alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### In the Matter of Incorporated Village of Ocean Beach, Appellant, v Department of Health Services, County of Suffolk, et al., Respondents.

[715 NYS2d 902]

—In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a deterniination of the *454Department of Health Services, County of Suffolk, dated May 15, 1998, denying the petitioner’s application for a permit to operate its ocean bathing beach for the 1998 season, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Floyd, J.), dated July 29, 1999, which denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

Initially, we note that this appeal presents an exception to the mootness doctrine *(cf., Matter of Hearst Corp. v Clyne,*50 NY2d, 707; *City of New York v Wiggles,*271 AD2d 632).

Contrary to the petitioner’s contention, the determination of the Department of Health Services, County of Suffolk, (hereinafter the County) denying it a permit to operate its bathing beach for the 1998 season after granting such a permit for the 1997 season, was not arbitrary and capricious. Although the factual predicates for its two determinations are almost identical, the County showed a proper basis for changing its determination based upon the 1998 amendment to the New York State Sanitary Code *(see,*10 NYCRR 6-2.13 [a]; 6-2.19 [5.1]), and a further review of the previous judicial decisions relating to this matter in light of that amendment *(see, Matter of Pokoik v Department of Health Servs.,*237 AD2d 368; *Matter of Pokoik v Department of Health Servs.,*168 Misc 2d 459; *see also, Matter of Richardson v Commissioner of N. Y. City Dept. of Social Servs.,*88 NY2d 35, 39-40; *Matter of Field Delivery Serv. [Roberts],*66 NY2d 516, 517). Thus, the Supreme Court properly denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding. Bracken, J. P., Ritter, Friedmann and Florio, JJ., concur. .
#### § 92.25 Title of affidavit.

Generally an affidavit taken for use in a pending cause must be entitled in that cause so that it will show to what proceedings it is intended to apply, and may support an indictment for perjury in case it proves to be false. If there is no suit pending at the time the affidavit is taken or if the affidavit is not to be used in any cause in court, no title need be given.
```

[House Report 110-447]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

110th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 1st Session                                                    110-447

======================================================================

 
 PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF THE CONFERENCE REPORT TO ACCOMPANY THE 
     BILL (H.R 3074) MAKING APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE DEPARTMENTS OF 
TRANSPORTATION, AND HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES 
 FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2008, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

                                _______
                                

 November 13, 2007.--Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 
                                printed

                                _______
                                

    Mr. Arcuri, from the Committee on Rules, submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                       [To accompany H. Res. 817]

    The Committee on Rules, having had under consideration 
House Resolution 817, by a non-record vote, report the same to 
the House with the recommendation that the resolution be 
adopted.

                SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS OF THE RESOLUTION

    The resolution waives all points of order against the 
conference report on H.R. 3074, Transportation, Housing and 
Urban Development, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 
2008, and against its consideration and provides that the 
conference report shall be considered as read.

                         EXPLANATION OF WAIVERS

    The waiver of all points of order against the conference 
report and against its consideration includes a waiver of 
clause 8 of rule XXII (requiring a three-day layover of 
conference reports and the accompanying joint explanatory 
statement). Although the rule waives all points of order 
against the conference report and against its consideration, 
the conference report does not violate either House Resolution 
491 or clause 9 or 10 of rule XXI (requiring earmarks to be 
disclosed in the conference report and requiring conference 
reports to be in compliance with the PAYGO rule).

                                  

