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

Filed 3/3/15 Salazar v. Superior Court CA4/2

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). Th is opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION TWO

IBIS SALAZAR,

Petitioner,

v.

THE SUPERIOR COURT OF

RIVE RSIDE COUNTY,

Respondent;

THE PEOPLE,

Real Party in Interest. E062264

(Super.Ct.No. RIC1409844)

OPINION

ORIGINAL PROCEEDINGS; petition for writ of mandate

. John W. Vineyard,

Judge. Petition granted.

La Cues Law Group, Jerry La Cues an d Brett La Cues, for Petitioner.

No appearance for Respondent.

No appearance for Real Party in Interest2

The law being clear and no response having been received from respondent and/or

real party in interest , the petition is granted.

DISCUSSION

Althou gh criminal contempt is available as a remedy where such conduct tends to

impede, embarrass, or obstruct the court ( In re Nolan W. (2009) 45 Cal.4th 1217), the

facts of contempt must be clearly established and may not be determined with the aid of

informat ion not in the record. ( Boysaw v. Superior Court (2000) 23 Cal.4th 215; In re

Littlefield (1993) 5 Cal.4th 122.)

Here, the witness’s testimony was ambiguous and readily susceptible to the

construction that it expressed confusion over the form of the qu estion rather than a

specific intent to frustrate the orders of the court. Even if another witness had made a

similar response, there is nothing in the record to show that petitioner was aware of that

response or the court’s reaction to it. We also note that the trial court was careful to

exonerate petitioner’s counsel from any suspicion of coaching the witness into an

improper response. It seems highly unlikely that the witness would have deliberately

attempted on her own to frame a response that might suggest to the jury that other defects

existed while trying to avoid an outright violation of the court’s order.

Hence, we conclude that the evidence supports no more than a finding that the

witness ina dvertently gave a response that arguably violated t he court’s order. The harsh

remedy of contempt was not available in these circumstances.3 DISPOSITION

Let a peremptory writ issue, directing the S uperior C ourt of Riverside County to

vacate its order of contempt against petitioner.

Petitioner is directed to prepare and have the peremptory writ of mandate issued,

copies served, and the original filed with the clerk of this court, together with proof of

service on all parties.

The previously ordered stay

, having served its purpose

, is LIFTED

.

NOT TO BE PUBL ISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

McKINSTER

J.

We concur:

HOLLENHORST

Acting P. J.

CODRINGTON

J.
### §1975. Civil actions by persons injured; jurisdiction and venue; amount of recovery

Any person who is injured in his business or property by reason of anything forbidden in section 1972 of this title may sue therefor in any district court of the United States in which the defendant resides or is found or has an agent, without regard to the amount in controversy, and shall be entitled to recover three times the amount of the damages sustained by him, and the cost of suit, including a reasonable attorney's fee.

(Pub. L. 91–607, title I, §106(e), Dec. 31, 1970, 84 Stat. 1767.)
§ 381.106 Export certification. ( a ) Exporters must apply for export certification of inspected and passed products to any foreign country. Exporters may apply for an export certificate using a paper or electronic application. FSIS will assess exporters that submit an electronic application the charge in § 362.5(e) of this chapter.
( b ) FSIS will issue only one certificate for each consignment, except in the case of error in the certificate or loss of the certificate originally issued. A request for a replacement certificate, except in the case of a lost certificate, must be accompanied by the original certificate. The new certificate will carry the following statement: “Issued in replacement of ______”, with the numbers of the certificates that have been superseded.
( c ) FSIS will deliver a copy of the certificate to the person who requested such certificate or his agent. Such persons may duplicate the certificate as required in connection with the exportation of the product.
( d ) FSIS will retain a copy of the certificate.
( e ) Exporters may request inspection personnel to issue certificates for export consignments of product of official establishments not under their supervision, provided the consignments are first identified as having been “U.S. inspected and passed,” are found to be neither adulterated nor misbranded, and are marked as required by § 381.105.
[81 FR 42234, June 29, 2016]
#### § 309.9 Swine erysipelas.

All hogs plainly showing on ante-mortem inspection that they are affected with acute swine erysipelas shall be identified as U.S. Condemned and disposed of in accordance with § 309.13.
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 81 Introduced in House (IH)]

106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 81

 Providing amounts for the expenses of the Committee on Small Business 
                   in the One Hundred Sixth Congress.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 23, 1999

 Mr. Talent submitted the following resolution; which was referred to 
                 the Committee on House Administration

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
 Providing amounts for the expenses of the Committee on Small Business 
                   in the One Hundred Sixth Congress.

    Resolved,

SECTION 1. AMOUNTS FOR COMMITTEE EXPENSES.

    For the expenses of the Committee on Small Business (hereinafter in 
this resolution referred to as the ``Committee''), including the 
expenses of all staff salaries, there shall be paid, out of the 
applicable accounts of the House of Representatives for committee 
salaries and expenses, not more than $4,399,035 for the One Hundred 
Sixth Congress.

SEC. 2. SESSION LIMITATIONS.

    Of the amount specified in section 1--
            (1) not more than $2,094,868 shall be available for 
        expenses incurred during the period beginning at noon on 
        January 3, 1999, and ending immediately before noon on January 
        3, 2000; and
            (2) not more than $2,304,167 shall be available for 
        expenses incurred during the period beginning at noon on 
        January 3, 2000, and ending immediately before noon on January 
        3, 2001.

SEC. 3. VOUCHERS.

    Payments under this resolution shall be made on vouchers authorized 
by the Committee, signed by the Chairman of the Committee, and approved 
in the manner directed by the Committee on House Administration.

SEC. 4. REGULATIONS.

    Amounts made available under this resolution shall be expended in 
accordance with regulations prescribed by the Committee on House 
Administration.
                                 <all>
```
### [§2192a. Renumbered §4093]
# C_2012138EN.01003004.xml

| 12.5.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 138/30 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.5.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 138/30

---

Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (Third Chamber) of 25 July 2011 — Filice and others v Court of Justice

(Case F-108/10) (1)

(Civil service - Annual adjustment of the remuneration and pensions of officials and other EU staff - No need to adjudicate)

(2012/C 138/67)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicants: Filice and Others (Luxembourg, Luxembourg) (represented by: B. Cortese, C. Cortese and F. Spitaleri, lawyers)

Defendant: Court of Justice of the European Union (represented by: A.V. Placco, agent)

Re:

Application to annul the defendant’s decisions, set out in the applicants’ salary slips, to limit the adjustment of their salaries, from July 2009, to an increase of 1,85 % within the framework of the annual adjustment of the remuneration and pensions of officials and other servants pursuant to Council Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1296/2009 of 23 December 2009.

Operative part of the order

| 1. | Declares that there is no need to adjudicate in F-108/10, Filice and Others v Court of Justice. |
| --- | --- |

1.

Declares that there is no need to adjudicate in F-108/10, Filice and Others v Court of Justice.

| 2. | Orders each party to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders each party to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 30, 29.1.2011, p. 65.

---
### §26. Comptroller to determine if association can commence business

Whenever a certificate is transmitted to the Comptroller of the Currency, as provided in title 62 of the Revised Statutes, and the association transmitting the same notifies the Comptroller that all of its capital stock has been duly paid in, and that such association has complied with all the provisions of title 62 of the Revised Statutes required to be complied with before an association shall be authorized to commence the business of banking, the Comptroller shall examine into the condition of such association, ascertain especially the amount of money paid in on account of its capital, the name and place of residence of each of its directors, and the amount of the capital stock of which each is the owner in good faith, and generally whether such association has complied with all the provisions of title 62 of the Revised Statutes required to entitle it to engage in the business of banking; and shall cause to be made and attested by the oaths of a majority of the directors, and by the president or cashier of the association, a statement of all the facts necessary to enable the Comptroller to determine whether the association is lawfully entitled to commence the business of banking.

(R.S. §5168; Pub. L. 86–230, §2, Sept. 8, 1959, 73 Stat. 457.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

Title 62 of the Revised Statutes, referred to in text, was in the original "this Title" meaning title LXII of the Revised Statutes, consisting of R.S. §§5133 to 5244, which are classified this section and to sections 16, 21, 22 to 24a, 25a, 25b, 27, 29, 35 to 37, 39, 43, 52, 53, 55 to 57, 59 to 62, 66, 71, 72 to 76, 81, 83 to 86, 90, 91, 93, 93a, 94, 141 to 144, 161, 164, 181, 182, 192 to 194, 196, 215c, 481 to 485, 501, 541, 548, and 582 of this title. See, also, sections 8, 333, 334, 475, 656, 709, 1004, and 1005 of Title 18, Crimes and Criminal Procedure. For complete classification of R.S. §§5133 to 5244 to the Code, see Tables.

#### Codification

R.S. §5168 derived from act June 3, 1864, ch. 106, §17, 13 Stat. 104, which was the National Bank Act. See section 38 of this title.

#### Amendments

1959—Pub. L. 86–230 substituted "all" for "at least 50 per centum" before "of its capital stock".

#### **Executive Documents**

#### Exception as to Transfer of Functions

Functions vested by any provision of law in Comptroller of the Currency, referred to in this section, not included in transfer of functions to Secretary of the Treasury, see note set out under section 1 of this title.
