OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985

Note: This is the original legislation as it was initially enacted. Any subsequent amendments hosted on Wikisource may be listed using What Links Here.
An Act To provide for reconciliation pursuant to section 2 of the first concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 1986 (S. Con. Res. 32, Ninety-ninth Congress).
    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

### Section 1. Short Title.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985´´.
Table of Contents
Approved April 7, 1986.

## Legislative History

* H.R. 3128, (H.R. 3500, S. 1730)
   * HOUSE REPORTS:
   ** No. 99-241, Pt. 1 (Comm. on Ways and Means)
   ** No. 99-241, Pt. 2 (Comm. on Education and Labor)
   ** No. 99-241, Pt. 3 (Comm. on the Judiciary)
   ** No. 99-300 accompanying H.R. 3500 (Comm. on the Budget)
   ** No. 99-453 (Comm. of Conference)
   * SENATE REPORTS:
   ** No. 99-146 accompanying S. 1730 (Comm. on the Budget)
   * CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 131 (1985):
   ** Oct. 15, 16, 22-24; Nov. 12-14, S. 1730 considered in Senate.
   ** Oct. 31, H.R. 3128 considered and passed House.
   ** Nov. 14, considered and passed Senate, amended, in lieu of S. 1730.
   ** Dec. 5, House agreed to Senate amendment with amendment.
   ** Dec. 19, Senate agreed to conference report. House rejected conference report; receded and concurred in Senate amendment with amendment. Senate concurred in House amendment with amendment.
   * CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 132 (1986):
   ** Mar. 6, House concurred in Senate amendment with amendment.
   ** Mar. 14, Senate concurred in House amendment with amendment.
   ** Mar. 18, House disagreed to Senate amendment. Senate insisted on its amendment.
   ** Mar. 20, House concurred in Senate amendment.
This work is in the public domain in the U.S. because it is an edict of a government, local or foreign. See § 313.6(C)(2) of the Compendium II: Copyright Office Practices. Such documents include "legislative enactments, judicial decisions, administrative rulings, public ordinances, or similar types of official legal materials" as well as "any translation prepared by a government employee acting within the course of his or her official duties."
These do not include works of the Organization of American States, United Nations, or any of the UN specialized agencies. See Compendium III § 313.6(C)(2) and 17 U.S.C. 104(b)(5).
A non-American governmental edict may still be copyrighted outside the U.S. Similar to {{PD-in-USGov}}, the above U.S. Copyright Office Practice does not prevent U.S. states or localities from holding copyright abroad, depending on foreign copyright laws and regulations.
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Consolidated Rail Corporation v. Railway Labor Executives' Association

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.

## Concurring Opinion

    White

## Dissenting Opinion

    Brennan
United States Supreme Court
491 U.S. 299
Consolidated Rail Corporation v. Railway Labor Executives' Association
No. 88-1 Argued: Feb. 28, 1989. --- Decided: June 19, 1989
Syllabus
Since its formation in 1976, petitioner Consolidated Rail Corporation (Conrail) has required its employees to undergo physical examinations periodically and upon return from leave. Those examinations routinely included a urinalysis for blood sugar and albumin and, in some circumstances, for drugs. In 1987, Conrail announced unilaterally that urinalysis drug screening would be included as part of all periodic and return-from-leave physical examinations. Respondent Railway Labor Executives' Association opposed this unilateral additional drug testing. The question presented by this case is whether Conrail's drug-testing program gives rise to a "major" or a "minor" dispute under the Railway Labor Act.
Held:
1. Where an employer asserts a contractual right to take a contested action, the ensuing dispute is minor if the action is arguably justified by the terms of the parties' collective-bargaining agreement. Where, in contrast, the employer's claims are frivolous or obviously insubstantial, the dispute is major. Pp. 302-307.
2. If an employer asserts a claim that the parties' agreement gives the employer the discretion to make a particular change in working conditions without prior negotiation, and if that claim is arguably justified by the terms of the parties' agreement, the employer may make the change and the courts must defer to the arbitral jurisdiction of the Adjustment Board. Pp. 307-311.
3. Conrail's contractual claim is not obviously insubstantial, and therefore the controversy constitutes a minor dispute that is within the Adjustment Board's exclusive jurisdiction. Pp. 311-320.
845 F.2d 1187, (CA3 1988) reversed.
BLACKMUN, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which REHNQUIST, C.J., and WHITE, STEVENS, O'CONNOR, SCALIA, and KENNEDY, JJ., joined. WHITE, J., filed a concurring opinion, post, p. 320. BRENNAN, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which MARSHALL, J., joined, post, p. 321.
Dennis J. Morikawa, Philadelphia, Pa., for petitioner.
John O'B. Clarke, Jr., Washington, D.C., for respondents.
Justice BLACKMUN delivered the opinion of the Court.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Complete Encyclopaedia of Music/B/Baroni, Antonio

