alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A15A1663. GEORGE JONES v. THE STATE.

In 2001, George Jones was convicted of armed robbery. On appeal, we

affirmed his conviction in an unpublished opinion but remanded for the trial court to

address his claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. Case No. A02A0634 (decided

April 10, 2002). On remand, the trial court rejected the ineffective assistance claim,

and Jones again appealed. Once more, we affirmed. Jones v. State, 312 Ga. App. 15

(717 SE2d 526) (2011). In June 2013, Jones filed a motion to modify his sentence,

arguing among other things that his sentence of life imprisonment without parole

should be vacated because the State did not seek the death penalty. The trial court

denied the motion, and Jones appealed. We dismissed the appeal after finding that

Jones did not raise a colorable void sentence claim. Case No. A14A0133 (decided

October 22, 2013). Jones then filed a second motion to modify his sentence, arguing

again that he wasimproperly sentenced to life imprisonment without parole. The trial

court denied the motion, specifically finding that this Court had already decided the

issue adversely to Jones, and Jones filed this direct appeal. We lack jurisdiction.

This Court previously ruled that the trial court properly sentenced Jones. “It is

axiomatic that the same issue cannot be relitigated ad infinitum. The same is true of

appeals of the same issue on the same grounds.” Echols v. State, 243 Ga. App. 775,

776 (534 SE2d 464) (2000); see also Jordan v. State, 253 Ga. App. 510, 511 (2) (559

SE2d 528) (2002). Our ruling in the prior appeal is res judicata. See Hook v. Bergen,

286 Ga. App. 258, 261 (1) (649 SE2d 313) (2007). Thus, Jones is estopped from

seeking further judicial review on this issues. See id; see also Ross v. State, 310 Ga.

June 09, 2015
App. 326, 328 (713 SE2d 438) (2011) (law of the case rule bars successive void

sentence appeals). Accordingly, this appeal is hereby DISMISSED.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

06/09/2015
ex10_1.htm




Exhibit 10.1


 


FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE


INSPERITY, INC. 2012 INCENTIVE PLAN




 


The Insperity, Inc. 2012 Incentive Plan (the “Plan”), shall be, and hereby is, amended in the following respects, effective as of January 1, 2013, except as otherwise specified below:








I.









Section 12 is amended, in its entirety, to be and to read as follows:







“12.           Acceleration Upon a Change in Control. Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, unless an Award Agreement provides otherwise, all conditions and/or restrictions relating to the continued employment or service of a Participant and/or the achievement of Performance Objectives with respect to the vesting and exercisability or full entitlement to any Award shall immediately lapse upon a Change in Control.”








II.









Except as modified herein, the Plan shall remain in full force and effect.







IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Amendment to the Plan is adopted this    19th     day of February, 2013.








	  	
INSPERITY, INC.


	  	  	  
	  	  	  
	  	
By:

	
/s/ Daniel D. Herink


	  	
Name:

	
Daniel D. Herink


	  	
Title:

	
Senior Vice President of Legal, General Counsel and Secretary
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano, 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.

 June 24, 2014

t0616

Order 

Clerk

June 24, 2014

148697

SHALANDA M. GOLDEN,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v SC: 148697

COA: 317056

MCAC: 12-000039

DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES,

Defendant-Appellee. 

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the January 2, 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.
##### 



Exhibit 32
 CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
    /s/ Gary L. ScottGary L. ScottChief Executive OfficerNovember 9, 2006/s/ Jason WestJason WestChief Financial OfficerNovember 9, 2006
 
 *
    
    As set forth in Item 601 of Regulation S-K, any certification furnished pursuant to this Item
will not be deemed filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act (15
U.S.C. 78r), or otherwise subject to the liability of that section. 45
# Field Descriptions

# 2016 Nonprofit Data
* Local Rule 47.5 provides: "The publication of opinions

that have no precedential value and merely decide particular

cases on the basis of well-settled principles of law imposes

needless expense on the public and burdens on the legal

profession." Pursuant to that Rule, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

__________________

No. 95-10449 

Conference Calendar

__________________

DAVID R. CALLAWAY,

 Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

RACETRAC PETROLEUM, INC.,

 Defendant-Appellee.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 3:95-CV-388-P

- - - - - - - - - -

(October 18, 1995)

Before POLITZ, Chief Judge, and REAVLEY and SMITH, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

To obtain relief under § 1983 a plaintiff must prove that he

was deprived of a right under the Constitution or laws of the

U.S. and that the person depriving him of that right acted under

color of state law. Resident Council of Allen Parkway Village v.

United States Dep't of Housing & Urban Dev., 980 F.2d 1043, 1050

(5th Cir.), cert. denied, 114 S. Ct. 75 (1993). Individuals are

acting under color of state law "only when it can be said that
No. 95-10449

-2-

the State is responsible for the specific conduct of which the

plaintiff complains." Daigle v. Opelousas Health Care, Inc., 774

F.2d 1344, 1349 (5th Cir. 1985). 

David R. Callaway has alleged no facts to establish that

Racetrac Petroleum, Inc. (Racetrac), his former employer, is

acting under color of state law. Callaway's assertions that the

management falsely accused him of theft and verbally harassed him

are private in nature, and the state cannot be considered

responsible for this conduct by Racetrac. Therefore, Callaway

has failed to state a viable claim for relief. See id.

Racetrac Petroleum, Inc.'s motion to dismiss Callaway's

appeal is DENIED.

AFFIRMED.
DA 11-0639

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

2012 MT 173N

CLIVE WELLINGTON KINLOCK,

 Petitioner and Appellant,

 v.

STATE OF MONTANA,

 Respondent and Appellee.

APPEAL FROM: District Court of the Eighth Judicial District,

In and For the County of Cascade, Cause No. BDV-06-084(a)

Honorable Thomas M. McKittrick, Presiding Judge

COUNSEL OF RECORD:

For Appellant:

Wade M. Zolynski, Chief Appellate Defender, Koan Mercer, Assistant

Appellate Defender, Helena, Montana

For Appellee:

Steve Bullock, Montana Attorney General, Katie F. Schulz, Assistant

Attorney General, Helena, Montana

John Parker, Cascade County Attorney, Great Falls, Montana

Submitted on Briefs: July 25, 2012

 Decided: August 10, 2012

Filed:

__________________________________________

Clerk

August 10 2012
2

Justice James C. Nelson delivered the Opinion of the Court.

¶1 Pursuant to Section I, Paragraph 3(d), Montana Supreme Court Internal Operating 

Rules, this case is decided by memorandum opinion and shall not be cited and does not 

serve as precedent. Its case title, cause number, and disposition shall be included in this 

Court’s quarterly list of noncitable cases published in the Pacific Reporter and Montana 

Reports.

¶2 In 1992, the Eighth Judicial District Court sentenced Clive W. Kinlock to 60 years 

at Montana State Prison on various felonies, plus a 10-year weapon enhancement. On 

September 22, 2011, the District Court clarified the basis of the weapon enhancement. 

Kinlock appeals and requests a hearing. We previously ruled that his sentence is legal, 

however. Kinlock v. State, No. OP 06-0054, 2006 Mont. LEXIS 120 (Feb. 8, 2006); 

Kinlock v. Mahoney, No. OP 07-0730, 2008 Mont. LEXIS 240 (Jan. 23, 2008). The 

District Court’s September 22, 2011 ministerial correction changes nothing of substance.

¶3 We have determined to decide this case pursuant to Section I, Paragraph 3(d) of 

our Internal Operating Rules, which provides for noncitable memorandum opinions. 

Having reviewed the record and the arguments, we affirm the District Court’s Order.

/S/ JAMES C. NELSON

We concur:

/S/ MIKE McGRATH

/S/ BRIAN MORRIS

/S/ BETH BAKER

/S/ JIM RICE
#### “Jane Doe,” Appellant, v Brian A. Goldweber, M.D., et al., Defendants, and Somerset Surgical Associates, P.C., et al., Respondents.

[976 NYS2d 77]

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Joan B. Lobis, J.), entered on or about December 15, 2011, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, granted defendants Somerset Surgical Associates, EC. and Frank Cohen, M.D.’s motion to dismiss plaintiffs negligent hiring claim as against them, unanimously affirmed, without costs. Order, same court and Justice, entered June 5, 2012, which granted defendants Abbe J. Garni, M.D. and Abbe J. Garni, M.D., EC.’s motion to reargue the portion of the December 15, 2011 order denying their motion for summary judgment dismissing the negligent hiring claim ás asserted against them and, upon reargument, dismissed such claim, unanimously modified, on the law, to deny dismissal of claim against Abbe J. Garni, M.D., EC. and otherwise affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff alleges that she contracted the hepatitis C virus as a result of the medical malpractice of Dr. Brian Goldweber, an anesthesiologist, arising from his reuse of a syringe from a source patient in a vial of propofol, in breach of sterile protocols, and then administering plaintiff propofol from the same con*447taminated vial. At the time, plaintiff was undergoing a colonoscopy performed by Dr. Frank Cohen at the ambulatory surgery offices of Somerset Surgical Associates, EC. Dr. Goldweber’s services were provided by Abbe J. Garni, M.D., EC., an anesthesiology placement company owned by Dr. Abbe Garni.

