alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
322 P.2d 339

#### L. B. REEDER and F. I. Reel, copartnership, d/b/a Valley Oil Company, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. Jesse W. BOWMAN and Q. I. Sprayberry, d/b/a Bowman & Sprayberry, Defendants-Appellants.

No. 6336.

Supreme Court of New Mexico.

Feb. 27, 1958.

*8Apodaca, Keltner & Fowlie, John E. Brown, Albuquerque, for appellants.

McAtee, Toulouse & Marchiondo, Paul A. Phillips, Albuquerque, for appellees.

LUJAN, Chief Justice.

This is an action brought by the plaintiffs-appellees against the defendants-appellants on a promissory note and debt arising out of contract.

The chronology of certain events is necessary to an appreciation of the question on the motion filed by defendants to set aside the order of the district court appointing a receiver to take over the management and operation of defendants’ business.

The complaint was filed on March 18, 1957. On the same day a motion to appoint a receiver was likewise filed by plaintiffs. On March 18, 1957, the court made and entered an order directing the defendants to appear before said court on March 25, 1957, and then and there show cause why a receiver should not be appointed. Because the defendants did not appear on said date the court postponed the hearing until March 28, 1957, but defendants again failed to show up. At this last hearing the district court appointed a receiver. On April 16, 1957, two separate answers were filed. On June 4, 1957, defendants filed a motion seeking to have the receivership dissolved. On June 14, 1957, a similar motion was filed. On July 17, 1957, an order was made and entered by the court denying both motions. On July 22, 1957, an appeal was granted to this court from the order denying defendants’ motions to dissolve the receivership. On Oc*9tober 16, 1957, the transcript and defendants’ brief in chief were filed. On October 31, 1957, while the case was pending on the appeal, the district court made and entered an order terminating the receivership. On November 15, 1957, the plaintiffs filed a motion in this court to dismiss the appeal on the ground that the issue had become moot.

Where there is no actual controversy existing as to a question presented on appeal, the appellate court need not determine it. Consequently, it is not necessary for us to pass upon the validity of the district court’s order of March 28, 1957, appointing a receiver, and we do not do so. The validity of that order has now become moot.

In Yates v. Vail, 29 N.M. 185, 221 P. 563, 564, this court recognized the universal rule to be, “that an appellate court will not sit in judgment on a controversy which has ceased to exist,” and we are still of the same opinion.

The appeal should, be dismissed.

It is so ordered.

McGHEE and COMPTON, JJ., and H. VEARLE PAYNE, District Judge, concur.

KIKER, J., not participating.
#### In the Matter of the Application of Virginia Wainwright.

Appeal dismissed. (See *People*v. *Doe [Bernoff],*261 App. Div. 504; *People*v. *Doe [Bubenstein],*259 App. Div. 921; *People*v. *Reed,*276 N. Y. 5,13.) All concur. (The order denies a motion in behalf of Virginia Wainwright to vacate an order committing her to the custody of the Monroe County Sheriff as a material witness.) Present — Taylor, P. J., McCurn, Love, Vaughan and Kimball, JJ.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                         447,830
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   14,116
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               461,946
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 981,293
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,240,489
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                 (3,876,014)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   981,293
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                38,707
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                97,675
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              78,768
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (137,736)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (137,736)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (137,736)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
#### § 1822.12 Where do I file my application or other required documents?

You should file your application or other required documents at the BLM office having jurisdiction over the lands or records involved. The specific BLM office where you are to file your application is usually referenced in the BLM regulations which pertain to the filing you are making. If the regulations do not name the specific office, or if you have questions as to where you should file your application or other required documents, contact your local BLM office for information and we will tell you which BLM office to file your application.
* This matter is being decided by a quorum. 28 U.S.C. §

46(d).

** Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-20581 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus MORRIS SYLVESTER, Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. CR-H-95-84-1

- - - - - - - - - - February 11, 1999 Before BARKSDALE and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges. * PER CURIAM: ** Morris Sylvester appeals his conviction for conspiracy, wire fraud, mail fraud, and money laundering. Sylvester contends that the district court abused its discretion by admitting evidence that Kirkwood USA Enterprises (“Kirkwood”) did not file income tax information for the year 1992. Sylvester contends that the Government produced the evidence to create an inference that he had knowledge of Kirkwood’s illegal activities. SylvesterNo. 96-20581 -2- contends that this evidence was irrelevant because he was not the listed owner of Kirkwood and had no duty to report to the Internal Revenue Service. “We review questions concerning the admissibility of evidence for abuse of discretion.” United States v. Giraldi , 86 F.3d 1368, 1375 (5th Cir. 1996) (citation omitted). The district court’s admission of the evidence was not an abuse of discretion. AFFIRMED.
#### § 2.302 What terms are used in this subpart?

*Act* means the Social Security Number Fraud Prevention Act of 2017, Public Law 115-59.

*Bureau* is any component or constituent bureau or office of DOI, including the Office of the Secretary and any other Departmental office.

*Department* or *DOI* means the Department of the Interior.

*Document* means a piece of written or printed matter that provides information or evidence or that serves as an official record.

*Individual* means a natural person who is a citizen of the United States or an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence as defined by the Privacy Act of 1974, as amended, 5 U.S.C. 552a.

*Mail* means artifacts used to assemble letters and packages that are sent or delivered by means of an authorized carrier of postal delivery or United States Postal Service (USPS) postal system. (For purposes of the subpart, the postal system that is managed by the U.S. Postal Service.)

*Social Security number* or *Social Security account number* means the nine-digit number issued by the Social Security Administration to U.S. citizens, permanent residents, and temporary (working) residents under section 205(c)(2) of the Social Security Act, codified as 42 U.S.C. 405(c)(2).

*Truncated or partial SSN* means the shortened or partial Social Security account number.
## Earth Justice and US EPA Meeting Attendees May 15 , 2012 A meeting was held today to discuss general issues covered in the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants f or the Portland Cement Manufacturing Industry , and Standards of Performance for Portland Cement Plants Reconsideration Proposal. The following were in attendance: Earth Justice : Jim Pew Earthjustice Clients US EPA: Peter Westlin Sharon Nizich Keith Barnett Steffan Johnson Peter Tsirigotis Steven Silverman Wendy Bl ake
### **CHAPTER 32B—SAFEGUARD TRIBAL OBJECTS OF PATRIMONY**

Sec.
3071.
Purposes.
3072.
Definitions.
3073.
Export prohibitions; export certification system; international agreements.
3074.
Voluntary return of tangible cultural heritage.
3075.
Interagency working group.
3076.
Native working group.
3077.
Treatment under Freedom of Information Act.
3078.
Regulations.
3079.
Authorization of appropriations.
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

