alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Editorial Note on Part 645
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 645 appear at 65 FR 70311, Nov. 22, 2000.

§ 645.213 Use and occupancy agreements (permits). The written arrangements, generally in the form of use and occupancy agreements setting forth the terms under which the utility is to cross or otherwise occupy the highway right-of-way, must include or incorporate by reference: ( a ) The transportation department standards for accommodating utilities. Since all of the standards will not be applicable to each individual utility installation, the use and occupancy agreement must, as a minimum, describe the requirements for location, construction, protection of traffic, maintenance, access restriction, and any special conditions applicable to each installation.
( b ) A general description of the size, type, nature, and extent of the utility facilities being located within the highway right-of-way.
( c ) Adequate drawings or sketches showing the existing and/or proposed location of the utility facilities within the highway right-of-way with respect to the existing and/or planned highway improvements, the traveled way, the right-of-way lines and, where applicable, the control of access lines and approved access points.
( d ) The extent of liability and responsibilities associated with future adjustment of the utilities to accommodate highway improvements.
( e ) The action to be taken in case of noncompliance with the transportation department's requirements.
( f ) Other provisions as deemed necessary to comply with laws and regulations.
(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control number 2125-0522)
### §552d. Punishment of violations of regulations

Any violation of the regulations issued under sections 552a to 552d of this title shall be punished as is provided in section 1853 of title 18.

(May 28, 1940, ch. 220, §4, 54 Stat. 225.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

"Section 1853 of title 18" substituted in text for "section 104 of title 18" on authority of act June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 683, the first section of which enacted Title 18, Crimes and Criminal Procedure.
#### Cave *v.*Loucee & Zimmer.

Holden, J.

An agent for hire was sued by his principal for money of the latter which had come into the hands of the agent and had not been accounted for or paid to the principal. The agent pleaded in defense, that the money was stolen by another wdthout his fault, and that the loss was occasioned because of the manner in which the money was handled and cared for by him with the knowledge and consent and in accordance with the instructions of the principal. *Held:*

1. That the evidence was sufficient to authorize the court to submit to the jury the question as to whether or not an agent of the principal had authority to direct and did direct the agent sued to take the money sued' for to a certain room, and whether or not the former had authority to consent and did consent that the latter leave the money in a box in such room unguarded while he was at dinner, and whether or not the money was stolen by another during such absence; and it was error to fail to submit these questions to the jury.

2. If the loss .of the money resulted from the agent following authorized instructions of the principal, or from the doing of acts consented to by *136the principal or his authorized agent, the agent sued would • not he chargeable, with its loss. , . .

February 24, 1910.

Action for money had and received. Before Judge Boan. DeKalb superior court.

January 16, 1909.

*Payne, Little & Jones*and *King & Spalding,*for plaintiff in ertor. *Tye, Peeples & Jordan,*contra.

*(a)*If the agent exceeded or violated his instructions,. and his doing so occasioned the loss of the money, he would be liable. Civil Code, § 3004.

(&) The agent would also be liable if the money was stolen as a result of his failing to perform some duty with respect to its handling and cus- . tody which rested on him independently of the instructions, under which he was acting, if such failure on his part, under the circumstances, amounted to a failure to exercise ordinary care. Civil Code, § 3009; *Frink*v. *Southern Express Co.,*82 *Ga.,*33 (8 S. E. 862, 3 L. R. A. 482). *Judgment reversed.*

*AU the Justices concur.*
#### Grace Wolfe, Appellant, v. Beacon Life Insurance Company, Appellee.

Appeals and *bbrobs—what not final order.*An order of the court overruling a demurrer is not a final judgment and no appeal can he taken therefrom.

Assumpsit. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cass county; the Hon. Guy W. Williams, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the May term, 1909.

Dismissed.

Opinion filed March 30, 1910.

*139Milton McClure, for appellant.

Bellatti, Barnes & Bellatti, for appellee.

Mr. Justice Philbrick

delivered the opinion of the court.

This is an action brought by appellant to recover upon the policy of insurance issued upon the life of appellant’s husband.

The policy was for the principal sum of $1,000 and payments were to be made in monthly installments in the sum of $21 each month. The suit is brought for the unpaid monthly installments at the time of the commencement of the action. The insured died June 30, 1907; suit instituted September 3, 1908.

Appellee filed in all six pleas, the fourth and sixth setting forth the existence of a by-law of the defendant which is as follows:

> “Legal proceedings for recovery of death benefits shall not be brought until after three months from the date of filing final proofs at the home office of the company, and not brought at all unless within one year from the death of the insured * * * .”