In the absence of any indication that Somerset and Dr. Cohen were on notice of Dr. Goldweber’s propensity to commit the conduct alleged, the court properly dismissed the negligent hiring claim asserted as against them *(see White v Hampton Mgt. Co. L.L.C.,*35 AD3d 243, 244 [1st Dept 2006]; *see also Sandra M. v St. Luke’s Roosevelt Hosp. Ctr.,*33 AD3d 875, 878, 881 [2d Dept 2006]). However, triable issues of fact exist as to whether Abbe J. Garni, M.D., EC. may be liable for negligently hiring Dr. Goldweber. Dr. Garni, acting for Abbe J. Garni, M.D., EC., failed to investigate a seven-month gap in Dr. Goldweber’s employment, which would have revealed his disciplinary history, including a three-year suspension from the practice of medicine, stayed by consent, arising from his negligent administration of anesthesia *(see Corbally v Sikras Realty Co.,*161 AD2d 107 [1st Dept 1990]). Indeed, Dr. Garni admitted that a gap in employment of a few months would have raised a red flag as to potential disciplinary problems, and should have been investigated. An employer may be liable for negligent hiring when it knew or should have known of the employee’s propensity to commit injury even if the injury committed was not identical to the prior injury *(see e.g. T.W. v City of New York,*286 AD2d 243, 245-246 [1st Dept 2001]). Concur — Mazzarelli, J.E, Sweeny, DeGrasse, Freedman and Gische, JJ. [Prior Case History: 33 Misc 3d 1220(A), 2011 NY Slip Op 51986(U).]
No. 21-3 For Immediate Release

February 2021

RRB Names Nancy L. Bitzer as Director of Human Resources

The U.S. Railroad Retirement Board (RRB) has appointed Nancy L. Bitzer as Director of Human 

Resources, effective January 31, 2021.

In this position, Ms. Bitzer is responsible for administering the agency’s staffing, recruitment, 

workforce planning, employee relations, labor relations, benefits, HR operations, and training and 

development programs for RRB employees. Before her new appointment, she served as Chief of 

Human Services/Labor Relations at the RRB since September 2013.

Ms. Bitzer serves on the advisory board for the Chicago-Kent College of Law’s Federal Sector 

Labor Relations & Labor Law Conference, is a member of the Federal Managers Association (FMA), 

and has presented at FMA regional and national conferences. While at the RRB, she was named 

supervisor of the year as part of the agency’s annual Awards for Excellence program, and has also 

received two team awards in which she was the project/program manager.

Prior to joining the RRB, Ms. Bitzer spent more than 8 years as the Chicago Regional 

Employee/Labor Relations Officer for the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC). Based in 

Chicago, she had responsibility for a six-state region. During her time at FDIC, she had extensive 

involvement in organizational culture change, knowledge management and employee development, 

performance management, equal employment opportunity, succession planning, employee relations 

and labor relations, among others.

Ms. Bitzer also worked for more than 6 years for the General Services Administration as the 

Chicago regional Employee/Labor Relations Officer and as an expert on the Nationwide 

Classification/Compensation team.

Prior to entering federal service in May 1999, she worked more than 4 years as an account 

executive at HealthCare Compare/First Health Group, a national health benefits company.

Born and raised in the Chicago area, she received a Bachelor of Science degree in business 

administration and marketing from the University of Illinois at Chicago. Ms. Bitzer also earned a 

Master of Business Administration in human resources management from DePaul University. She 

currently resides in Brookfield, Illinois, and has two daughters.

U.S. Railroad Retirement Board

RRB News

844 North Rush Street Chicago, Illinois 60611-1275

www.rrb.gov

877-772-5772 general information

Public Affairs

312-751-4777 

opa@rrb.gov media inquiries
-2-

Ms. Bitzer replaces Marguerite “Vikki” Daniels, who had been Director of Human Resources 

since August 2012. Ms. Daniels retired in December 2020 with almost 40 years of federal service, 

with the vast majority at the RRB.

# # #

An independent federal agency headquartered in Chicago, the RRB administers about 

$13.3 billion a year in benefits under the federal Railroad Retirement and Railroad Unemployment 

Insurance Acts covering the nation’s railroad workers and their families.
# United States Court of Appeals

f or the Fifth Circuit

No. 21

- 40851 Summary Calendar

United States of America,
Plaintiff

— Appellee ,

versus Cipriano Quintero

- Barias,
Defendant

— Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 5:21

- CR

- 1419

- 1

Before Southwick, Oldham, and Wilson, Circuit Judges

. Per Curiam : * The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Cipriano Quintero

- Barias 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). Quintero

- Barias has not filed a

* Pursuant to 5th Cir cuit R ule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir cuit R ule 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED April 21, 2022 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 21-40851 Document: 00516290194 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/21/2022No. 21

- 40851

2 response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief a nd the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We 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 fur ther responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED

. See 5th Cir. R. 42.2

. Case: 21-40851 Document: 00516290194 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/21/2022
```

[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 126 (Thursday, July 2, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 31745]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-15477]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

[Docket No. FR-5280-N-25]

Federal Property Suitable as Facilities To Assist the Homeless

AGENCY: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Community Planning and 
Development, HUD.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This Notice identifies unutilized, underutilized, excess, and 
surplus Federal property reviewed by HUD for suitability for possible 
use to assist the homeless.

DATES: Effective Date: July 2, 2009.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kathy Ezzell, Department of Housing 
and Urban Development, 451 Seventh Street, SW., Room 7262, Washington, 
DC 20410; telephone (202) 708-1234; TTY number for the hearing- and 
speech-impaired (202) 708-2565 (these telephone numbers are not toll-
free), or call the toll-free Title V information line at 800-927-7588.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In accordance with the December 12, 1988 
court order in National Coalition for the Homeless v. Veterans 
Administration, No. 88-2503-OG (D.D.C.), HUD publishes a Notice, on a 
weekly basis, identifying unutilized, underutilized, excess and surplus 
Federal buildings and real property that HUD has reviewed for 
suitability for use to assist the homeless. Today's Notice is for the 
purpose of announcing that no additional properties have been 
determined suitable or unsuitable this week.

    Dated: June 25, 2009.
Mark R. Johnston,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Special Needs.
[FR Doc. E9-15477 Filed 7-1-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210-67-P
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5

       
<S>                                    <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                 YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                      SEP-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                         OCT-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                           SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                     223,398
<SECURITIES>                                     0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    0
<ALLOWANCES>                                     0
<INVENTORY>                                      0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                           223,398
<PP&E>                                           0
<DEPRECIATION>                                   0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             223,398
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,500
<BONDS>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            0
<PREFERRED>                                      0
<COMMON>                                     2,814
<OTHER-SE>                                 217,084
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               223,398
<SALES>                                          0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 0
<CGS>                                            0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               13,571
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          (8,337)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             (5,234)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         (5,234)
<DISCONTINUED>                                   0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  0
<CHANGES>                                        0
<NET-INCOME>                                (5,234)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    0
        


</TABLE>
# Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

June 24, 2014

N o. 04

- 14

- 00440

- CV

D&J ALEXANDER MANAGEMENT, LP,

Appellant

v.

Raymond S. DE LEON II, Trustee of the Delfina & Josefina Alexander Family Trust,

Appellee s

From the County Court at Law No 2, Webb County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2013

- PBA

- 00133L2

Honorable Jesus Garza, Judge Presidin g



### O R D E R

Sitting: Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice

Marialyn Barnard, Justice

Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice

Appellant s, Judith Zaffirini, David H. Arredondo, and Clarissa N. Chapa, filed a n “Emergency Motion for Temporary Orders to Preserve Jurisdiction and Rights Pending Appeal

( Garcia, Tamez, and Tellez Ad Litem Order). ” The motion is DENIED.

Appellant, D&J Alexander Management, LP, also filed an “Emergency Motion for

Temporary Orders to Preserve Jurisdiction and Rights Pending Appeal (Garcia, Tamez, and

Tellez Ad Litem Order).” The motion is ORDERED HELD IN ABEYANCE pending further

order of this court.

_________________________________ Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice

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

court on this 24th day of June, 2014

.

___________________________________ Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Ramon Caba, Appellant.

[852 NYS2d 773]

The court properly exercised its discretion in reducing defendant’s sentence of six years to life to 5V2 years pursuant to the Drug Law Reform Act'(L 2005, ch 643), and we perceive no basis for reducing the sentence any further. The Act does not apply to defendant’s conspiracy conviction *(People v Anonymous,*43 AD3d 806 [2007]). On this appeal, defendant may not challenge the validity of the underlying judgment of conviction, which, we note, has already been affirmed (12 AD3d 268 [2004], *lv denied*4 NY3d 828 [2005]). Concur—Saxe, J.P., Gonzalez, Buckley and Acosta, JJ.