 2,354.82

 2,354.58

 2,354.36

 2,354.19

 2,353.99

 2,353.74

 2,353.59

 2,353.32

 2,353.08

 2,352.77

 2,352.58

 2,352.42

 2,352.28

 2,352.13

 2,351.98

 2,351.79

 2,351.61

 2,351.39

 2,351.12

 2,350.90

 2,350.68

 2,350.51

 2,350.33

 2,350.14

 2,349.91

 2,349.72

 2,349.55

 2,349.46

 2,349.26

 2,349.05

 2,348.82

 2,207.1

 2,203.4

 2,200.0

 2,197.4

 2,194.4

 2,190.6

 2,188.3

 2,184.2

 2,180.5

 2,175.8

 2,172.9

 2,170.5

 2,168.4

 2,166.1

 2,163.8

 2,160.9

 2,158.2

 2,154.9

 2,150.8

 2,147.5

 2,144.1

 2,141.6

 2,138.9

 2,136.0

 2,132.5

 2,129.7

 2,127.1

 2,125.8

 2,122.8

 2,119.6

 2,116.2

STORAGE

-3.2

-3.7

-3.4

-2.6

-3.1

-3.8

-2.3

-4.1

-3.7

-4.7

-2.9

-2.4

-2.1

-2.3

-2.3

-2.9

-2.7

-3.3

-4.1

-3.3

-3.3

-2.6

-2.7

-2.9

-3.5

-2.9

-2.6

-1.4

-3.0

-3.2

-3.4

CHANGE

123

156

381

353

148

143

59

-401

5

-377

211

355

677

451

418

233

271

74

-38

139

419

215

347

268

208

230

302

221

-57

2

-22

INFLOW

 995

 1,137

 1,487

 1,519

 1,518

 508

 0

 329

 1,171

 1,220

 1,527

 1,491

 1,445

 1,528

 1,459

 1,531

 1,533

 1,534

 1,535

 1,540

 1,962

 1,454

 1,538

 1,536

 1,544

 1,540

 1,465

 806

 1,391

 1,473

 1,551

POWER

 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

 616

 734

 433

 0

 0

 1,425

 1,033

 1,250

 503

 693

 129

 0

 142

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 339

 190

 0

 0

 0

 79

 202

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

OUTLET

 131

 135

 157

 144

 171

 130

 179

 94

 175

 85

 9

 89

 161

 71

 107

 151

 111

 218

 147

 84

 129

 53

 177

 97

 208

 128

 124

 97

 66

 119

 163

C.F.S.

 .29

 .30

 .35

 .32

 .38

 .29

 .40

 .21

 .39

 .19

 .02

 .20

 .36

 .16

 .24

 .34

 .25

 .49

 .33

 .19

 .29

 .12

 .40

 .22

 .47

 .29

 .28

 .22

 .15

 .27

 .37

INCHES

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .33

 .07

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

PRECIP

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

AUGUST 2019 TRINITY LAKE DAILY OPERATIONS RUN DATE: September 23, 2019

IN LAKE

EVAPORATION

INCHES

C.F.S.

COMPUTED*

1000 ACRE-FEET

RELEASE - C.F.S.

TOTALS -94.4 5,514 41,267 0 7,768 3,910 8.78 .40

ACRE-FEET -94,400 10,937 81,853 0 15,408 7,755

COMMENTS:

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

SUMMARY

RELEASE (ACRE-FEET)

POWER 81,853

SPILL 0

OUTLET

TOTAL

 15,408

 97,261

PRECIPITATION

THIS MONTH =

TO DATE =

 .40

JULY 1, 2019 .40

 2,210.3

(1) (1)

OCT 1, 2018 TO DATE = 37.27
#### §§ 2.229-2.230 [Reserved]
#### In the Matter of the Arbitration between Arcola Fabrics Corporation, Respondent, and Lanor Fabrics, Inc., Appellant. In the Matter of Arcola Fabrics Corporation, Respondent, for an Order Confirming an Award of Arbitration between Respondent and Lanor Fabrics, Inc., Appellant. In the Matter of the Arbitration between Arcola Fabrics Corporation, Respondent, and Lanor Fabrics, Inc., Appellant.

No opinion. Present — Peek, P. J., Dore, Cohn, Callahan and Van Voorhis, JJ.
§ 802.407 Reconsideration of Board decisions. ( a ) Any party-in-interest may, within 30 days from the filing of a decision or non-interlocutory order by a panel or the Board pursuant to § 802.403(b), request reconsideration of such decision by those members who rendered the decision. The panel of members who heard and decided the appeal will rule on the motion for reconsideration. If any member of the original panel is unavailable, the Chariman shall designate a new panel member.
( b ) Except as provided in § 801.301(d), a party may, within 30 days from the filing of a decision or non-interlocutory order by a panel of the Board pursuant to § 802.403(b), suggest the appropriateness of reconsideration by the permanent members sitting en banc. Such suggestion, however, must accompany a motion for reconsideration directed to the panel which rendered the decision. The suggestion for reconsideration en banc must be clearly marked as such.
( c ) Except as provided in § 801.301(d), even where no party has suggested reconsideration en banc, any permanent member may petition the permanent Board for reconsideration en banc of a panel decision.
( d ) Reconsideration en banc shall be granted upon the affirmative vote of the majority of permanent members of the Board. A panel decision shall stand unless vacated or modified by the concurring vote of at least three permanent members.
### §309b. Vocational education funds

Notwithstanding any other provision of law, funds provided by the Bureau for adult vocational education to any vocational school (as defined for purposes of any program of assistance to students under the Higher Education Act of 1965 [20 U.S.C. 1001 et seq.]) may be treated as non-Federal, private funds of such school for purposes of any provision of Federal law which requires that non-Federal or private funds of such school be used in a project or for a specific purpose.

(Pub. L. 100–297, title V, §5403(c), Apr. 28, 1988, 102 Stat. 416.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

The Higher Education Act of 1965, referred to in text, is Pub. L. 89–329, Nov. 8, 1965, 79 Stat. 1219, which is classified generally to chapter 28 (§1001 et seq.) of Title 20, Education. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 1001 of Title 20 and Tables.

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

#### Effective Date

For effective date and applicability of section, see section 6303 of Pub. L. 100–297, set out as an Effective Date of 1988 Amendment note under section 1071 of Title 20, Education.
[Cite as Lorain Cty. Sheriff's Office v. Ayers, 2023-Ohio-1180.]

STATE OF OHIO ) IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

)ss: NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

COUNTY OF LORAIN )

LORAIN COUNTY SHERIFF’S 

OFFICE

Respondent

v.

JAMES L. AYERS

Relator

C.A. No. 22CA011925

 

ORIGINAL ACTION IN 

MANDAMUS

Dated: April 10, 2023

PER CURIAM.

{¶1} Relator, James L. Ayers, has petitioned this Court for a writ of mandamus 

to “command the lower Avon Lake Municipal Court to permit [him] to pay the $10 filing 

fee for ‘his’ pro se motion to dismiss the traffic ticket, supra., which he received in Lorain 

County.” Avon Lake Municipal Court was not named as a respondent on the complaint, 

however. The only respondent named on the complaint, the Lorain County Sheriff’s 

Office, has moved to dismiss. For the following reasons, this Court grants the motion to 

dismiss.

{¶2} In its motion to dismiss, the Lorain County Sheriff’s Office argued that the 

complaint failed to comply with R.C. 2731.04. Specifically, the Sheriff’s Office argued 

that the complaint was not brought in the name of the state on the relation of the person 
C.A. No. 22CA011925

Page 2 of 3

applying, as required by the statute. According to the proof of service on the motion, the 

Sheriff’s Office served the motion at the address Mr. Ayers listed in his complaint. Mr. 

Ayers did not respond to the motion to dismiss.

{¶3} R.C. 2731.04 requires that a writ of mandamus must be brought “in the 

name of the state on the relation of the person applying.” When an objection to the form 

of the caption is raised in a motion to dismiss, as it was here, if relator moves to amend 

the complaint, the court should grant the motion to allow the matter to be resolved on the 

merits. Blankenship v. Blackwell, 103 Ohio St.3d 567, 2004-Ohio-5596, ¶ 35. If a 

respondent moves to dismiss on this basis, and relator does not move to amend the 

“complaint to comply with R.C. 2731.04, the mandamus action must be dismissed.” Id.

at ¶ 36.

{¶4} In this case, Mr. Ayers’ complaint does not comply with R.C. 2731.04. The 

Lorain County Sheriff’s Office raised this defect in its motion to dismiss. Mr. Ayers 

could have moved to amend his complaint, but he did not respond to the motion. Pursuant 

to Blankenship, this action must be dismissed.

{¶5} Because the mandamus complaint is deficient, the motion to dismiss is 

granted, and this case is dismissed. Costs are taxed to Mr. Ayers.

{¶6} The clerk of courts is hereby directed to serve upon all parties not in default 

notice of this judgment and its date of entry upon the journal. See Civ.R. 58(B).

JENNIFER L. HENSAL

FOR THE COURT
C.A. No. 22CA011925

Page 3 of 3

SUTTON, J.