Baroni, Antonio. An Italian composer. Some of his music was published at Vienna in 1799.
# Complete Encyclopaedia of Music/B/Barman, F

Barman, F., of Munich. A celebrated performer on the clarinet. He was remarkable for his beautiful piano, and for his facility more than for his general tone. He composed eight operas of duos for flutes. Died June 11, 1847, at Munich, aged sixty-four.
# Complete Encyclopaedia of Music/B/Barni, Camille

Barni, Camille, of the Lombard school of musicians, was born at Como in 1762. He commenced his musical career chiefly by arriving at eminence as a violoncellist. He next became second, then first violin at the Grand Opera in Milan ; subsequently he settled at Paris, where he has composed many French romances and Italian ariettes ; also airs, with variations, for the violin and violoncello.
# Complete Encyclopaedia of Music/B/Baron, Ernst Gottlieb

Baron, Ernst Gottlieb, published some works relating to music at Berlin. He died in 1760. He was author of an historical treatise on the lute.
# Complete Encyclopaedia of Music/B/Baroni, Catharina

Baroni, Catharina. A sister of the following, was a poetess and musician.
# Complete Encyclopaedia of Music/B/Baroni, Leonora

Baroni, Leonora, a daughter of Adriana Baroni, born at Naples, went in 1638 to Rome, where she was considered the finest singer in Italy.
# Complete Encyclopaedia of Music/B/Barmann, Johann Baptist

Barmann, Johann Baptist, a German Benedictine, died in 1788. He published some church music at Augsburg in 1760.
# Complete Encyclopaedia of Music/B/Barnard, Rev

Barnard, Rev. JOHN. A minor canon of St. Paul's Church, London, in the time of Charles I. He published a noble collection of church music by different English masters. This work, unfortunately, was not printed in score, and the consequence of the parts being separated is, that at present it is entirely lost to the world.
# Complete Encyclopaedia of Music/B/Baroni, Adriana

Baroni, Adriana, of Mantua, for her beauty surnamed the fair, was a fine singer. She lived in the beginning of the seventeenth century.
# Complete Encyclopaedia of Music/B/Besozzi, Antoine

Besozzi, Antoine, brother of the two preceding, was, in 1755, a performer on the hautboy at the chapel at Dresden. He died at Turin in 1781. He performed, at different times, at the principal courts of Europe.
# Complete Encyclopaedia of Music/B/Bertuch

Bertuch, or BERTOUCH, GEORG VON, was born in 1668. He was a Daniell general officer, and composed several cantatas and other music.
# Complete Encyclopaedia of Music/B/Besardus, Jean Baptiste

Besardus, Jean Baptiste. A performer on the lute, and composer for his instrument, at the commencement of the seventeenth century.
# Complete Encyclopaedia of Music/B/Bertram, Balthasar Christian Friedrich

Bertram, Balthasar Christian Friedrich, chamber musician to the King of Prussia, and a pupil of Graun, died in 1787.
# Complete Encyclopaedia of Music/B/Besozzi, Gaetan

Besozzi, Gaetan, brother of the three preceding, was born at Parma in 1727, and first entered the service of the court of Naples as per-former on the hautboy, and subsequently held the same situation at the court of France. His playing was much admired in London about the year 1793.
# Complete Encyclopaedia of Music/B/Bertuch, Carl Volkmar

Bertuch, Carl Volkmar, was born at Erfurt about the year 1730. He was organist of St. Peter's Church, at Berlin, and considered to be a fine player of Sebastian Bach's music.
# Complete Encyclopaedia of Music/B/Besnecker, J. A