```
Si()-l()()4()7-()2 3



### CIT Y O F JOHNSO N CIT Y TENNESSE E orrici".o r TMFCIT Y MAYO R March 25,201 0 Th e Honorabl e Raymon dH , LaHoo d Secretai > U.S . Departmen

t o f Transportatio n 120 0 Ne w Jersey Ave , S E Washington , D

C 2059 0 Docke t DOT-OST-2010-«» I Dea r Mr . Secretar>' : I t i s in y pleasure_ip,tak

e thi s opportunit

y t o expres s ou

r suppor t fo r th e applicatio n fo

r antitrus t irnfnunityaiitl'prQposc djoin t busines s agreement

filedb y America

n Airline s and Japa

n Airlines . Th

e propose d"alliance betwee n thesetw o airline s i s vita l fo r oneworl d to compete effectively wit h th e Sta r an d SkyTea malliance . Thi s increase dinterallianc e competitio n wil l i n tur n enhanc e th e benefit s o f

th e Department' s Open Skie s polic y - first b y solidifyin g U.S.-Japa

n Ope n Skies , the n b y servin g a s a foundatio n fo r fUrthe r liberalizatio n acros s Asia . O n behal f o f the Boar do f Commissioner s here i

n Johnso n Cit

y w e encourag e th e Departmen t o f Transportatio n t

o approv e thi s applicatio n a s i t woul d enabl e thes e oneworl d allianc e airline s to wor k closely togethe

r to deliver highl y competitiv e ai r

transportatio n services , an d improv e th e possibilit y o f globa l economic development . Approval fo r AA/JA L alUance wil l hav e apositiv e impac t on ai r trave l b y offerinf j oistomeri i mor

e cer-'ice , cohcdulin g and piiciii g upiiun s and wii i hel p x o ensure tna

t customer s continu e t o benefi t fromhavin g thre e competitiv e air alliance s to choos e from. Pleas e conside

r swif l an dpromp t endorsement

o f thi s application . Sincerely , .. . LWjMyrpni.Maypr

, ; ''City.o f Johnso n City<. ;

MUNICIPA L & SAFET Y BUILDIN G POS T OFFIC E BO X 215 0 JOHNSNO N CIT Y TENNESSE E 37605-215 0 PHON E (423 ) 434-600 0 FA X (423 ) 434-629 5
# Úradný vestník L 16I/2019

| | ISSN 1977-0790 |
| --- | --- |
| Úradný vestník
  Európskej únie | L 016I |
| | |
| Slovenské vydanie | Právne predpisy | Ročník 6218. januára 2019 |

ISSN 1977-0790

Úradný vestník

Európskej únie

L 016I

Slovenské vydanie

Právne predpisy

Ročník 6218. januára 2019

---

| Obsah | | Korigendá | Strana |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | * | Korigendum k vykonávaciemu nariadeniu Komisie (EÚ) 2019/73 zo 17. januára 2019, ktorým sa ukladá konečné antidumpingové clo a s konečnou platnosťou sa vyberá predbežné clo uložené na dovoz elektrických bicyklov s pôvodom v Čínskej ľudovej republike ( Ú. v. EÚ L 16, 18.1.2019 ) | 1 |

Obsah

Korigendá

Strana

*

Korigendum k vykonávaciemu nariadeniu Komisie (EÚ) 2019/73 zo 17. januára 2019, ktorým sa ukladá konečné antidumpingové clo a s konečnou platnosťou sa vyberá predbežné clo uložené na dovoz elektrických bicyklov s pôvodom v Čínskej ľudovej republike ( Ú. v. EÚ L 16, 18.1.2019 )

( Ú. v. EÚ L 16, 18.1.2019 )

1

| SK | Akty, ktoré sú vytlačené obyčajným písmom, sa týkajú každodennej organizácie poľnohospodárskych záležitostí a sú spravidla platné len obmedzenú dobu.
  Názvy všetkých ostatných aktov sú vytlačené tučným písmom a je pred nimi hviezdička. |
| --- | --- |

SK

Akty, ktoré sú vytlačené obyčajným písmom, sa týkajú každodennej organizácie poľnohospodárskych záležitostí a sú spravidla platné len obmedzenú dobu.

Názvy všetkých ostatných aktov sú vytlačené tučným písmom a je pred nimi hviezdička.