Appellant demurred to each of these pleas by special and general demurrer. The demurrer to these pleas was overruled by the trial court. Appellant elected to abide by her demurrer; thereupon appellee withdrew all pleas except the fourth and sixth to which the demurrer had been overruled.

The order of the court in overruling the demurrer was as follows: “It is ordered and adjudged by the court that judgment be entered herein in favor of the defendant and that judgment be entered against the plaintiff for costs.”

Upon this order in overruling the demurrer no final judgment, whatever, was ever rendered so far as is disclosed by the record in this case. An order of the court overruling a demurrer is not a final judgment and no appeal can be taken therefrom.

*140The appeal in this case is premature and it is, therefore, dismissed with leave to either party to apply to the trial court' for final judgment.

*Appeal dismissed.*
Exhibit 24

                                POWER OF ATTORNEY
                                -----------------

     We,  the  undersigned directors of Green Mountain Power Corporation, hereby
severally  constitute  Christopher  L.  Dutton,  Mary  G.  Powell, and Robert J.
Griffin,  and  each of them singly, our true and lawful attorney with full power
of  substitution,  to  sign  for us and in our names in the capacities indicated
below,  the  Annual  Report on Form 10-K of Green Mountain Power Corporation for
the  fiscal year ended December 31, 2004, and generally to do all such things in
our  name  and  behalf  in  our capacities as directors to enable Green Mountain
Power  Corporation  to comply with the provisions of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934, as amended, all requirements of the Securities and Exchange Commission,
and all requirements of any other applicable law or regulation, hereby ratifying
and  confirming  our  signatures  as they may be signed by our said attorney, to
said  Annual  Report.

SIGNATURE                     TITLE                       DATE
---------                     -----                       ----

/s/Christopher  L.  Dutton  President  and  Director     March  28,  2005
--------------------------
Christopher  L.  Dutton      (Principal  Executive
                            Officer)

/s/Nordahl  L.  Brue                              March  28,  2005
--------------------
Nordahl  L.  Brue             Chairman  of  the  Board

/s/Elizabeth  A.  Bankowski                         March  28,  2005
---------------------------
Elizabeth  A.  Bankowski      Director

/s/William  H.  Bruett                         March  9,  2005
----------------------
William  H.  Bruett           Director

/s/Merrill  O.  Burns                         March  10,  2005
---------------------
Merrill  O.  Burns            Director

/s/David  R.  Coates                         March  28,  2005
--------------------
David  R.  Coates             Director

/s/Kathleen  C.  Hoyt                         March  28,  2005
---------------------
Kathleen  C.  Hoyt            Director

/s/Euclid  A.  Irving                         March  28,  2005
---------------------
Euclid  A.  Irving            Director

/s/Marc  A.  vanderHeyden                         March  9,  2005
-------------------------
Marc  A.  vanderHeyden        Director
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Before the

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

Release No. 97930 / July 18, 2023

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDING 

File No. 3-20855

In the Matter of

Allianz Global Investors U.S. LLC,

Respondent.

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

ORDER EXTENDING TIME TO 

ENTER AN ORDER APPROVING OR 

DISAPPROVING PLAN OF 

DISTRIBUTION

On May 22, 2023, pursuant to Rule 1103 of the United States Securities and Exchange 

Commission’s Rules on Fair Fund and Disgorgement Plans (the “Commission’s Rules”), 

17 C.F.R.§ 201.1103, the Commission published a Notice of Proposed Plan of Distribution and 

Opportunity to Comment (“Notice”)1for the distribution of monies placed into a Fair Fund in the 

above-captioned matter. The Notice invited public comment on the proposed plan of distribution

(“Plan”) through June 21, 2023, and the Commission received three public comments that raised 

various issues (the “Comments”).

Rule 1104 of the Commission’s Rules, 17 C.F.R. § 201.1104, provides in relevant part, 

“[t]he order approving or disapproving the plan should be entered within 30 days after the end of 

the final period allowed for comments on the proposed plan unless the Commission or the 

hearing officer, by written order, allows a longer period for good cause shown.”

Thirty (30) days from the end of the final period for comments on the Plan will lapse on 

July 21, 2023. The Division requests additional time to present its recommendation to the 

1

 Exchange Act Rel. No. 97540 (May 22, 2023).
2

Commission regarding the Comments and the Plan and has demonstrated good cause to extend 

the thirty (30) day time period, provided in Rule 1104 of the Commission’s Rules, with entry of 

an order extending time to approve or disapprove the Plan until December 31, 2023. 

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that pursuant to Rule 1104 of the Commission’s Rules,2

for good cause shown, the time for entering an order approving or disapproving the Plan is 

extended to December 31, 2023.

For the Commission, by its Secretary, pursuant to delegated authority.

Vanessa A. Countryman

Secretary

2

 17 C.F.R. § 201.1104.
III 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. RES. 450 

Recognizing the 71st anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human 

Rights and the celebration of ‘‘Human Rights Day’’. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

DECEMBER 10, 2019 

Mr. COONS (for himself, Mr. TILLIS, and Mr. BLUMENTHAL) submitted the 

following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

DECEMBER 18, 2019 

Committee discharged; considered and agreed to 

RESOLUTION 

Recognizing the 71st anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the celebration of ‘‘Human 

Rights Day’’. 

Whereas the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by the United Nations on December 10, 1948, represents the first comprehensive agreement among countries as to the specific rights and freedoms of all human 

beings; 

Whereas the Universal Declaration of Human Rights upholds 

the basic principles of liberty and freedom enshrined in 

the Constitution of the United States and the Bill of 

Rights; 

Whereas awareness of human rights— 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

SRES 450 ATS 

(1) is essential to the realization of fundamental 

freedoms; 

(2) promotes equality; 

(3) contributes to preventing conflict and human 

rights violations; and 

(4) enhances participation in democratic processes; 

Whereas Congress has a proud history of promoting human 

rights that are internationally recognized; and 

Whereas December 10 of each year is celebrated around the 

world as ‘‘Human Rights Day’’: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the Senate— 

2 (1) designates December 10, 2019, as ‘‘Human 

3 Rights Day’’; 

4 (2) recognizes the 71st anniversary of the Uni5 versal Declaration of Human Rights; 

6 (3) reaffirms the Universal Declaration of 

7 Human Rights; 

8 (4) supports the right of human rights defend9 ers all over the world to promote the fundamental 

10 freedoms enshrined in the Universal Declaration of 

11 Human Rights; and 

12 (5) encourages the people of the United 

13 States— 

14 (A) to observe Human Rights Day; and 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
3 

SRES 450 ATS 

1 (B) to continue a commitment to uphold2 ing freedom, democracy, and human rights 

3 around the globe. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA

Present: Judges Kelsey, Petty and Senior Judge Bumgardner

ALLIED WASTE INDUSTRIES, INC. AND

 ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY

MEMORANDUM OPINION*

v. Record No. 0872-11-4 PER CURIAM

AUGUST 30, 2011

JAMES ASHBY

FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION

(Stephanie S. Ryan; Ryan Law PLLC, on briefs), for appellants.

(Robert B. Guntharp; Ritchie Law Firm, P.L.C., on brief), for 

appellee.

Allied Waste Industries, Inc. and Zurich American Insurance Company appeal a decision of 

the Workers’ Compensation Commission finding that James Ashby’s claim was not barred by 

willful misconduct. We have reviewed the record and the commission’s opinion and find that 

this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the commission in 

its final opinion. See Ashby v. Allied Waste Indust., VWC File No. VA000-0006-9121 (Mar. 

29, 2011). We dispense with oral argument and summarily affirm because the facts and legal 

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the Court and argument would not 

aid the decisional process. See Code § 17.1-403; Rule 5A:27.

Affirmed.

 * Pursuant to Code § 17.1-413, this opinion is not designated for publication.
<PAGE>

                                                                      Exhibit 23






                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS


We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statement on Form S-8 (File No. 333- 47153) of HMI Industries, Inc. of our
report dated February 13, 2004, except for Note 4, as to which the date is
February 20, 2004, relating to the financial statements, which appears in this
Annual Report on Form 10-K. We also consent to the incorporation by reference of
our report dated February 13, 2004, except for Note 4, as to which the date is
February 20, 2004, relating to the Financial Statement Schedule, which appears
in this Form 10-K.