Besnecker, J. A. A celebrated organist and church composer at Prague in the beginning of the seventeenth century.
# Complete Encyclopaedia of Music/B/Besozzi, Charles

Besozzi, Charles, son of Antoine Besozzi, was born at Dresden. He was also a performer on the hautboy.
# Complete Encyclopaedia of Music/B/Bertrand, Antony

Bertrand, Antony, born in Auvergne, set to music the songs of Ronsard, the favorite bard of France during the reigns of Henry II., Francis II., Charles IX., and Henry III. He published them in four parts, in 1578, under the title of "Amours de Ronsard."
# Complete Encyclopaedia of Music/B/Berwald, Johann Friedrich

Berwald, Johann Friedrich, was born at Stockholm in 1788. When between four and five years of age, he played at a public concert on a small violin. After that time he visited, with his father, various courts of Europe, whence he received medals and many other marks of royal approbation ; at the same time he prosecuted his studies in composition and on the piano-forte. Several of his instrumental works have been published in Germany since the year 1798.
# Complete Encyclopaedia of Music/B/Bisset, Catharine

Bisset, Catharine. Eldest daughter of Robert Bisset, LL. I)., author of the "Life of Burke," and the "Reign of George III." At an early age, Miss Bisset gave promise of musical abilities. In consequence of the death of her father, when she was quite a child, she was advised by many friends to study, as a profession, that art which she had previously cultivated as an accomplishment; and notwithstanding the high rank of several of her nearest relatives, at twelve years of age she was giving lessons to assist in supporting her family. Shortly after, she became acquainted with J. B. Cramer, who, with the liberality of mind which so peculiarly characterized him, instructed her withont any emolument.
In 1811, Miss Bisset performed, at the New Musical Fund concert, Cramer's difficult concerto in C minor, with the most unbounded applause.
Having established her fame as a public performer, Miss Bisset preferred being heard at the nobility's private concerts until the season of 1823, when she was prevailed on to play at Paris, where she was enthusiastically received, and pronounced, by several of the first professors in that city, to be the only performer of the present day in the true style of her inimitable master.
# Complete Encyclopaedia of Music/B/Bitzenberg, Madame

Bitzenberg, Madame. A celebrated pianist, singer, and violinist at Vienna, about the year 1798.
# Complete Encyclopaedia of Music/B/Bizaaro

Bizaaro. (I.) This term implies that the style of the movement to which it i, prefixed is odd, fantastical, and irregular; now quick, now slow; sometimes loud, sometime, soft ; just as the carelessness, or whim of the moment, dictates to the composer.
# Complete Encyclopaedia of Music/B/Bittheuser, F. R

Bittheuser, F. R. A monk and composer of music at Wurtzburg in the latter half of the last century.
# Complete Encyclopaedia of Music/B/Bisset, Miss Elizabeth

Bisset, Miss Elizabeth, pupil of Mr. Dizi, was as celebrated on the harp as her sister on the piano-forte.
# Complete Encyclopaedia of Music/B/Bisson, Louis

Bisson, Louis. A French composer in the latter half of the sixteenth century. He altered many four part songs of Nicholas Chemin into duets, without changing the first part.
# Complete Encyclopaedia of Music/B/Bitti, Martini

Bitti, Martini. A distinguished violinist and composer of instrumental music at Florence about the year 1714.
# Complete Encyclopaedia of Music/B/Biumi, Giacomo Filippo

Biumi, Giacomo Filippo, an organist and composer at Milan, died in 1652. He published motets and church music.
# Complete Encyclopaedia of Music/B/Bisinia

Bisinia. (L.) A term formed from the word his, twice and applied to pianoforte pieces, or movements in which both hands are alternately employed upon the same melody, or succession of intervals.
# Complete Encyclopaedia of Music/B/Bisoni A

Bisoni A church composer at Lugo, in Italy, in 1788.
# Crime and Punishment/List of Characters

LIST OF CHARACTERS
| Rodion Romanovitch Raskolnikov, a student. |
| Pulcheria Alexandrovna, his mother. |
| Avdotya Romanovna (Dounia), his sister. |
| Dmitri Prokofitch Razumihin, his friend. |
| Praskovya Pavlovna, his landlady. |
| Nastasya Petrovna, her maid-servant. |
| Alyona Ivanovna, an old woman, a pawnbroker. |
| Lizaveta, her half-sister. |
| Semyon Zaharovitch Marmeladov, a drunken clerk. |
| Katerina Ivanovna, his wife. |
| Her three little children. |
| Sonia Semyonovna, Marmeladov's daughter. |
| Amalia Ivanovna Lippevechsel, his landlady. |
| Andrey Semyonovitch Lebeziatnikov, an advanced young man |
| Pyotr Petrovitch Luzhin, suitor for Dounia. |
| Arkady Ivanovitch Svidrigaïlov, a landowner. |
| Marfa Petrovna, his wife. |
| Nikodim Fomitch, superintendent of the district, | of the St. |
| Zametov, head clerk, | Petersburg |
| Ilya Petrovitch, assistant clerk, | police. |
| Porfiry Petrovitch, detective, | |
| Zossimov, a young physician. |
# Crime and Punishment/Part I

CRIME AND PUNISHMENT A NOVEL IN SIX PARTS AND AN EPILOGUE
page
CRIME AND PUNISHMENT
A NOVEL IN SIX PARTS AND AN EPILOGUE
PART I
# Davis v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Company/Concurrence Stewart

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
* Concurring Opinions Harlan Stewart
United States Supreme Court
379 U.S. 671
Davis v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Company
Mr. Justice STEWART, concurring.
I share the views of Mr. Justice HARLAN. See Sentilles v. Inter-Caribbean Shipping Corp., 361 U.S. 107, 111, 80 S.Ct. 173, 176, 4 L.Ed.2d 142 (concurring opinion).

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Davis v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Company/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
* Concurring Opinions Harlan Stewart
United States Supreme Court
379 U.S. 671
Davis v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Company
The petition for writ of certiorari is granted. The judgment of the Maryland Court of Appeals is reversed.
In this action under the Federal Employers' Liability Act, 45 U.S.C. § 51 et seq., the petitioner was awarded damages by a jury in the Superior Court of Baltimore City. The Court of Appeals held that the issue of employer negligence should not have been submitted to the jury and that the trial court erred in denying the motions of the railroad for a directed verdict and for a judgment n.o.v., 235 Md. 568, 202 A.2d 348.
The petitioner worked for the railroad as a tallyman and trucker at its Locust Point terminal in Baltimore City. His foreman directed him to find some boxes of merchandise. While working on this assignment near an open elevator shaft he fell into the shaft and one of the railroad's forklift trucks fell in on top of him. The crucial fact question in the case concerned the forklift truck. There was testimony that the petitioner had mounted the truck and backed it into the shaft. There was also evidence, however, which, if believed by the jury, would support a finding that the operator assigned to use the truck negligently left it unattended, and that it rolled toward the petitioner, either because it was not secured or because it was set in motion by an unauthorized third person, and struck petitioner in the back, propelling him into the shaft. In these circumstances, the Court of Appeals improperly invaded the function and province of the jury. Rogers v. Missouri Pac. R. Co., 352 U.S. 500, 77 S.Ct. 443, 1 L.Ed.2d 493; Gallick v. Baltimore & Ohio R. Co., 372 U.S. 108, 83 S.Ct. 659, 9 L.Ed.2d 618.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Davis v. Beason

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Wikidata item.
Davis v. Beason, 133 U.S. 333 (1890), was a United States Supreme Court case affirming, by a 9-0 vote, that courts of the United States had jurisdiction to hear charges related to polygamy that is part of a religious belief, despite the free exercise clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. Warning: template has been deprecated.
United States Supreme Court
133 U.S. 333
Davis v. Beason
[Statement of Case from pages 333-335 intentionally omitted]
F. S. Richards, S. Shellabarger, and J. M. Wilson, for appellant.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 337-341 intentionally omitted]
H. W. Smith, for appellee.
Mr. Justice FIELD, after stating the facts as above, delivered the opinion of the court.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Davies Warehouse Company v. Bowles

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.