LANZINGER, J.

CONCUR.

APPEARANCES:

JAMES L. AYERS, Pro se, Relator.

J.D. TOMLINSON, Prosecuting Attorney, and JACOB W. PULLAR, Assistant Prosecuting 

Attorney, for Respondent.
### §284p. Seventh replenishment; authorization of appropriations

(a) The United States Governor is hereby authorized to agree on behalf of the United States to pay to the Association $2,250,000,000 as the United States contribution to the seventh replenishment of the resources of the Association, except that any commitment to make such contributions shall be made subject to obtaining the necessary appropriations.

(b) In order to pay for the United States contribution provided for in subsection (a), there are authorized to be appropriated, without fiscal year limitation, $2,250,000,000 for payment by the Secretary of the Treasury.

(Pub. L. 86–565, §18, as added Pub. L. 98–473, title I, §101(1) [title I], Oct. 12, 1984, 98 Stat. 1884, 1885.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 18 of Pub. L. 86–565 is based on section 901 of S. 2582, Ninety-eighth Congress, as reported Apr. 18, 1984, and enacted into law by Pub. L. 98–473.

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

#### Credits Available to Sub-Saharan Africa

Pub. L. 98–473, title I, §101(1) [title I], Oct. 12, 1984, 98 Stat. 1884, 1885, provided: "That the Secretary of the Treasury shall instruct the United States Executive Director to undertake negotiations to ensure, to the maximum extent possible consistent with the effective use of resources, that the amount of development credits made available to sub-Saharan Africa through the seventh replenishment shall equal or exceed the amount of development credits made available to sub-Saharan Africa through the sixth replenishment."
EXHIBIT 24.2



                               POWER OF ATTORNEY

     KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that each person whose signature appears
below hereby constitutes and appoints Britt D. Banks, Sharon E. Thomas and
Thomas P. Mahoney, each of them acting individually, his or her true and lawful
attorney-in-fact and agent, with full power of substitution and revocation, in
his or her name and on his or her behalf, to do any and all acts and things and
to execute any and all instruments which said attorney-in-fact and agent may
deem necessary or advisable to enable Newmont USA Limited (the "Corporation") to
comply with the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the "Act"), and any rules,
regulations or requirements of the Securities and Exchange Commission in respect
thereof, including, without limitation, the power and authority to sign his or
her name in any and all capacities (including his or her capacity as a Director
and/or Officer of the Corporation) to (i) a Registration Statement on Form S-3,
or such other form as may be appropriate and any amendments, including
pre-effective and post-effective amendments to such Registration Statement and
supplements thereto, registering the issuance from time to time pursuant to Rule
415 of, among other things, debt securities of Newmont Mining Corporation and
guarantees thereof of the Corporation and (ii) any and all instruments or
documents filed as part of or in connection with such Registration Statement or
any amendments thereto, including any registration statement relating to such
Registration Statement that is to be effective upon filing pursuant to Rule 462
under the Securities Act; and the undersigned hereby ratifies and confirms all
that said attorney-in-fact and agent shall lawfully do or cause to be done by
virtue hereof

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have subscribed these presents as of
the 27th day of April, 2005.


              Signature              Title
              ---------              -----

       /s/ David H. Francisco        Chairman of the Board and Director
------------------------------------
           David H. Francisco


       /s/ Britt D. Banks            Vice President, General Counsel
------------------------------------ and Director
           Britt D. Banks


       /s/ Pierre Lassonde           Director
------------------------------------
           Pierre Lassonde


       /s/ Bruce D. Hansen           Director
------------------------------------
           Bruce D. Hansen


       /s/ Richard M. Perry          President and Director
------------------------------------ (Principal Executive Officer)
           Richard M. Perry

<PAGE>


       /s/ Thomas P. Mahoney         Vice President and Treasurer
------------------------------------ Principal Financial Officer)
           Thomas P. Mahoney


       /s/ Russell D. Ball           Vice President and Controller
------------------------------------ (Principal Accounting Officer)
           Russell D. Ball