Cleveland, Ohio
February 20, 2004
### §1332. Definitions

As used in this chapter—

(a) "Secretary" means the Secretary of the Interior when used in connection with public lands administered by him through the Bureau of Land Management and the Secretary of Agriculture in connection with public lands administered by him through the Forest Service;

(b) "wild free-roaming horses and burros" means all unbranded and unclaimed horses and burros on public lands of the United States;

(c) "range" means the amount of land necessary to sustain an existing herd or herds of wild free-roaming horses and burros, which does not exceed their known territorial limits, and which is devoted principally but not necessarily exclusively to their welfare in keeping with the multiple-use management concept for the public lands;

(d) "herd" means one or more stallions and his mares; and 1

(e) "public lands" means any lands administered by the Secretary of the Interior through the Bureau of Land Management or by the Secretary of Agriculture through the Forest Service.2

(f) "excess animals" means wild free-roaming horses or burros (1) which have been removed from an area by the Secretary pursuant to applicable law or, (2) which must be removed from an area in order to preserve and maintain a thriving natural ecological balance and multiple-use relationship in that area.

(Pub. L. 92–195, §2, Dec. 15, 1971, 85 Stat. 649; Pub. L. 95–514, §14(b), Oct. 25, 1978, 92 Stat. 1810.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1978—Subsec. (f). Pub. L. 95–514 added subsec. (f).

1 So in original. The word "and" probably should not appear.

2 So in original. The period probably should be "; and".
1

The Honorable Richard G. Kopf, United States District Judge for the District

of Nebraska.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 05-2235

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* District of Nebraska.

Fernando Rios-Serna, *

* [UNPUBLISHED]

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: January 5, 2006

Filed: January 11, 2006 

___________

Before MELLOY, HANSEN, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Fernando Rios-Serna pleaded guilty to conspiring to distribute and possess with

intent to distribute at least 500 grams of methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C.

§ 846. The district court1

 sentenced him at the bottom of the advisory Guidelines

range to 108 months in prison and 5 years of supervised release. On appeal, his

counsel has moved to withdraw and filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S.

738 (1967). For the reasons discussed below, we grant counsel’s motion and affirm.
-2-

Counsel argues that the sentence imposed is unreasonable under the standard

of review announced in United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005). However, a

sentence within the advisory Guidelines range is presumptively reasonable, and we

conclude that Rios-Serna has not satisfied his burden to rebut that presumption of

reasonableness. See United States v. Lincoln, 413 F.3d 716, 717-18 (8th Cir. 2005),

cert. denied, 2005 WL 3067440 (U.S. Dec. 12, 2005) (No. 05-7506).

After reviewing the record independently under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75

(1988), we have found no nonfrivolous issues for appeal. Accordingly, we grant

counsel’s motion to withdraw, and we affirm the judgment of the district court.

______________________________
<PAGE>

                              Verizon Hawaii Inc.


                                                                      EXHIBIT 12
                COMPUTATION OF RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                               Years Ended December 31,
                                                -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Dollars in Millions)                                     2001           2000            1999           1998            1997
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<S>                                              <C>             <C>             <C>             <C>             <C>
Income before provision for income taxes                $ 81.3         $135.1          $151.8         $101.3          $103.3
Equity in loss from affiliate                              5.3            ---             ---            ---             ---
Interest expense                                          38.9           37.9            39.6           44.1            39.2
Portion of rent expense representing interest              2.6            4.1             3.5            4.3             4.8
Amortization of capitalized interest                        .2             .2              .2             .2              .1
                                                -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Earnings, as adjusted                                   $128.3         $177.3          $195.1         $149.9          $147.4
                                                =============================================================================

Fixed charges:
Interest expense                                         $ 38.9        $ 37.9          $ 39.6         $ 44.1          $ 39.2
Portion of rent expense representing interest               2.6           4.1             3.5            4.3             4.8
Capitalized interest                                         .4            .5              .3             .6             2.0
                                                -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fixed Charges                                            $ 41.9        $ 42.5          $ 43.4         $ 49.0          $ 46.0
                                                =============================================================================

Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges                        3.06           4.17            4.50           3.06            3.20
                                                =============================================================================
</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<RESTATED>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          FEB-28-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             MAR-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               AUG-31-1997
<CASH>                                               1
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    3,173
<ALLOWANCES>                                       355
<INVENTORY>                                      3,556
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 7,629
<PP&E>                                           2,017
<DEPRECIATION>                                   1,021
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  15,608
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            6,348
<BONDS>                                          2,776
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                         19
<COMMON>                                            32
<OTHER-SE>                                       6,433
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    15,608
<SALES>                                          9,750
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                10,014
<CGS>                                            7,846
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    7,846
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    48
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 223
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     51
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 51
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                        51
<EPS-BASIC>                                   (0.14)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.14)


</TABLE>