alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 246.8 Materials to be submitted to HUD in support of preemption request. ( a ) After posting or delivery of the Notice as required by § 246.7, the mortgagor shall immediately send HUD notification of its intention to file a preemption request, to include: ( 1 ) The written Notice to the tenants, which will state the date of its posting and distribution.
( 2 ) An annual Statement of Profit and Loss, on a form prescribed by the Commissioner, audited by an independent public accountant and covering the most recently ended accounting year, and if more than four months have elapsed since the date of the Profit and Loss Statement, an unaudited accrual Profit and Loss Statement on a form prescribed by the Commissioner for the intervening period since the date of the annual statement, with the mortgagor's certification as to its accuracy.
( 3 ) A certified statement which provides a separate breakdown for the percentage of vacancies for the present and previous year.
( 4 ) A certified statement which provides a separate breakdown of the actual rent loss due to nonpayment of rent for the past 2 years.
( 5 ) A certified statement which provides a separate breakdown of rent loss due to tenant turnover for the past 2 years.
( 6 ) A certified statement covering known approved rate or cost increases not yet experienced by the project which can be documented by the following: ( i ) Tax rates or appraisals,
( ii ) Utility rates,
( iii ) Contracts for employees or services,
( iv ) Insurance, and
( 7 ) A certified statement covering known decreases of rates or costs not yet experienced by the project which have been approved and can be documented as follows: ( i ) Tax rates or appraisals,
( ii ) Utility rates,
( iii ) Contracts for employees or services,
( iv ) Insurance. If there are none, the mortgagor must so certify.
( 8 ) A copy of the full application to the board with supporting documentation.
( b ) The local HUD office shall review the mortgagor's submission promptly upon receipt, to ascertain that it is complete as required by paragraph (a) of this section. Should the submission be found to be incomplete, the local HUD office shall notify the mortgagor within 48 hours of the review of its determination that further material is necessary to constitute a complete submission as defined in paragraph (a) of this section.
( c ) When the submission is complete, the HUD office shall hold the mortgagor's submission as specified in paragraph (a) of this section in abeyance until a preemption request is received pursuant to § 246.9.
( d ) If the mortgagor subsequently resubmits any change to the submission as described in paragraphs (a) (1) through (7) of this section, it will be required to provide the tenants with an additional 30 days to comment.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                          15,739
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                29,000
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                    111,333
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                           111,333
<LOANS>                                        163,896
<ALLOWANCE>                                      3,882
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 324,726
<DEPOSITS>                                     274,013
<SHORT-TERM>                                    15,712
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              3,748
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        20,771
<OTHER-SE>                                      10,482
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 324,726
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                  4,133
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                1,530
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   374
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                 6,037
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               1,512
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,651
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            4,386
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                        0
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                  61
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  3,203
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  2,655
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       2,655
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,556
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.33
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.32
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    .060
<LOANS-NON>                                      1,033
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 3,871
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                        3
<RECOVERIES>                                        14
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                3,882
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             3,882
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        

</TABLE>
NO. 07-01-00503-CV 

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILLO

PANEL D

JANUARY 29, 2002

______________________________

GERALD MEYERDIRK

Appellant

v.

J&L CATTLE ASSOCIATES, LTD d/b/a J. K. CATTLE COMPANY

Appellee

______________________________

FROM THE 47TH DISTRICT COURT OF RANDALL COUNTY;

NO. 46,941-A; HON. DAVID L. GLEASON, PRESIDING

______________________________

ORDER ON APPELLANT’S MOTION TO WITHDRAW NOTICE OF APPEAL

 

Before BOYD, C.J., QUINN and REAVIS, JJ.

Gerald Meyerdirk appellant, has moved to withdraw his notice of appeal contending

that he “no longer wishes to pursue this Appeal.” Without passing on the merits of the case,

we grant the motion pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.1(a)(2) and dismiss

the appeal. Having dismissed the appeal at appellant’s personal request, no motion for

rehearing will be entertained, and our mandate will issue forthwith.

 Brian Quinn 

 Justice

Do not publish.
Exhibit 32.2

                   Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C.ss.1350

     In connection with the filing with the United States Securities and
Exchange Commission of Emergent Group Inc.'s (the "Company") Quarterly Report on
Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended March 31, 2004 (the "Report"), the
undersigned, the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, hereby certify that (i) in our capacities as officers of the Company,
(ii) to each of our own respective actual knowledge, and (iii) solely for the
purpose of compliance with 18 U.S.C.ss.1350, that:

     (1)  the Report fully complies with the requirements of ss.13(a) or 15(d)
          of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

     (2)  the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
          material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
          of the Company.

     The above certification is given as of the date of the Report and is
limited to the periods covered by the Report. The above certification is made
severally and not jointly.

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have executed this Certificate on May
14, 2004.


                                            By: /s/ William M. McKay
                                            ------------------------
                                            William M. McKay
                                            Chief Financial Officer
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk's Office, Atlanta, February 09, 2016. I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia. Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto affixed the day and year last above written. , Clerk. 

# Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia
ATLANTA, February 09, 2016 The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order A16I0123. DANIEL KNIGHT v. THE STATE . Upon consideration of the Application for Interlocutory Appeal, it is ordered that it be hereby DENIED.
LC NUMBERS: 15SC136361
on the idea that the latter motion was the functional equivalent of a 

motion for a new tria1. 1We disagree. 

The order denying the post-conviction petition for a writ of 

habeas corpus is appealable. NRS 34.575(1). The notice of appeal had to 

be filed within 30 days after the court served written notice that the order 

had been entered. Id. In this case, the order was entered on December 14, 

2012, and the district court clerk served a notice of entry on appellant and 

his counsel on December 21, 2012. The notice of appeal was not filed until 

March 3, 2013, long after the 30-day appeal period expired. 

Appellant implies that the appeal period was tolled under 

NRAP 4(b)(3) because his motion to alter, amend, clarify and reconsider 

was the functional equivalent of a motion for new trial. Based on the 

same rationale, appellant asserts that the order denying that motion also 

is appealable. See NRS 177.015(1)(b). Despite appellant's arguments, the 

motion was not the equivalent of a motion for new trial. Although the 

ultimate goal behind the motion, as with the post-conviction habeas 

petition, undoubtedly was to obtain a new trial, the same can be said of 

virtually all post-conviction challenges to a judgment of conviction. That 

does not turn them into motions for a new trial. 

NRAP 4(b)(3) is clearly referring to a motion filed pursuant to 

NRS 176.515. Because appellant did not file his motion within 7 days 

after the verdict, he can only assert that his motion was the equivalent of 

a motion for new trial based on newly discovered evidence. See NRS 

176.515(3), (4). Such an argument does not hold up. Appellant's motion 

'Appellant does not appear to contest that the order denying his 

motion for bail is not appealable. 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 

(0) 1937A 

2 
J. 

J. 

does not assert newly discovered evidence that would render a different 

result probable on retrial. See Sanborn v. State, 107 Nev. 399, 406, 812, 

P.2d 1279, 1284-85 (1991) (listing factors relevant to motion for new trial 

based on newly discovered evidence). Instead, the motion takes issue with 

various findings and conclusions in the order denying the post-conviction 

habeas petition. It is quintessentially a motion to alter, amend, or 

reconsider that order. As such, it does not toll the time to file a notice of 

appeal from the order denying the post-conviction habeas petition, see 

Klein v. Warden, 118 Nev. 305, 309-10, 43 P.3d 1029, 1032-33 (2002), and 

is not itself an appealable order, see Phelps, 111 Nev. 1021, 900 P.2d 344. 

For these reasons, we lack jurisdiction and therefore 

ORDER this appeal DISMISSED. 

cc: Hon. Michael Villani, District Judge 

Alan R. Johns 

Attorney General/Carson City 

Clark County District Attorney 

Eighth District Court Clerk 

3
Editorial Note on Part 200
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 200 appear at 69 FR 18803, Apr. 9, 2004.

§ 200.1500 Sanctions against a MAP lender. ( a ) In addition to any other legal remedy available to HUD, HUD may take the following actions with respect to a MAP lender: ( 1 ) Warning letter;
( 2 ) Probation;
( 3 ) Suspension;
( 4 ) Termination;
( 5 ) Limited Denial of Participation (LDP);
( 6 ) Referral to the Mortgagee Review Board; and
( 7 ) Referral to the Office of Inspector General.
( b ) The actions listed in paragraphs (a)(1) through (a)(4) of this section are carried out in accordance with the requirements of this subpart. An LDP is a sanction applied in accordance with subpart J of 2 CFR part 2424 to participants in loan transactions other than FHA-insured lenders. The Mortgagee Review Board procedures are found at 24 CFR part 25.
[70 FR 43242, July 26, 2005, as amended at 72 FR 73494, Dec. 27, 2007]
```

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 69 (Wednesday, April 10, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 21343]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-08533]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS

Sunshine Act Meeting

AGENCY: United States Commission on Civil Rights.

ACTION: Notice of Briefing and Business Meeting.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DATE AND TIME:  Friday, April 19, 2013; 9:30 a.m. EST.

PLACE:  1331 Pennsylvania Ave NW., Suite 1150, Washington, DC 20425.

Briefing Agenda--9:30 a.m.-11:15 a.m.

    This briefing is open to the public.
    Topic: Increasing Compliance with Section 7 of the NVRA.

I. Introductory Remarks by Chairman
II. Panel Discussion--State Government Officials & Litigators Speakers' 
Remarks and Questions from Commissioners
III. Adjourn Briefing

Meeting Agenda--11:15 a.m.

I. Approval of Agenda
II. Office of General Counsel--Training on Online Filing of OGE Form 
278
III. