alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

**JOAN LICHTMAN,**

**Petitioner**

**v.**

**MICHAEL NUTTER,**

**Respondent :** 

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**: No. 348 EAL 2015** 

**Petition for Allowance of Appeal from**

**the Order of the Commonwealth Court**

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW **, this 30th day of September, 2015, the Petition for Allowance of** 

**Appeal is** DENIED

**.**
### **CHAPTER 63—FEDERAL CAVE RESOURCES PROTECTION**

Sec.
4301.
Findings, purposes, and policy.
4302.
Definitions.
4303.
Management actions.
4304.
Confidentiality of information concerning nature and location of significant caves.
4305.
Collection and removal from Federal caves.
4306.
Prohibited acts and criminal penalties.
4307.
Civil penalties.
4308.
Miscellaneous provisions.
4309.
Savings provision.
4310.
Establishment of Cave Research Program.
#### § 513.12 Inmate request for record clarification.

Where the inmate believes that his or her FBI identification record is incorrect or inaccurate, the inmate may follow procedures outlined in 28 CFR 16.34. The procedures in 28 CFR 16.34 also apply for the clarification of an inmate's NCIC/III record.
**Exhibit 23**

Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

The Board of Directors The Goldfield Corporation:

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statement (No. 333-72241) on Form S-8 of The Goldfield Corporation of our report dated March 26, 2007 with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of The Goldfield Corporation and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2006 and 2005, and the related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders’ equity and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2006, which report appears in the annual report on Form 10-K of The Goldfield Corporation.

/s/ KPMG LLP

Certified Public Accountants

Orlando, Florida March 29, 2007

----
§ 49.3 Examination of the material. Documentary material, answers to interrogatories, or transcripts of oral testimony produced pursuant to the Act, while in the custody of the custodian, shall be for the official use of officers, employees, and agents of the Department of Justice in accordance with the Act. Upon reasonable notice to the custodian— ( a ) Such documentary material or answers to interrogatories shall be made available for examination by the person who produced such documentary material or answers to interrogatories, or by any duly authorized representative of such person; and
( b ) Such transcripts of oral testimony shall be made available for examination by the person who produced such testimony, or by such person's counsel, during regular office hours established for the Department of Justice. Examination of such documentary material, answers to interrogatories, or transcripts of oral testimony at other times may be authorized by the Assistant Attorney General or the custodian.
[60 FR 44277, Aug. 25, 1995; 60 FR 61290, Nov. 29, 1995]
### §1534. Land acquisition

#### (a) Implementation of conservation program; authorization of Secretary and Secretary of Agriculture

The Secretary, and the Secretary of Agriculture with respect to the National Forest System, shall establish and implement a program to conserve fish, wildlife, and plants, including those which are listed as endangered species or threatened species pursuant to section 1533 of this title. To carry out such a program, the appropriate Secretary—

(1) shall utilize the land acquisition and other authority under the Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956, as amended [16 U.S.C. 742a et seq.], the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, as amended [16 U.S.C. 661 et seq.], and the Migratory Bird Conservation Act [16 U.S.C. 715 et seq.], as appropriate; and

(2) is authorized to acquire by purchase, donation, or otherwise, lands, waters, or interest therein, and such authority shall be in addition to any other land acquisition authority vested in him.

#### (b) Availability of funds for acquisition of lands, waters, etc.

Funds made available pursuant to chapter 2003 of title 54 may be used for the purpose of acquiring lands, waters, or interests therein under subsection (a) of this section.

(Pub. L. 93–205, §5, Dec. 28, 1973, 87 Stat. 889; Pub. L. 95–632, §12, Nov. 10, 1978, 92 Stat. 3766; Pub. L. 113–287, §5(d)(32), Dec. 19, 2014, 128 Stat. 3267.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

The Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956, as amended, referred to in subsec. (a)(1), is act Aug. 8, 1956, ch. 1036, 70 Stat. 119, which is classified generally to sections 742a to 742d and 742e to 742j–2 of this title. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 742a of this title and Tables.

The Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, as amended, referred to in subsec. (a)(1), is act Mar. 10, 1934, ch. 55, 48 Stat. 401, which is classified generally to sections 661 to 666c–1 of this title. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see section 661(a) of this title, Short Title note set out under section 661 of this title, and Tables.

The Migratory Bird Conservation Act, referred to in subsec. (a)(1), is act Feb. 18, 1929, ch. 257, 45 Stat. 1222, which is classified generally to subchapter III (§715 et seq.) of chapter 7 of this title. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see section 715 of this title and Tables.

#### Amendments

2014—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 113–287 substituted "chapter 2003 of title 54" for "the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965, as amended,".

1978—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 95–632, among other changes in text preceding par. (1), inserted reference to the Secretary of Agriculture with respect to the National Forest System and substituted the establishment and implementation of a plan to conserve plants for the establishment and implementation of a plan to conserve plants which were concluded in Appendices to the Convention.
§ 35.171 Acceptance of complaints. ( a ) *Receipt of complaints.* ( 1 ) ( i ) Any Federal agency that receives a complaint of discrimination on the basis of disability by a public entity shall promptly review the complaint to determine whether it has jurisdiction over the complaint under section 504.
( ii ) If the agency does not have section 504 jurisdiction, it shall promptly determine whether it is the designated agency under subpart G of this part responsible for complaints filed against that public entity.
( 2 ) ( i ) If an agency other than the Department of Justice determines that it does not have section 504 jurisdiction and is not the designated agency, it shall promptly refer the complaint to the appropriate designated agency, the agency that has section 504 jurisdiction, or the Department of Justice, and so notify the complainant.
( ii ) When the Department of Justice receives a complaint for which it does not have jurisdiction under section 504 and is not the designated agency, it may exercise jurisdiction pursuant to § 35.190(e) or refer the complaint to an agency that does have jurisdiction under section 504 or to the appropriate agency designated in subpart G of this part or, in the case of an employment complaint that is also subject to title I of the Act, to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
( 3 ) ( i ) If the agency that receives a complaint has section 504 jurisdiction, it shall process the complaint according to its procedures for enforcing section 504.
( ii ) If the agency that receives a complaint does not have section 504 jurisdiction, but is the designated agency, it shall process the complaint according to the procedures established by this subpart.
( b ) *Employment complaints.* ( 1 ) If a complaint alleges employment discrimination subject to title I of the Act, and the agency has section 504 jurisdiction, the agency shall follow the procedures issued by the Department of Justice and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission under section 107(b) of the Act.
( 2 ) If a complaint alleges employment discrimination subject to title I of the Act, and the designated agency does not have section 504 jurisdiction, the agency shall refer the complaint to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission for processing under title I of the Act.
( 3 ) Complaints alleging employment discrimination subject to this part, but not to title I of the Act shall be processed in accordance with the procedures established by this subpart.
( c ) *Complete complaints.* ( 1 ) A designated agency shall accept all complete complaints under this section and shall promptly notify the complainant and the public entity of the receipt and acceptance of the complaint.
( 2 ) If the designated agency receives a complaint that is not complete, it shall notify the complainant and specify the additional information that is needed to make the complaint a complete complaint. If the complainant fails to complete the complaint, the designated agency shall close the complaint without prejudice.
[Order No. 1512-91, 56 FR 35716, July 26, 1991, as amended by AG Order No. 3180-2010, 75 FR 56184, Sept. 15, 2010]
```
                               POWER OF ATTORNEY

KNOW ALL BY THESE PRESENTS that the undersigned hereby makes, constitutes,

designates and appoints Dave Downing, Tim Paymal and Rick Parod as the undersigned's

true and lawful attorney-in-fact to act for and on behalf of the undersigned for and

limited to the following purposes:

a.  To execute for and on behalf of the undersigned, in the undersigned's

capacity as an officer and/or director of Lindsay Manufacturing Co., a Deleware

corporation (the "Company"), Forms 3, 4 and 5 in accordance with Section 16(a)

of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the "Exchange Act"), and

the rules thereunder;

b.  To do and perform any and all acts for and on behalf of the undersigned

which may be necessary or desirable to complete and execute any individual or

group filings under Section 16(a) of the Exchange Act and timely file such

forms with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission and any stock

exchange or similar authority; and

c.  To take any other action of any type whatsoever in connection with the

foregoing which, in the opinion of such attorney-in-fact, may be of benefit to,

in the best interest of, or legally required by, the undersigned, it being

understood that the documents executed by such attorney-in-fact on behalf of

the undersigned pursuant to this Power of Attorney shall be in such form and

shall contain such terms and conditions as such attorney-in-fact may approve in

such attorney-in-fact's discretion.

The undersigned hereby grants to each such attorney-in-fact full power and

authority ot do and perform any and every act and thing whatsoever requisite,

necessary, or proper to be done in the exercise of any of the rights and powers

herein granted, as fully to all intents and purposes as the undersigned might

or could do if personally present, with full power of substitution or

revocation, hereby ratifying and confirming all that such attorney-in-fact shall

lawfully do or cause to be done by virtue of theis Power of Attorney and the

righs and powers herein granted.  The undersigned acknowledges that the

foregoing attorneys-in-fact, in serving in such capacity at the request of the

undersigned, are not assuming, nor is the Company assuming, any of

the undersigned's responsibilities to comply with Section 16 of the

Exchange Act.

This Power of Attorney shall remain in full force and effect until the

undersigned is no longer required to make filings uner Section 16(a) of the

Exchange Act with the respect to the undersigned's holdings of the

transactions in securities issued by the Company, unless earlier revoked by

the undersigned in a signed writing delivered to the foregoing attorneys-

in-fact and the Secretary of the Company.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF the undersigned has caused this Power of Attorney to be

executed as of theis 8th day of November, 2005.

Dirk Lenie

-----------

signature
```
In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

No. 02-19-00251-CR

OSCAR LEONARDO PORTILLO,

Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS

§

§

§

§

§

On Appeal from the 415th District 

Court

of Parker County (CR13-0473)

March 12, 2020

Per Curiam

(nfp)

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that there 

was no error in the trial court’s judgment. It is ordered that the judgment of the trial 

court is affirmed.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS 

PER CURIAM
#### J. C. Busby, Appellee, v. S. E. Baughman, Appellant.

*Evidence—when admission of incompetent will not reverse.*The admission of incompetent evidence will not reverse if it is apparent from the whole record that notwithstanding such error a re-trial of the cause would result in a like verdict and judgment.

Action commenced before justice of the peace. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Christian county; the Hon. S. L. Dwight, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the May term, 1909.

Affirmed.

Opinion filed March 30, 1910.

*66J. C. & W. B. McBride, for appellant.

Frank P. Drennan, for appellee.

Mr. Presiding Justice Baume

delivered the opinion of the court.

This suit was originally instituted by the plaintiff against S. E. Baughman and James Sharp, before á justice of the peace, to recover $14.50 alleged to be due and unpaid to the plaintiff from the defendant Sharp, for work and labor performed for the defendant Baughman under an original contract between said Sharp and Baughman, for which amount the plaintiff had served a notice upon Baughman asserting a subcontractor’s lien. From the judgment against said defendants rendered by the justice of the peace, the defendant Baughman prayed an appeal to the circuit court of Christian county, where upon a trial by jury the plaintiff recovered a judgment for $14.50, from which judgment said Baughman prosecutes this further appeal.

The only issue involved was whether or not at the time the plaintiff served notice upon Baughman of a subcontractor’s lien, the said Baughman was indebted to Sharp, the original contractor, in an amount sufficient to cover the amount due the plaintiff and two other subcontractors, who had also served notices asserting liens, the total amount due said subcontractors being $55.75. It is conceded by counsel for appellant that the contract price for the construction by Sharp for Baughman of some buildings upon the latter’s farm was $265 to be paid from time to time as the work progressed, and that during that time Baughman paid to Sharp upon said contract $219.68. It is further clearly apparent from the record that Sharp performed some extra labor for Baughman, the value of which was in dispute between the parties, which dispute is responsible for this litigation. We are satisfied from an ex*67amination of the competent evidence in the record that Baughman was indebted to Sharp upon the original contract and for extras in an amount sufficient to entitle plaintiff to recover the amount due him, and that notwithstanding the errors committed by the trial court in the admission of incompetent evidence a re-trial of the cause would result in a like verdict and judgment against appellant. As the judgment of the circuit court accomplished substantial justice without contravening any established rule of law it will be affirmed.

*Affirmed.*
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 55 (Tuesday, March 22, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 15989]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-6730]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism; Notice of 
Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. App), notice is hereby given of the following 
meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable materials, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and 
Alcoholism, Special Emphasis Panel, RFA on AIDS Consortium.
    Date: April 21-22, 2011.
    Time: 8 a.m. to 6 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: Embassy Suites at the Chevy Chase Pavilion, 4300 Military 
Road, NW., Washington, DC 20015.
    Contact Person: Ranga Srinivas, PhD, Chief, Extramural Project 
Review Branch, EPRB, National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and 
Alcoholism, National Institutes of Health, 5635 Fishers Lane, Room 
2085, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-451-2067, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#d6a5a4bfb8bfa0b7a496bbb7bfbaf8b8bfbef8b1b9a0"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="bfcccdd6d1d6c9decdffd2ded6d391d1d6d791d8d0c9">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.271, 
Alcohol Research Career Development Awards for Scientists and 
Clinicians; 93.272, Alcohol National Research Service Awards for 
Research Training; 93.273, Alcohol Research Programs; 93.891, 
Alcohol Research Center Grants; 93.701, ARRA Related Biomedical 
Research and Research Support Awards., National Institutes of 
Health, HHS)

    Dated: March 15, 2011.
Jennifer Spaeth,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2011-6730 Filed 3-21-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
§ 540.17 Correspondence between confined inmates. An inmate may be permitted to correspond with an inmate confined in any other penal or correctional institution if the other inmate is either a member of the immediate family, or is a party or witness in a legal action in which both inmates are involved. Such correspondence may be approved in other exceptional circumstances, with particular regard to the security level of the institution, the nature of the relationship between the two inmates, and whether the inmate has other regular correspondence. The following additional limitations apply: ( a ) Such correspondence at institutions of all security levels may always be inspected and read by staff at the sending and receiving institutions (it may not be sealed by the inmate); and
( b ) ( 1 ) The appropriate unit manager at each institution must approve of the correspondence if both inmates are housed in Federal institutions and both inmates are members of the same immediate family or are a party or witness in a legal action in which both inmates are involved.
( 2 ) The Wardens of both institutions must approve of the correspondence if one of the inmates is housed at a non-Federal institution or if approval is being granted on the basis of exceptional circumstances.
[50 FR 40109, Oct. 1, 1985, as amended at 61 FR 65204, Dec. 18, 1995]
### IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS
No. 10
- 24
- 00187
- CV JOSEPH HAAS , Appellant v. ENVIRONMENTAL US RESOURCES, LLC , Appellee

From the County Court at Law No. 1 Ellis County, Texas Trial Court No. 24 -C- 3178

MEMORANDUM OPINION
Joseph Haas appeals the trial court’s judgment awarding immediate possession of real property that was the subject of a lease, hereinafter “the premises,” to appellee, Environmental US Resources, LLC, and ordering a writ of possession regarding the premises. The writ of possession set the amount of a supersedeas bond at $20,000. Based on documents filed by Haas, it appears to the Cou rt that the premises were used for some type of motor repair business. There has been no allegation that the premises were used for residential purposes. Consequently, by letter dated June 25, 2024,Haas v. Environ

