alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### §3386. Omitted

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section, Pub. L. 89–10, title IX, §9005, formerly title VIII, §812, as added Pub. L. 93–380, title I, §110, Aug. 21, 1974, 88 Stat. 513; renumbered title IX, §1006, Pub. L. 95–561, title VIII, §801 (1), (2), Nov. 1, 1978, 92 Stat. 2284; renumbered title X, §1006, Pub. L. 96–46, §2(a)(1), Aug. 6, 1979, 93 Stat. 340; Pub. L. 96–88, title III, §301(a)(1), title V, §507, Oct. 17, 1979, 93 Stat. 677, 692; renumbered §8005, Pub. L. 100–297, title I, §1002(a), Apr. 28, 1988, 102 Stat. 293; renumbered title IX, §9005, Pub. L. 103–227, title X, §1032(1), (2), Mar. 31, 1994, 108 Stat. 270, which related to open meetings of educational agencies, was omitted in the general amendment of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, Pub. L. 89–10, by Pub. L. 103–382, title I, §101, Oct. 20, 1994, 108 Stat. 3519.
## U NITED 

## S TATES 

## N AVY



## – M ARINE 

## C ORPS 

## C OURT OF 

## C RIMINAL 

## A PPEALS

_________________________ No

. 201 600325

_________________________ 

### UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Appellee

v. 

### TYRONE M. WALKER Logistics Specialist Seaman Apprentice (E

- 2 ), U

. S

. Navy Appellant

___________

______________ Appeal from the United States Navy

- Marine Corps Trial Judiciary

Military Judge: Captain Charles N. Purnell, JAGC, USN

. Convening Authority: Comm odore
, First Navy Expeditionary

Logistics Regiment, Williamsburg, VA. Staff Judge Advocate’s Rec ommendation: Lieutenant Commander

Janelle M. Beal, JAGC, USN

. For Appellant : Commander Richard E.N. Federico, JAGC, USN

.

For Appellee: Brian K. Keller, Esq.

_________________________ Decided 16 February 2017

_________________________ Before C AMPBELL , R UGH , and E LLINGTON , Appellate Military Judges

_________________________ After careful consideration of the record, submitted without assignment of error, we affirm the findings and sentence as approved by the convening authority. Art. 66(c), Uniform Code of Mi litary Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 866(c).

For the Court

R.H. TROIDL Clerk of Court
### Part Z—Henry Kuualoha Giugni Kupuna Memorial Archives
<PAGE>   1
INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Post-Effective Amendment No. 1
to Registration Statement No. 333-42004 and Post-Effective Amendment No. 1 to
Registration Statement No. 33-67102 of Herbalife International, Inc. on Form
S-8 and in Post-Effective Amendment No. 2 to Registration Statement No.
33-48580 of Herbalife International, Inc. on Form S-3 of our report dated
February 27, 1998 appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Herbalife
International, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 1997.

DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

Los Angeles, California

March 4, 1998
(No. 79-CC-0631

#### Raymond J. Francheshini, Claimant, *v.*State of Illinois, Respondent.

*Order filed April 9, 1979.*

*961Per Curiam.

Claimant, an inmate of an Illinois penal institution, has brought this action to recover the value of certain items of personal property of which he was allegedly possessed while incarcerated. Claimant contends that his property was lost, misplaced, stolen or destroyed while he was imprisoned, and that the loss of his property was proximately caused by the negligence of employees of the State of Illinois.

In *Bargas v. State, 32*Ill.Ct.Cl.__, this Court held that the State of Illinois does not owe a duty to inmates of its penal institutions to safeguard property which inmates keep in their cells. In the companion case of *Doubling v. State, 32 Ill.Ct.Cl.1,*we further held that only where the State takes actual physical possession of the property of an inmate, as during the course of his transfer between penal institutions, does a duty arise to use reasonable care in protecting the inmate’s property.

The complaint in this action does not allege that Claimant’s property was delivered to agents of the State, but rather that the property disappeared or was damaged in Claimant’s cell. Under our reasoning in *Bargas v. State, supra,*and *Doubling v. State, supra,*the complaint herein fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.

It is therefore ordered that this cause be, and hereby is, dismissed.
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

 3,451.43

 3,451.28

 3,451.12

 3,451.00

 3,450.82

 3,450.70

 3,450.57

 3,450.49

 3,450.39

 3,450.26

 3,450.14

 3,450.07

 3,449.96

 3,449.83

 3,449.71

 3,449.64

 3,449.53

 3,449.40

 3,449.33

 3,449.27

 3,449.16

 3,449.03

 3,448.97

 3,448.95

 3,448.83

 3,448.73

 3,448.60

 3,448.54

 3,448.46

 3,448.41

 3,448.40

 29,431

 29,350

 29,264

 29,200

 29,104

 29,041

 28,972

 28,929

 28,876

 28,807

 28,743

 28,706

 28,648

 28,580

 28,517

 28,480

 28,422

 28,354

 28,317

 28,286

 28,228

 28,160

 28,128

 28,118

 28,056

 28,004

 27,936

 27,905

 27,863

 27,837

 27,832

STORAGE

-32

-81

-86

-64

-96

-63

-69

-43

-53

-69

-64

-37

-58

-68

-63

-37

-58

-68

-37

-31

-58

-68

-32

-10

-62

-52

-68

-31

-42

-26

-5

CHANGE

23.0

3.4

5.0

18.1

-0.6

11.2

-0.8

10.9

8.6

-0.6

1.2

13.5

1.4

1.2

2.2

15.0

2.7

-1.1

11.7

11.8

5.0

0.3

16.0

20.3

-1.1

2.1

-7.6

15.3

5.2

6.9

17.5

INFLOW

 35

 40

 44

 46

 44

 40

 31

 30

 32

 31

 31

 30

 27

 32

 31

 31

 29

 30

 28

 25

 31

 32

 30

 22

 28

 26

 24

 28

 25

 19

 19

CONDUIT

 .0

 .0

 .0

 .0

 .0

 .0

 .0

 .0

 .0

 .0

 .0

 .0

 .0

 .0

 .0

 .0

 .0

 .0

 .0

 .0

 .0

 .0

 .0

 .0

 .0

 .0

 .0

 .0

 .0

 .0

 .0

SPILL

 1.0

 1.0

 1.0

 1.0

 1.0

 1.0

 1.0

 1.0

 1.0

 1.0

 1.0

 1.0

 1.0

 1.0

 1.0

 1.0

 1.0

 1.0

 1.0

 1.0

 1.0

 1.0

 1.0

 1.0

 1.0

 1.0

 1.0

 1.0

 1.0

 1.0

 1.0

PK CR

 3.1

 3.2

 3.4

 3.4

 2.8

 2.0

 2.0

 1.6

 2.3

 2.2

 1.5

 1.2

 2.6

 2.5

 2.0

 1.7

 1.9

 2.2

 1.4

 1.4

 2.2

 1.6

 1.1

 2.3

 1.2

 1.3

 1.7

 1.9

 0.4

 0.0

 0.0

C.F.S.

 .176

 .185

 .195

 .195

 .160

 .117

 .116

 .095

 .135

 .130

 .090

 .067

 .150

 .148

 .117

 .100

 .109

 .131

 .083

 .081

 .129

 .093

 .063

 .133

 .068

 .078

 .103

 .113

 .025

 .000

 .002

INCHES

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .57

 .12

PRECIP

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

OCTOBER 2001 JENKINSON LAKE DAILY OPERATIONS RUN DATE: 11/16/2001

IN LAKE

EVAPORATION

INCHES

C.F.S.

COMPUTED*

ACRE-FEET

RELEASE - C.F.S. 

TOTALS -1,631 217.7 951 31.0 0.0 58.1 3.387 .69

ACRE-FEET -1,631 431.8 1,886 61.5 0.0 115.2

COMMENTS:

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

DATA BASED ON 24 HOUR PERIOD ENDING 0800.

SUMMARY

RELEASE (ACRE-FEET)

CAMINO-CONDUIT 1,886.3

SLY PARK CREEK

SPILL

 61.5

 0.0

 0.0

PRECIPITATION

THIS MONTH =

JULY 1, 2001 TO DATE = 1.07

 29,463

 1,886.3 0.69

CAMINO SLY

CAMP

CREEK

C.F.S.

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 1

 3

 4

 8

E.I.D. PROJECT

E.I.D. WATER RIGHTS
### §1403. Abrogation of State sovereign immunity

#### (a) In general

A State shall not be immune under the 11th amendment to the Constitution of the United States from suit in Federal court for a violation of this chapter.

#### (b) Remedies

In a suit against a State for a violation of this chapter, remedies (including remedies both at law and in equity) are available for such a violation to the same extent as those remedies are available for such a violation in the suit against any public entity other than a State.

#### (c) Effective date

Subsections (a) and (b) apply with respect to violations that occur in whole or part after October 30, 1990.

(Pub. L. 91–230, title VI, §604, as added Pub. L. 108–446, title I, §101, Dec. 3, 2004, 118 Stat. 2659.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 1403, Pub. L. 91–230, title VI, §604, as added Pub. L. 105–17, title I, §101, June 4, 1997, 111 Stat. 47, related to abrogation of State sovereign immunity, prior to the general amendment of subchapters I to IV of this chapter by Pub. L. 108–446.

Another prior section 1403, Pub. L. 91–230, title VI, §604, as added Pub. L. 101–476, title I, §103, Oct. 30, 1990, 104 Stat. 1106, related to abrogation of State sovereign immunity, prior to the general amendment of subchapters I to IV of this chapter by Pub. L. 105–17.

Another prior section 1403, Pub. L. 91–230, title VI, §604, Apr. 13, 1970, 84 Stat. 177; Pub. L. 93–380, title VI, §613, Aug. 21, 1974, 88 Stat. 580; Pub. L. 94–273, §§3(14), 13(2), Apr. 21, 1976, 90 Stat. 376, 378; Pub. L. 98–199, §4, Dec. 2, 1983, 97 Stat. 1358, established the National Advisory Committee on the Education of Handicapped Children and Youth, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 99–457, title IV, §407, Oct. 8, 1986, 100 Stat. 1177.
### §1087g. Repealed. Pub. L. 111–39, title IV, §404(b)(3), July 1, 2009, 123 Stat. 1946

Section, Pub. L. 89–329, title IV, §457, as added Pub. L. 102–325, title IV, §451, July 23, 1992, 106 Stat. 572; amended Pub. L. 103–66, title IV, §4021, Aug. 10, 1993, 107 Stat. 352, related to regulatory activities associated with implementation of the first year of the direct student loan program authorized by part D, including establishment of closing date for applications not later than Oct. 1, 1993, and publication of list of selected institutions not later than Jan. 1, 1994.

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date of Repeal

Repeal effective as if enacted on the date of enactment of Pub. L. 110–315 (Aug. 14, 2008), see section 3 of Pub. L. 111–39, set out as an Effective Date of 2009 Amendment note under section 1001 of this title.
<PAGE>

                                                            EXHIBIT 10.4
                                          
                                    GANTOS, INC.
                          1266 EAST MAIN STREET, 5TH FLOOR
                            STAMFORD, CONNECTICUT  06902
                                          
                                          
                                   March 16, 1999


Mr. Dennis Horstman
1266 East Main Street, 5th Floor
Stamford, Connecticut  06902

Dear Dennis:

     We have entered into a letter agreement, dated November 1, 1996 (the
"Agreement"), with respect to your employment with Gantos, Inc. ("Gantos").  In
connection with your continued employment by Gantos, you and Gantos desire to
extend the severance provisions of the Agreement by two years.  This letter (the
"Amendment") states our agreement with respect to the changes to the Agreement
and is entered into in exchange for good and valuable consideration, the receipt
and adequacy of which are acknowledged by both of us.

     1.   SEVERANCE.  The Agreement is amended by substituting the following for
the first and second to last sentences of Paragraph 5 of the Agreement:

     "You will receive twelve (12) months separation pay as your exclusive
     severance benefits in the event that your employment is terminated without
     cause (and other than pursuant to your death or disability) on or before
     December 2, 2000."

     "Payment on account of death or disability or for termination without cause
     after December 2, 2000 will be in accordance with the Company's policies
     concerning these areas."

     2.   NO OTHER CHANGE.  Except as modified by this Amendment, the Agreement
shall continue in full force according to its terms and is ratified.

     3.   COUNTERPARTS.  This Amendment may be signed in counterparts, both of
which together will be deemed an original of this Amendment.  This Amendment
will also be effective if evidenced by signed copies transmitted by telecopier
or facsimile transmission.

     If this letter correctly expresses our mutual understanding, please sign
and date the enclosed copy and return it to us.


                                        Very truly yours,

                                        GANTOS, INC.


                                        By:  
                                             

                                             Its:      
The terms of this agreement
are accepted and agreed to
on ____________________:



Dennis Horstman
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

 347

 355

 342

 341

 329

 357

 337

 355

 351

 344

 352

 346

 338

 334

 341

 357

 355

 356

 359

 361

 358

 361

 364

 360

 352

 338

 328

 321

 332

 342

 344

 316

 315

 312

 312

 311

 315

 312

 321

 312

 312

 318

 322

 307

 291

 311

 324

 340

 341

 338

 330

 332

 333

 325

 323

 306

 300

 300

 298

 308

 316

 311

 330

 331

 328

 323

 318

 331

 322

 331

 328

 325

 334

 330

 325

 313

 322

 333

 344

 347

 347

 343

 342

 344

 342

 336

 329

 313

 310

 309

 317

 323

 325

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

MARCH 2019 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: April 8, 2019

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

FARRAR PARK AT DUTCH SLOUGH
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<CIK>                         0000731947                 
<NAME>                        Swiss Army Brands, Inc.
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
<CURRENCY>                                     US Dollars
       
<S>                                           <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                  9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                                 JUL-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1.000
<CASH>                                         861
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  23,938
<ALLOWANCES>                                   994
<INVENTORY>                                    35,779
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               67,591
<PP&E>                                         10,791
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (7,000)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 95,098
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          18,058
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       882
<OTHER-SE>                                     76,158
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   95,098
<SALES>                                        80,943
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               80,943
<CGS>                                          51,019
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  35,095
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               399
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             136
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (4,636)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (1,847)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (2,789)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (2,789)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  (0.34)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (0.34)
        


</TABLE>
# United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 19-1911

___________________________ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee

v. Mauricio Eduardo Bayardo Chan, also known as Amigo, also known as Friend, also known as Mexico lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant

____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa - Dubuque

____________ Submitted: January 24, 2020 Filed: February 6, 2020 [Unpublished]

____________ Before SHEPHERD, STRAS, and KOBES, Circuit Judges.

____________ PER CURIAM.Mauricio Chan appeals after he pled guilty to drug and money-laundering

offenses, and the district court 1 imposed a 300-month prison term. His counsel filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), suggesting that the district court erred in applying three Guidelines enhancements. Even assuming the district court erred in applying the challenged enhancements, we conclude that any such error was harmless, in light of the court’ s statements at sentencing that Chan’s sentence was independent of the court’s Guidelines calculations, that the sentence was based on the 18 U.S.C. § 3553( a) factors, and that the court believed the same sentence would have been appropriate even if it had not applied the enhancements. See United States v. LaRoche, 700 F.3d 363, 365 (8th Cir. 2012) (misapplication of Guidelines is harmless if distri ct court would have imposed same sentence had it not relied on invalid factor); see als o United States v. Davis, 932 F.3d 1150, 1152 (8th Cir. 2019) (declining to address argument that district court erred in calculating Guidelines, in light of al ternative sentencing determination that rendered issue moot). Finally, we have independently reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988), and have found no non-frivolous issues. Accordingly, we affirm.

______________________________

1 The Honorable Leonard T. Strand, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa. -2-
#### Frances Beckish et al. *v.*Planning and Zoning Commission of the Town of Columbia

*Jerome I. Walsh,*for the appellee (defendant).

*Herbert A. Lane,*for the appellants (plaintiffs).

Argued February 2

decided February 2, 1971

The motion by the defendant to dismiss the appeal from the Superior Court in Tolland County is denied.
### §1070g–3. Program period and funding

Beginning on July 1, 2008, there shall be available to the Secretary to carry out this subpart, from funds not otherwise appropriated, such sums as may be necessary to provide TEACH Grants in accordance with this subpart to each eligible applicant.

(Pub. L. 89–329, title IV, §420O, as added Pub. L. 110–84, title I, §104, Sept. 27, 2007, 121 Stat. 790.)
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen

, Justices 

# Order

January 27, 2016

152810 ( 87 )

MIDWEST MEMORIAL GROUP

, LLC, ACACIA

PARK CEMETERY, ALBION MEMORY

GARDENS, CADILLAC MEMORIAL

GARDENS EAST, CADILLAC MEMORIAL

GARDENS WEST, CHAPEL GARDENS,

EASTLAWN MEMORIAL GARDENS AND

MAUSOLEUM, ELM LAWN CEMETERY,

FLORAL VIEW MEMORIAL GARDENS,

FOREST LAWN MEMORIAL GARDENS,

GARDEN OF REST MEMORIAL PARK,

GRACELAND MEMORIAL PARK AND

MAUSOLEUM, GRANDLAWN CEMETERY

AND MAUSOLEUM, HILLCREST MEMORIAL

PARK, KENT MEMORIAL GARDENS,

MIDLAND MEMORIAL GARDENS, MOUNT

HOPE MEMORIAL GARDENS, NORTHLAND

CHAPEL GARDENS, OAKLAND HILLS

MEMORIAL GARDENS, OAKLAWN CHAPEL

GARDENS, OAKVIEW CEMETERY,

OAKWOOD MEMORIAL MAUSOLEUM,

RESTLAWN MEMORIAL GARDENS,

ROSELAND PARK CEMETERY , ROSELAWN

MEMORIAL GARDENS, UNITED MEMORIAL

GARDENS, WASHTENONG MEMORIAL

PARK AND MAUSOLEUM, WOODLAWN

CEMETERY, and WOODMERE CEMETERY

, Plaintiff s

- Appell ees

, SC: 152810

v COA: 322338

Ingham CC: 2010

- 000025

- CR

CITIGROUP GLOBAL MARKETS

, INC

. d/b/a

SMITH BARNEY, CURRIE KENDALL, PETER

JENSEN, CLAYTON SMART, KIMBERLY2

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

January 27, 2016 SINGER, MARK SINGER, MKS FAMILY

, LLC,

INTERNATIONAL FUND SERVICES

, Defendant s

, and

PLANTE & MORAN

, PLLC,

Defendant

- Appellant.

______________________________ /

On order of the Chief Justice, t he motion of defendant

- appellant to extend the time

for filing its reply is GRANTED. The reply will be accepted as timely filed if submitted

on or before February 11, 2016.

Clerk
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-29-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JAN-12-1997
<CASH>                                         549,508
<SECURITIES>                                     4,769
<RECEIVABLES>                                  670,391
<ALLOWANCES>                                   121,368
<INVENTORY>                                    257,843
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,796,721
<PP&E>                                      11,253,320
<DEPRECIATION>                               5,078,482
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               8,832,373
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,462,157
<BONDS>                                      3,034,150
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     4,745,584
<OTHER-SE>                                 (2,573,851)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 8,732,373
<SALES>                                      4,617,337
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             4,772,701
<CGS>                                        1,264,016
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                4,029,503
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               710,837
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                32,161
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              98,873
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (98,673)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (98,673)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (98,673)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>