## Dissenting Opinion

    O. Douglas
United States Supreme Court
321 U.S. 144
Davies Warehouse Company v. Bowles
Argued: Nov. 18, 1943. --- Decided: Jan 31, 1944
Mr. Reginald L. Vaughan, of San Francisco, Cal., for petitioners.
Mr. Nathaniel L. Nathanson, of Washington, D.C., for respondent.
Mr. Justice JACKSON delivered the opinion of the Court.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Davies v. Arthur

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
96 U.S. 148
Davies v. Arthur
ERROR to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York.
This is an action by John M. Davies & Co. to recover certain duties claimed by them to have been illegally exacted by Arthur, the defendant, as collector of the port of New York.
In April, 1872, they imported from Liverpool certain merchandise, a portion of which is described on the invoice as 'Ducape Eglington ties,' which are manufactured of silk, and used and known as neckties. Another portion of the merchandise is described as 'twill silk cut up.' The appraiser, in his report to the collector, returned the ties as silk scarfs, and the twill silk as silk in pieces; whereupon the collector imposed a duty of sixty per cent ad valorem upon each.
The importers thereupon protested in writing against the assessment, upon the ground that the merchandise 'should only pay duty, being articles worn by 'men, women, or children,' &c., and 'wearing-apparel,' under sect. 22, act of March 2, 1861, and sect. 13, act of July 14, 1862, at thirty-five per cent ad valorem. 'They are neither 'scarfs' nor ready-made clothing in fact, nor as known in trade and commerce.'
On the same day, they appealed to the Secretary of the Treasury, who affirmed the action of the collector, and they thereupon brought this suit.
It having been admitted by both parties at the trial that the goods were, under the concluding clause of the eighth section of the act of June 30, 1864 (13 Stat. 210), subject to a duty of fifty per cent ad valorem, as manufactures of silk not otherwise provided for, the question submitted to the court, which tried the case without a jury, was whether, under their protest, the plaintiffs could recover the difference between the amount of duties payable on said 'Ducape Eglington ties,' at the rate of fifty per cent ad valorem, and the amount claimed and exacted by the defendant on the same , at the rate of sixty per cent ad valorem.
There was a judgment for the defendant, whereupon the plaintiffs brought the case here.
Mr. Edward Hartley for the plaintiffs in error.
The Solicitor-General, contra.
MR. JUSTICE CLIFFORD delivered the opinion of the court.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Davidson v. New Orleans/Concurrence Bradley

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
* Concurring Opinion Bradley
* Wikipedia article
United States Supreme Court
96 U.S. 97
Davidson v. New Orleans
MR. JUSTICE BRADLEY.
In the conclusion and general tenor of the opinion just read, I concur. But I think it narrows the scope of inquiry as to what is due process of law more than it should do.
It seems to me that private property may be taken by a State without due process of law in other ways than by mere direct enactment, or the want of a judicial proceeding. If a State, by a its laws, should authorize private property to be taken for public use without compensation (except to prevent its falling into the hands of an enemy, or to prevent the spread of a conflagration, or, in virtue of some other imminent necessity, where the property itself is the cause of the public detriment), I think it would be depriving a man of his property without due process of law. The exceptions noted imply that the nature and cause of the taking are proper to be considered. The distress-warrant issued in the case of Murray's Lessee et al. v. Hoboken Land and Improvement Co. (18 How. 272) was sustained, because it was in consonance with the usage of the English government and our State governments in collecting balances due from public accountants, and hence was 'due process of law.' But the court in that case expressly holds that 'it is manifest that it was not left to the legislative power to enact any process which might be devised. The article is a restraint on the legislative, as well as on the executive and judicial, power of the government, and cannot be so construed as to leave Congress free to make any process 'due process of law' by its mere will.' p. 276. I think, therefore, we are entitled, under the fourteenth amendment, not only to see that there is some process of law, but 'due process of law,' provided by the State law when a citizen is deprived of his property; and that, in judging what is 'due process of law,' respect must be had to the cause and object of the taking, whether under the taxing power, the power of eminent domain, or the power of assessment for local improvements, or none of these: and if found to be suitable or admissible in the special case, it will be adjudged to be 'due process of law;' but if found to be arbitrary, oppressive, and unjust, it may be declared to be not 'due process of law.' Such an examination may be made without interfering with that large discretion which every legislative power has of making wide modifications in the forms of procedure in each case, according as the laws, habits, customs, and preferences of the people of the particular State may require.
This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse