alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### The People of the State of New York on Complaint of Theresa Soriano, Respondent, v. Joseph Soriano, Appellant.

Motion denied, upon the ground that, pursuant to the provisions of sections 74 and 94 of the Laws of 1910,* and title 3 of part 5 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court upon an appeal in this proceeding is final. Present — Jenks, P. J., Carr, Rich, Stapleton and Putnam, JJ.

*

*Sic.*See Laws of 1910, chap. 659, § 74, as amd. by Laws of 1911, chap. 881; Id. § 94. — [Rep.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

DAY HIGH

 3,014

 2,596

 2,215

 2,698

 4,082

 3,865

 3,453

 3,880

 4,135

 4,149

 3,943

 3,341

 2,581

 2,077

 2,198

 1,297

 933

 2,372

 1,834

 588

 3,031

 2,374

 3,589

 4,791

 5,301

 4,963

 4,051

 3,099

 2,605

 2,247

 2,239

 260

 274

 225

 215

 244

 241

 252

 292

 293

 309

 451

 319

 237

 288

 289

 240

 222

 204

 215

 216

 243

 304

 343

 415

 447

 315

 388

 425

 438

 397

 334

 866

 720

 576

 549

 803

 812

 820

 976

 1,116

 1,096

 1,112

 953

 743

 634

 579

 463

 354

 429

 410

 262

 580

 732

 1,158

 1,438

 1,395

 1,265

 1,032

 881

 867

 820

 785

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

AUGUST 2007 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: September 11, 2007

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

14 DAY

ACCUM

MEAN

14 DAY

AVG

MEAN

 6,892

 7,335

 7,660

 7,995

 8,577

 9,157

 9,665

 10,219

 10,812

 11,303

 11,735

 11,935

 11,906

 11,776

 11,489

 11,232

 11,010

 10,890

 10,497

 9,947

 9,707

 9,463

 9,505

 9,847

 10,130

 10,442

 10,731

 10,978

 11,266

 11,623

 12,054

 492

 524

 547

 571

 613

 654

 690

 730

 772

 807

 838

 853

 850

 841

 821

 802

 786

 778

 750

 711

 693

 676

 679

 703

 724

 746

 767

 784

 805

 830

 861

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

EMMATON BOTTOM ON THE SACRAMENTO RIVER
§ 222.160 What are the scope and purpose of this subpart? ( a ) *Scope.* This subpart applies to determinations made by the Secretary under section 8009 of the Act.
( b ) *Purpose.* The sole purpose of the regulations in this subpart is to implement the provisions of section 8009. The definitions and standards contained in this subpart apply only with respect to section 8009 and do not establish definitions and standards for any other purpose.
(Authority: 20 U.S.C. 7709)
DISMISS; Opinion issued February 20, 2013 

# S

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05

- 12

- 01366

- CV

HELEN CLARK , Appellant

V.

THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON, Appellee

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 2 Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. CC

- 12

- 04514

- B

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Chief Justice Wright, and Justices Lang

- Miers and Lewis Opinion by Chief Justice Wright

By postcard dated October 5, 2012, we n otified appellant the $175 filing fee was due.

We cautioned appellant that failure to pay the filing fee within ten days would result in the

dismissal of this appeal. To date, appellant has not paid the filing fee.

Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal. Se e T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.3(b), (c).

121366F.P05 /Carolyn Wright/

CAROLYN WRIGHT

CHIEF JUSTICE2 

# S

Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT

HELEN CLARK, Appellant

No. 05

- 12

- 01366

- CV V.

THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON, Appellee On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 2, Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. CC

- 12

- 04514

- B. Opinion delivered by Chief Justice Wright. Justices Lang

- Miers and Lewis participating.

In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, this appeal is DISMISSED

.

It is ORDERED that appellee THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON, recover its costs of this appeal from appellant HELEN CLARK.

Judgment entered February 20, 2013.

/Carolyn Wright/

CAROLYN WRIGHT

CHIEF JUSTICE
DISMISS and Opinion Filed May 12, 2021 

S 

In The 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-12-01515-CV 

EDUARDO WILKINSON, M.D. P.A. AND INDIVIDIALLY, Appellant 

V. 

RICHARDSON HOSPITAL AUTHORITY, Appellee 

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 5 

Dallas County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. CC-10-02678-E 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

Before Chief Justice Burns, Justice Molberg, and Justice Smith 

Opinion by Chief Justice Burns 

We reinstate this appeal. In 2013, we abated this case due to bankruptcy. See 

TEX.R. APP. P. 8.2. The Court conducted an independent review of the federal Public 

Access to Court Electronic Records (PACER) system which shows the bankruptcy 

case associated with this appeal was terminated on November 7, 2013, effectively 

dissolving the automatic stay. 

We notified the parties by letter, requesting they inform the Court of the status 

of the bankruptcy and of this appeal. We cautioned that the failure to respond would 

result in the appeal being dismissed for want of prosecution. See id. 42.3(b),(c). To 

date, neither party has responded. 
 –2– 

Because we gave the parties an opportunity to show why we should not 

dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution and no one responded, we dismiss this 

appeal. See id. 42.3(b),(c); Brewer v. Admiral Ins. Co., 2002 WL 31312990, at *1 

(Tex. App.—Dallas Oct. 16, 2002, no writ) (per curiam) (not designated for 

publication). 

121515F.P05 

 

/Robert D. Burns, III/

ROBERT D. BURNS, III 

CHIEF JUSTICE 
 –3– 

S 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

JUDGMENT 

EDUARDO WILKINSON, M.D. 

P.A. AND INDIVIDIALLY, 

Appellant 

No. 05-12-01515-CV V. 

RICHARDSON HOSPITAL 

AUTHORITY, Appellee 

 On Appeal from the County Court at 

Law No. 5, Dallas County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. CC-10-02678-

E. 

Opinion delivered by Chief Justice 

Burns. Justices Molberg and Smith 

participating. 

 In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, this appeal is 

DISMISSED. 

Judgment entered May 12, 2021
## Legend Panhandle West Panhandle East North Central Peninsula West Central South
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

DAY ELEV

 1,195.45

 1,196.46

 1,197.58

 1,198.36

 1,198.43

 1,198.37

 1,198.34

 1,198.29

 1,198.27

 1,198.26

 1,198.24

 1,198.22

 1,198.21

 1,198.20

 1,198.19

 1,198.18

 1,198.21

 1,198.23

 1,198.24

 1,198.24

 1,198.23

 1,198.22

 1,198.21

 1,198.21

 1,198.21

 1,198.21

 1,198.21

 1,198.20

 1,198.20

 1,198.18

 1,198.18

 43.56

 45.25

 47.17

 48.53

 48.66

 48.55

 48.50

 48.41

 48.37

 48.36

 48.32

 48.28

 48.27

 48.25

 48.23

 48.21

 48.27

 48.30

 48.32

 48.32

 48.30

 48.28

 48.27

 48.27

 48.27

 48.27

 48.27

 48.25

 48.25

 48.21

 48.21

STORAGE

+0.45

+1.69

+1.92

+1.36

+0.12

-0.11

-0.05

-0.09

-0.04

-0.02

-0.04

-0.04

-0.02

-0.02

-0.02

-0.02

+0.05

+0.04

+0.02

+0.00

-0.02

-0.02

-0.02

+0.00

+0.00

+0.00

+0.00

-0.02

+0.00

-0.04

+0.00

CHANGE

230

857

974

786

214

50

55

6

25

27

9

2

9

4

0

-2

43

40

38

29

19

12

9

15

17

18

18

9

22

-9

10

INFLOW

 0

 0

 0

 92

 147

 99

 78

 47

 37

 31

 22

 14

 10

 6

 4

 0

 10

 18

 22

 22

 18

 14

 10

 10

 10

 10

 10

 6

 7

 0

 0

SPILL

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

OUTLET

 3

 3

 5

 5

 3

 3

 3

 3

 5

 4

 4

 5

 7

 6

 4

 6

 5

 3

 6

 6

 9

 6

 7

 4

 6

 7

 7

 11

 14

 8

 9

C.F.S.

 .05

 .05

 .08

 .08

 .06

 .05

 .05

 .06

 .08

 .07

 .07

 .08

 .12

 .11

 .07

 .10

 .08

 .06

 .10

 .11

 .15

 .11

 .13

 .07

 .10

 .12

 .13

 .20

 .25

 .14

 .16

INCHES

 .58

 .55

 .46

 .04

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .01

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .01

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

PRECIP

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-ORLAND PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

MARCH 2009 EAST PARK RESERVOIR DAILY OPERATIONS RUN DATE: 04/01/2009

IN LAKE

EVAPORATION

INCHES

C.F.S.

COMPUTED*

1000 ACRE-FEET

RELEASE - C.F.S.

TOTALS +5.06 3,536 31 754 177 3.09 1.65

ACRE-FEET +5,060 7,014 61 1,496 351

COMMENTS:

* COMPUTED INFLOW IS THE SUM OF CHANGE IN STORAGE, RELEASES AND EVAPORATION.

DATA BASED ON 24 HOUR PERIOD ENDING 0800 AM.

SUMMARY RELEASE (ACRE-FEET)

SPILL 1,496

OUTLET

TOTAL

 61

 1,557

PRECIPITATION

THIS MONTH =

TO DATE =

 1.65

JULY 1, 2008 8.05

 43.11
EXHIBIT 31.2



CERTIFICATION



I, James G. Clark, certify that:



1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Education Lending Group, Inc.;



2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material
fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;



3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present
in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;



4. The registrants other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined
in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:



(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including
its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;



(b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions
about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and



(c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the
registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over
financial reporting; and



5. The registrants other
certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of registrants board of directors (or persons performing the
equivalent functions):



(a) All significant
deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial
information; and



(b) Any fraud, whether or
not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal controls over financial reporting.



|                     |  |        |  |                        
|-------------------- |  | ------ |  | -----------------------
|Date: August 9, 2004 |  | By:    |  | /s/ James G. Clark     
|                     |  | Name:  |  | James G. Clark         
|                     |  | Title: |  | Chief Financial Officer
(No. 74-CC-608

#### Central Office Equipment Co., Claimant, *vs.*State of Illinois, Secretary of State, Respondent.

*Opinion filed June 5, 1974.*

Central Office Equipment Co., Claimant, pro se.

William J. Scott, Attorney General; Howard W. Feldman, Assistant Attorney General, for Respondent.

Per Curiam.
#### § 280.21 Seizure of aircraft.

Seizure of an aircraft under the authority of section 239 of the Act and § 280.2 will not be made if such aircraft is damaged to an extent that its value is less than the amount of the fine which may be imposed. If seizure of an aircraft for violation of section 239 of the Act is to be made, Form G-297 (Order to Seize Aircraft) and Form G-298 (Public Notice of Seizure) shall be prepared in septuple and the originals furnished to the immigration officer who will effect the seizure. The original of Form G-297, properly endorsed as to date and place of seizure, shall be returned for retention in the relating file after seizure is effected. The original of Form G-298 shall be placed on the seized aircraft and a copy retained in the file. Copies of both forms shall be served upon the owner of the aircraft and the pilot if other than the owner. Copies shall also be furnished the district director of customs and the United States Attorney for the district in which the seizure was made. In addition, immediately upon the seizure of an aircraft, or prior thereto, if circumstances permit, a full report of the facts in the case shall be submitted by the district director to the United States Attorney for the district in which the seizure was made, together with copies of Form G-296 (Report of Violation) and Form I-79 (Notice of Intention to Fine). The report shall include the cost incurred in seizing and guarding the aircraft and an estimate of the further additional cost likely to be incurred.

[29 FR 14433, Oct. 21, 1964, as amended at 32 FR 17651, Dec. 12, 1967]
§ 19.673 Small plant permit applications. ( a ) *General.* Any person wishing to establish a small plant must file form TTB F 5110.74, Application and Permit for an Alcohol Fuel Producer Under 26 U.S.C. 5181, with the appropriate TTB officer. Except as otherwise provided in § 19.674(d), a person may not commence operations before issuance of the permit.
( b ) *Application information.* The applicant for a small plant permit must include the following information with the application: ( 1 ) Name and mailing address of the applicant, and the location of the plant if not the same as the mailing address;
( 2 ) A diagram of the plant premises;
( 3 ) A statement regarding ownership of the premises. If the premises are not owned by the applicant, the owner's consent for access by TTB officers must be furnished;
( 4 ) A description of the stills on the premises and a statement of the maximum capacity of each;
( 5 ) A description of the materials from which spirits will be produced; and
( 6 ) A description of the security measures to be used to protect the premises, buildings, and equipment where spirits are produced, processed, and stored.
( c ) *Information already on file.* If any of the information required by this section is already on file with TTB and the information is accurate and complete, the applicant may advise the appropriate TTB officer that the information on file is incorporated by reference and made part of the application, unless the applicant will not conduct bona fide production operations.
( d ) *Additional information.* When required by the appropriate TTB officer, the applicant must furnish, as part of the application for a permit under this section, any additional information required by TTB to determine whether the application should be approved.
( e ) *Bonds.* The applicant is not required to provide a bond in order to establish a small plant, unless the applicant will not conduct bona fide production operations. Plants for the receipt of spirits without production must furnish a bond in accordance with § 19.699 with a penal sum as prescribed in § 19.700. The appropriate TTB officer must approve the bond before issuance of the permit.
(26 U.S.C. 5181)
Exhibit 3.33.1
 ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION
 OF
 MAGELLAN SHIPPING CORPORATION
 PURSUANT TO THE MARSHALL ISLANDS BUSINESS CORPORATIONS ACT
  A.
    
    The name of the Corporation shall be:
 MAGELLAN SHIPPING CORPORATION
 B.
    
    The purpose of the Corporation is to engage in any lawful act or activity for which corporations
may now or hereafter be organized under the Marshall Islands Business Corporations Act.C.
    
    The registered address of the Corporation in the Marshall Islands is Trust Company Complex,
Ajeltake Road, Ajeltake Island, Majuro, Marshall Islands MH96960. The name of the Corporations
registered agent at such address is The Trust Company of the Marshall
Islands, Inc.D.
    
    The aggregate number of shares of stock that the
Corporation is authorized to issue is Fifty Thousand (50,000) registered shares with a par value of
One US Dollar (US$1.00) per share.E.
    
    The Corporation shall have every power which a corporation now or hereafter organized under the
Marshall Islands Business Corporations Act may have.F.
    
    The name and address of the incorporator is:
 Name
    

Post Office AddressMajuro Nominees Ltd.
    
    P.O. Box 1405MajuroMarshall Islands




---



##### 



G.
    
    The Board of Directors as well as the shareholders of the Corporation shall have the authority
to adopt, amend or repeal the bylaws of the Corporation.H.
    
    Corporate existence shall begin upon filing these Articles of Incorporation with the Registrar
of Corporations as of the filing date stated on these Articles.
  Majuro Nominees Ltd.
       Incorporatorby:

(-s-)
Exhibit 23.2
 Consent
of Independent Auditors
Editorial Note on Part 13
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 13 appear by T.D. ATF-449, 66 FR 19085, Apr. 13, 2001.

§ 13.61 Publicity of information. ( a ) *Pending and denied applications* — ( 1 ) *General.* Pending and denied applications for certificates of label approval, certificates of exemption from label approval, or distinctive liquor bottle approvals are treated as proprietary information, unless the applicant or certificate holder provides written authorization to release such information.
( 2 ) *Labels that make organic claims.* TTB will disclose applications for approval of labels that make organic claims to the appropriate office of the United States Department of Agriculture to assure such labels comply with National Organic Program rules.
( b ) *Approved applications.* The appropriate TTB officer shall cause to be maintained in the TTB public reading room for public inspection, a copy of each approved application for certificate of label approval, certificate of exemption from label approval, or distinctive liquor bottle approval. These documents may be viewed during business hours at 1310 G Street NW., Washington, DC, or by viewing the Public COLA Registry on the TTB Web site at (*http://www.ttb.gov*).
( c ) *Revoked certificates.* If an approved certificate is subsequently revoked, the record of the approved application will remain on file for public inspection, but the index will be annotated to show it was revoked.
( d ) *Further disclosure of information on denied or revoked certificates.* If an applicant whose application is pending or has been denied, or a holder of a revoked certificate of label approval, certificate of exemption from label approval, or distinctive liquor bottle approval, issues public statements concerning TTB action in connection with such application or certificate, then TTB may issue a statement to clarify its position or correct any misstatements of fact, including a disclosure of information contained on the application or certificate of label approval, certificate of exemption from label approval, or distinctive liquor bottle approval.
[T.D. ATF-406, 64 FR 2129, Jan. 13, 1999, as amended by T.D. ATF-483, 67 FR 62859, Oct. 8, 2002]
(No. 6597

#### Ruth Feather Allison, Executrix of Raymond Feather, Deceased, Claimant, vs. State of Illinois, Department of Corrections, Respondent.

*12
      *Opinion filed July 14, 1972.*

Arnold and Kadjan, Attorney for Claimant.

William J. Scott, Attorney General; Saul R. Wexler, Assistant Attorney General, for Respondent.

Perlin, C.J.
#### Omaha Loan & Trust Company, appellee, v. Mary Ann Fitzpatrick, appellant.

Filed November 23, 1899.

No. 9,024.

1. Conflicting Evidence: Review. A finding of the trial court upon conflicting- evidence will not be disturbed or reviewed.

S. Judicial Sales: Appraisement. The appraisement of property for the purposes of judicial sale, as being too low, can be assailed only for fraud.

Appeal from the district court of Douglas county. Heard below before Powell, J.

*Affirmed.*

*I. J. Dunn,*for appellant.

*Francis A. Brogan, contra.*

Norval, J.

This appeal was taken from an order confirming a sale of real estate, the sole objection being that the property was appraised too low. The evidence adduced by the defendant tended to establish that the real estate was worth a much larger sum than was fixed in the appraisement, while the proof introduced on behalf of the plaintiff was to the effect that the property was not worth more than the figure at which it was appraised. We must refrain from weighing conflicting evidence, farther than to ascertain that it sustains the finding. There is an entire lack of evidence to establish fraud in making of the appraisement. The order appealed from is

Affirmed.
IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

In re ) Chapter

) 

) Case Number. 

) 

Debtor(s) )

) 

REQUEST OF ATLAS ACQUISITIONS

FOR SERVICE OF NOTICES PURSUANT TO FED. R. BANKR. P. 2002(g)

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that Atlas Acquisitions LLC, a creditor in the above-captioned case, 

requests, pursuant to Rules 2002 and 9007 of the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure (the 

Bankruptcy Rules) and sections 102(1), 342 and 1109(b) of title 11 of the United States Code, 

11 U.S.C. §§ 101, et seq. (as amended, the Bankruptcy Code), that all notices given or required 

to be given and all papers served or required to be served in this case be also given to and 

served, whether electronically or otherwise, on:

Atlas Acquisitions LLC

294 Union St.

Hackensack, NJ 07601

Attn: Avi Schild

Telephone: (888) 762-9889

Facsimile: (201) 546-9377

E-mail: bk@atlasacq.com

Dated:

By: /s/ Avi Schild

Avi Schild

c/o Atlas Acquisitions LLC

President

294 Union St.

Hackensack, NJ 07601

(888) 762-9889 

Assignee Creditor:

7

Judge Klinette H. Kindred 20-10143 03/17/2020 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA ALEXANDRIA DIVISON

Francis J Robinson and

Renita L Priestley,

Snap Finance [Last four digits of account: 50VA]

Case 20-10143-KHK Doc 13 Filed 03/17/20 Entered 03/17/20 12:38:46 Desc Main

Document Page 1 of 1
^ .^^ r^t? —-

G&ujesnw county ^^^ly-lJ7vs <jaut*/r \-wtt?

(

m
^n/HT, rfHV TKJ7WC oOUt«T SHOUli 1WT
-TPt/£

JUKTSCCOtjOM TO £2^U/€" TKC.-'lH'^-aOf0

Mug i/hv^ u(\m ,rH/f??i/H/v ni^tvhi^if^

xaio, jiMra2t craad, suASvnrcrw;jm3* 2^55^

fll I MUST Cl«4rtS'^KttfiHT 0« *frctt**>T TC^GMnXK

-ivi.oito _

3
$ftk? Kjftr r <w/\tfli/ \ uMV/ kUfr. l.Q?>/ 1-^flS &\r

-TC\l\ C\\B€ -ifimnT£\l\^F KUTX. \n\(\4. (n(nl,

nx vwrwtw / \\rK, centrum .ncpvfcffr vwrfKVMM **r, l/HOm/ll/dX KWU^rS ID TH/W"

r-£uw£ ^rviMr ums ezcsmc s.sev? caj Gravis.

s t"W r K9C cA4vt/5r W/C otfM cm-m-lUW«e ih£3 jtj
T\AM -bTVfrt/ PRL>W WlESMTZ TKWTWlY IST MSt '

rrmJmv?v> ,,,^K7PMr^ Am4-,ftxr i-arnan-te

.TKfcS

5
TM/T lrtv*V*(fTl/tA/r

FtTi^0UO€'5 CU/UVH5 •W€C-

.... . ivi^r fV0€ - -

'WK^

^ywr tsuiwwj (ivcr imxise fqotq m^k and

om nvi _iMKiaj2^^-m^mnmn-'f -*hv;lore

-TUtS

nor/ ok su^tauvf of wmi3£MLD^m

[\S\AMF:Wk'-

mUcy^ in4,^h^; f^wmw^

tl&fl. ^Kom^c^kaM?)

rfftffl0 AS ;U*>^ .^MS

AbslAcosta,Clerk
§ 76.799 Do the requirements in this subpart apply to LEAs? ( a ) Each LEA that is responsible for funding a charter school under a covered program must comply with the requirements in this subpart on the same basis as SEAs are required to comply with the requirements in this subpart.
( b ) In applying the requirements in this subpart (except for §§ 76.785, 76.786, and 76.787) to LEAs, references to SEA (or State), charter school LEA, and LEA must be read as references to LEA, charter school, and public school, respectively.
(Authority: 20 U.S.C. 8065a)