---

Korigendá

| 18.1.2019 | SK | Úradný vestník Európskej únie | LI 16/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.1.2019

SK

Úradný vestník Európskej únie

LI 16/1

---

Korigendum k vykonávaciemu nariadeniu Komisie (EÚ) 2019/73 zo 17. januára 2019, ktorým sa ukladá konečné antidumpingové clo a s konečnou platnosťou sa vyberá predbežné clo uložené na dovoz elektrických bicyklov s pôvodom v Čínskej ľudovej republike

(
  Úradný vestník Európskej únie L 16 z 18. januára 2019
  )

Na strane 135 v článku 4:

pred:

„Toto nariadenie je záväzné v celom rozsahu a priamo uplatniteľné vo všetkých členských štátoch.“

vložte text:

„Toto nariadenie nadobúda účinnosť dňom nasledujúcim po jeho uverejnení v Úradnom vestníku Európskej únie.“

---
#### Ameur International Corp., Appellant, v Dominican Industrial Corp. et al., Defendants-Respondents.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County, entered on January 24, 1977, unanimously affirmed on the opinion of Fraiman, J., at Special Term. Respondents shall recover of appellant $60 costs and disbursements of this appeal. Concur — Kupferman, J. P., Birns, Silverman and Capozzoli, JJ.
II 

Calendar No. 339 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2630 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 14, 2005 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and 

Governmental Affairs 

DECEMBER 16, 2005 

Reported by Ms. COLLINS, without amendment 

A BILL 

To redesignate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 1927 Sangamon Avenue in Springfield, 

Illinois, as the ‘‘J.M. Dietrich Northeast Annex’’. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. REDESIGNATION. 

4 The facility of the United States Postal Service lo5 cated at 1927 Sangamon Avenue in Springfield, Illinois, 

6 and known as the Northeast Annex, shall be known and 

7 designated as the ‘‘J.M. Dietrich Northeast Annex’’. 
2 

•HR 2630 RS 

1 SEC. 2. REFERENCES. 

2 Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 

3 paper, or other record of the United States to the facility 

4 referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference 

5 to the ‘‘J.M. Dietrich Northeast Annex’’. 

Calendar No. 339 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2630 

AN ACT 

To redesignate the facility of the United States 

Northeast Annex’’. in Springfield, Illinois, as the ‘‘J.M. Dietrich Postal Service located at 1927 Sangamon Avenue 

DECEMBER 16, 2005 

Reported without amendment
I 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 279

To amend the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 to include nurse 

practitioners and domestic partners within the scope of coverage of 

the Act and to extend the period of family or medical leave for spouses 

employed by the same employer. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 6, 2005

Ms. MILLENDER-MCDONALD introduced the following bill; which was referred 

to the Committee on Education and the Workforce, and in addition to 

the Committees on House Administration and Government Reform, for 

a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for 

consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned 

A BILL

To amend the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 to 

include nurse practitioners and domestic partners within 

the scope of coverage of the Act and to extend the 

period of family or medical leave for spouses employed 

by the same employer.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Family and Medical 

5 Leave Protection Act of 2005’’. 
2

•HR 279 IH 

1 SEC. 2. AMENDMENTS TO FAMILY AND MEDICAL LEAVE 

2 ACT OF 1993. 

3 (a) INCLUSION OF NURSE PRACTITIONER WITHIN

4 DEFINITION OF HEALTH CARE PROVIDER.—Section 

5 101(6) of the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 (29 

6 U.S.C. 2611(6)) is amended—

7 (1) in subparagraph (A), by striking ‘‘or’’ at 

8 the end; 

9 (2) by redesignating subparagraph (B) as sub10 paragraph (C); and 

11 (3) by inserting after subparagraph (A) the fol12 lowing new subparagraph: 

13 ‘‘(B) a nurse practitioner; or’’; 

14 (b) INCLUSION OF DOMESTIC PARTNER WITHIN

15 DEFINITION OF SPOUSE.—Section 101(13) of such Act 

16 (29 U.S.C. 2611(13)) is amended by inserting before the 

17 period at the end the following: ‘‘and includes a domestic 

18 or civil partner registered or recognized under the applica19 ble domestic or civil partnership State or local law’’. 