. US Res

. , LLC Page 2 the Clerk of this Court notified Haas that this appeal wa s subject to dismissal because this Court has no jurisdiction of an appeal from a final judgment of a county court in an eviction suit on the issue of possession unless the premises in question are being used for residential purposes only. T EX

. P ROP

. C O DE § 24.007. In the same letter, the Clerk warned
Haas that this appeal w ould be dismissed unless, within 10 days from the date of th e letter, Haas file d a response with the Court showing grounds for continuing the appeal. Haas filed a response, but does not address our jurisdiction. Instead, Haas requests that we issue a writ of replevin against Environmental US Resources for the return of Haas’s prope rty . We cannot. Re plevin is an "action for the repossession of personal property wrongfully taken or detained by the defendant, whereby the plaintiff gives security for and holds the property until the court decides who owns it." Simmonds v. TDCJ , No. 1 0

- 07

- 00361

- CV, 2010 Tex. App. LEXIS 1338, at *28

- 29 (Tex. App.

— Waco Feb. 24, 2010, no pet.) ( mem. op.). We may issue writs when necessary to enforce our jurisdiction , s ee T EX

. G OV ' T C ODE § 22.221 , and a writ of replevin is not necessary to enforce our jur isdiction. Accordingly, because Haas does not explain why we would have jurisdiction of his appeal, his appeal is dismissed. 1

TOM GRAY Chief Justice

1 Further, Haas presented this Court with a statement of inability to afford payment of costs on appeal. It was not opposed. Thus, Haas is entitled to proceed without the payment of appellate costs. See T EX

. R. A PP
. P. 20.1(c).Haas v. Environ

. US Res

. , LLC Page 3 Before Chief Justice Gray, Justice Johnson, and Justice Smith Appeal dismissed Opinion delivered and filed July 18 , 2024 [CV 0 6]
Stewart D. Gregg, 2nd VP & Senior Counsel
Allianz Life Insurance Company of North America
5701 Golden Hills Drive
Minneapolis, MN  55416
(763) 765-2913

April 28, 2004

Board of Directors

Allianz Life Insurance Company of North America
5701 Golden Hills Drive
Minneapolis, MN  55416

Re:     Opinion and Consent of Counsel
        Allianz Life Variable Account B

Dear Sir or Madam:

You have requested my Opinion of Counsel in connection  with the filing with the
Securities  and Exchange  Commission  pursuant to the Securities Act of 1933, as
amended, of Post-Effective Amendment No. 9 to the Registration Statement on Form
N-4 for the  Individual  Deferred  Variable  Annuity  Contracts  to be issued by
Allianz  Life  Insurance  Company of North  America  and its  separate  account,
Allianz Life Variable Account B File No. 333-82329.

I am of the following opinions:

1.   Allianz Life Variable  Account B is a unit investment trust as that term is
     defined in Section  4(2) of the  Investment  Company Act of 1940 (the Act),
     and is currently  registered  with the Securities and Exchange  Commission,
     pursuant to Section 8(a) of the Act.

2.   Upon the acceptance of purchase  payments made by a Contract Owner pursuant
     to a Contract  issued in accordance  with the  Prospectus  contained in the
     Registration  Statement and upon  compliance  with  applicable  law, such a
     Contract  Owner  will  have a  legally-issued,  fully-paid,  non-assessable
     contractual interest under such Contract.

You  may  use  this  opinion  letter,  or  copy  hereof,  as an  exhibit  to the
Registration Statement.

I consent to the  reference to me and to this opinion  under the caption  "Legal
Opinions"  contained in the  Statements of Additional  Information  which form a
part of the Registration Statement.

Sincerely,

ALLIANZ LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF NORTH AMERICA

By: /s/ Stewart D. Gregg

    ------------------------------
        Stewart D. Gregg