# C_2011089EN.01000403.xml

| 19.3.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 89/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.3.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 89/4

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from Court of Appeal (England & Wales) (Civil Division) made on 13 December 2010 — The United States of America v Christine Nolan

(Case C-583/10)

2011/C 89/08

Language of the case: English

Referring court

Referring court

Court of Appeal (England & Wales) (Civil Division)

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: The United States of America

Applicant:

Defendant: Christine Nolan

Defendant:

Question referred

Question referred

Does the employer's obligation to consult about collective redundancies, pursuant to Directive 98/59/EC (1), arise (i) when the employer is proposing, but has not yet made, a strategic business or operational decision that will foreseeably or inevitably lead to collective redundancies; or (ii) only when that decision has actually been made and he is then proposing consequential redundancies?

1

---

(1)  Council Directive 98/59/EC of 20 July 1998 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to collective redundancies

1

OJ L 225, p. 16

---
§ 115.18 Upgrades to facilities and technologies. ( a ) When designing or acquiring any new facility and in planning any substantial expansion or modification of existing facilities, the facility or agency, as appropriate, shall consider the effect of the design, acquisition, expansion, or modification upon their ability to protect detainees from sexual abuse.
( b ) When installing or updating a video monitoring system, electronic surveillance system, or other monitoring technology in an immigration detention facility, the facility or agency, as appropriate, shall consider how such technology may enhance their ability to protect detainees from sexual abuse.
§ 309.3 Dead, dying, disabled, or diseased and similar livestock. ( a ) Livestock found to be dead or in a dying condition on the premises of an official establishment shall be identified as U.S. Condemned and disposed of in accordance with § 309.13.
( b ) Livestock plainly showing on ante-mortem inspection any disease or condition that, under part 311 of this subchapter, would cause condemnation of their carcasses on post-mortem inspection shall be identified as U.S. Condemned and disposed of in accordance with § 309.13.
( c ) Any swine having a temperature of 106 °F. or higher and any cattle, sheep, goats, horses, mules, or other equines having a temperature of 105 °F. or higher shall be identified as U.S. Condemned. In case of doubt as to the cause of the high temperature, or when for other reasons a Program employee deems such action warranted, any such livestock may be held for a reasonable time under the supervision of a Program employee for further observation and taking of temperature before final disposition of such livestock is determined. Any livestock so held shall be reinspected on the day it is slaughtered. If, upon such reinspection, or when not held for further observation and taking of temperature, then on the original inspection, the animal has a temperature of 106 °F. or higher in the case of swine, or 105 °F. or higher in the case of other livestock, it shall be condemned and disposed of in accordance with § 309.13.
( d ) Any livestock found in a comatose or semicomatose condition or affected with any condition not otherwise covered in this part, which would preclude release of the animal for slaughter for human food, shall be identified “U.S. Condemned” and disposed of in accordance with § 309.13, except that such animal may be set apart and held for further observation or treatment under supervision of a Program employee or other official designated by the area supervisor and for final disposition in accordance with this part.
( e ) Establishment personnel must notify FSIS inspection personnel when cattle become non-ambulatory disabled after passing ante-mortem inspection. Non-ambulatory disabled cattle that are offered for slaughter must be condemned and promptly disposed of in accordance with § 309.13.
[35 FR 15563, Oct. 3, 1970, as amended at 69 FR 1873, Jan. 12, 2004; 72 FR 38729, July 13, 2007; 74 FR 11466, Mar. 18, 2009; 81 FR 46577, July 18, 2016]
#### BOLTON CORP. v. STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA

No. 476P89

Case below: 95 N.C.App. 596

Petition by plaintiffs for discretionary review pursuant to G.S. 7A-31 denied 18 January 1990.
§ 351.3 Kind of service. ( a ) Certification, in the form set forth in paragraph (b), is available under the regulations in this part for specific lots of technical animal fat for export, if the fat was rendered from materials derived from carcasses, or parts of carcasses, that had been inspected and passed and came from animals that did not die otherwise than by slaughter under inspection. The certification will be made by a Program employee when he determines, upon the basis of examinations made by him or other inspectors, as provided in § 351.14, and information obtained by him or them from the exporter or other sources, as provided in the regulations in this part, that the technical animal fat is eligible for certification under this section and therefore the statements to be certified are correct. The service will be available upon a voluntary fee basis in accordance with said regulations.
( b ) ( 1 ) The form of Certificate for Export of Technical Animal Fats is as follows:
