017
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               4,484,882
<DEPOSITS>                                   3,395,222
<SHORT-TERM>                                   305,501
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                             83,322
<LONG-TERM>                                    308,937
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           260
<OTHER-SE>                                     391,640
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>               4,484,882
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 53,553
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                3,677
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                19,612
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                76,842
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              35,817
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              44,817
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           32,271
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                        0
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                 24,169
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 18,542
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                      12,237
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                    403
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    11,834
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.35
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.33
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    3.05
<LOANS-NON>                                     12,405
<LOANS-PAST>                                     5,295
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                   600
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                 59,473
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                35,965
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                    1,498
<RECOVERIES>                                       550
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                               34,017
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                            34,017
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        

</TABLE>
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

BARTKOWSKI INVESTMENT GROUP,

INC

 v.

HAVERFOR TOWNSHIP ZONING

HEARING BOARD 

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 146 MAL 2015

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the

Order of the Commonwealth Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 15th day of July, 2015, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

DENIED.

SANDRA DONATO, MICHELLE 

COLLIER, MARK CAPRIOTTI, 

MARGARET MURR AND LOWER 

MERION TOWNSHIP, INTERVENORS

PETITION OF: HAVERFORD 

TOWNSHIP
82,855 1-0)
Toh 73, Ros
Abel Acosta , Clerk °
Court of Criminal Appeals
P.O. Box , 12308, Capito / section

an EIVED IN

Austin, Texas 7871 se eer peus
Ae: Cesae Tuan Chaver NL 15 20

CLA No. WR- G2, 551-0! costa,

Trrol Covet Case Mo. wog- b4527-R UA) Abelonata, Cle

Ln wer thra % Jee if Z gaa

ser ae Py ot
Ske. Order Shed Shes cour/ A/S % wy Care 4p Aemandng
m case back my Serra! court On or abst Sanvary 13 oe/4,

Za/S, .
sf here (Soa Sew

xk cf suck Order hk hed. om
how ob ob ail boe much OO a 7

Staterely ’
Cena ; Teas Chavéer_ :
Conna! nif TIAEXAZ
ye Ln a ASS ZBAES

632
Kener , Texas VEIIF

LAL