20 (c) EXTENSION OF PERIOD OF FAMILY OR MEDICAL

21 LEAVE FOR SPOUSES EMPLOYED BY SAME EMPLOYER.—

22 Section 102(f) of such Act (29 U.S.C. 2612(f)) is amend23 ed by striking ‘‘12 workweeks’’ and inserting ‘‘24 work24 weeks’’.

Æ
### §4341. Omitted

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section, Pub. L. 91–190, title II, §201, Jan. 1, 1970, 83 Stat. 854, which required the President to transmit to Congress annually an Environmental Quality Report, terminated, effective May 15, 2000, pursuant to section 3003 of Pub. L. 104–66, as amended, set out as a note under section 1113 of Title 31, Money and Finance. See, also, item 1 on page 41 of House Document No. 103–7.
§ 901.20 Party. *Party* means— ( a ) The grievant/charged employee;
( b ) The Agency or Agencies employing the grievant/charged employee and/or having control over the act, omission, or condition leading to appearance before the Board; or
( c ) The exclusive representative if it has achieved party status under § 903.4.
A Party may act through its duly designated representative. [50 FR 31353, Aug. 2, 1985, as amended at 56 FR 55458, Oct. 28, 1991]
#### In the Matter of Probate of the Will of Mary L. Cressey, Deceased. Bridget McGarry et al., Appellants; Elizabeth Connaughton et al., Respondents.

Decree unanimously affirmed, without costs of this appeal to any party. Memorandum: In our opinion, this instrument was neither executed nor attested in the manner required by section 21 of the Decedent Estate Law. (Appeal from decree of Monroe Surrogate’s Court dismissing the petition and denying probate to the claimed last will of decedent.) Present — Williams, P. J., Bastow, Goldman, McClusky and Henry, JJ.
§ 100.306 Intent to operate as housing designed for persons who are 55 years of age or older. ( a ) In order for a housing facility or community to qualify as housing designed for persons who are 55 years of age or older, it must publish and adhere to policies and procedures that demonstrate its intent to operate as housing for persons 55 years of age or older. The following factors, among others, are considered relevant in determining whether the housing facility or community has complied with this requirement: ( 1 ) The manner in which the housing facility or community is described to prospective residents;
( 2 ) Any advertising designed to attract prospective residents;
( 3 ) Lease provisions;
( 4 ) Written rules, regulations, covenants, deed or other restrictions;
( 5 ) The maintenance and consistent application of relevant procedures;
( 6 ) Actual practices of the housing facility or community; and
( 7 ) Public posting in common areas of statements describing the facility or community as housing for persons 55 years of age or older.
( b ) Phrases such as “adult living”, “adult community”, or similar statements in any written advertisement or prospectus are not consistent with the intent that the housing facility or community intends to operate as housing for persons 55 years of age or older.
( c ) If there is language in deed or other community or facility documents which is inconsistent with the intent to provide housing for persons who are 55 years of age or older housing, HUD shall consider documented evidence of a good faith attempt to remove such language in determining whether the housing facility or community complies with the requirements of this section in conjunction with other evidence of intent.
( d ) A housing facility or community may allow occupancy by families with children as long as it meets the requirements of §§ 100.305 and 100.306(a).
(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control number 2529-0046) [64 FR 16330, Apr. 2, 1999]
§ 518.73 Collection of amounts due. ( a ) Any funds paid to a recipient in excess of the amount to which the recipient is finally determined to be entitled under the terms and conditions of the award constitute a debt to the Federal Government. If not paid within a reasonable period after the demand for payment, the Federal awarding agency may reduce the debt by the provisions of paragraphs (a) (1), (2) or (3) of this section. ( 1 ) Making an administrative offset against other requests for reimbursements.
( 2 ) Withholding advance payments otherwise due to the recipient.
( 3 ) Taking over action permitted by statute.
( b ) Except as otherwise provided by law, the Federal awarding agency shall charge interest on an overdue debt in accordance with 4 CFR chapter II, “Federal Claims Collection Standards.”