( 2 ) Certified technical animal fat may be described on the certificate as “technical animal fat”; or if it is tallow, it may be described on the certificate as “Tallow” and the description may include the statement “titre not less than 40 °C.”
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                       5,207,466
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                3,951,618
<ALLOWANCES>                                  (848,000)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            13,089,539
<PP&E>                                      17,984,685
<DEPRECIATION>                              (9,651,231)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              40,105,295
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        6,539,417
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       128,002
<OTHER-SE>                                  32,777,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                40,105,295
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            46,853,280
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               47,655,531
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              52,831
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (653,835)
<INCOME-TAX>                                    99,483
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (753,318)
<EPS-BASIC>                                       (.06)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     (.06)


</TABLE>
#### Emma J. Ellis, Respondent, v. The Burt Olney Canning Company, Appellant.

— Judgment and order unanimously affirmed, with costs. No opinion. Sewell, J., not sitting. •
UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20549

**FORM N-Q**

**QUARTERLY SCHEDULE OF PORTFOLIO HOLDINGS OF REGISTERED MANAGEMENT INVESTMENT COMPANIES**

Investment Company Act File Number: 811-2215

     T. Rowe Price Small-Cap Value Fund, Inc. (Exact name of registrant as specified in charter)

100 East Pratt Street, Baltimore, MD 21202 (Address of principal executive offices) 

David Oestreicher

100 East Pratt Street, Baltimore, MD 21202  (Name and address of agent for service)

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (410) 345-2000 Date of fiscal year end: December 31 Date of reporting period: March 31, 2008
#### § 352.16 Exports.

This shall be conducted in accordance with the provisions contained in 9 CFR 322.1 through 322.5.
Order entered July 18, 2016

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-16-00349-CV

THE CITY OF DALLAS, Appellant/Cross-Appellee

V.

TRINITY EAST ENERGY, LLC, Appellee/Cross-Appellant

On Appeal from the 192nd Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. DC-14-01443

ORDER

We GRANT the July 15, 2016 joint motion to extend time to file response briefs and 

ORDER the briefs filed no later than August 29, 2016.

/s/ CRAIG STODDART 

JUSTICE
### **CHAPTER 15D—ALASKA NATURAL GAS PIPELINE**

Sec.
720.
Definitions.
720a.
Issuance of certificate of public convenience and necessity.
720b.
Environmental reviews.
720c.
Pipeline expansion.
720d.
Federal Coordinator.
720e.
Judicial review.
720f.
State jurisdiction over in-State delivery of natural gas.
720g.
Study of alternative means of construction.
720h.
Clarification of ANGTA status and authorities.
720i.
Sense of Congress concerning use of steel manufactured in North America and negotiation of a project labor agreement.
720j.
Sense of Congress concerning participation by small business concerns.
720k.
Alaska pipeline construction training program.
720 l.
Sense of Congress concerning natural gas demand.
720m.
Sense of Congress concerning Alaskan ownership.
720n.
Loan guarantees.
§ 201.27 Underwriter; equivalent in lieu of bonds; standard forms. ( a ) The surety on bonds maintained under the regulations in this part shall be a surety company which is currently approved by the United States Treasury Department for bonds executed to the United States; and which has not failed or refused to satisfy its legal obligations under bonds issued under said regulations.
( b ) Any packer, market agency, or dealer required to maintain a surety bond under these regulations may elect to maintain, in whole or partial substitution for such surety bond, a bond equivalent as provided below. The total amount of any such surety bond, equivalent, or combination thereof, must be the total amount of the surety bond otherwise required under these regulations. Any such bond equivalent must be in the form of: ( 1 ) A trust fund agreement governing funds actually deposited or invested in fully negotiable obligations of the United States or Federally-insured deposits or accounts in the name of and readily convertible to currency by a trustee as provided in § 201.32, or
( 2 ) A trust agreement governing funds which may be drawn by a trustee as provided in § 201.32, under one or more irrevocable, transferrable, standby letters of credit, issued by a Federally-insured bank or institution and physically received and retained by such trustee.
( c ) The provisions of §§ 201.27 through 201.34 shall be applicable to the trust fund agreements, trust agreements and letters of credit authorized in paragraph (b) of this section.
( d ) Bonds, trust fund agreements, letters of credit and trust agreements shall be filed on forms approved by the Administrator.
(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control number 0580-0015) [56 FR 2128, Jan. 22, 1991, as amended at 61 FR 36279, July 10, 1996; 62 FR 11759, Mar. 13, 1997; 68 FR 75388, Dec. 31, 2003]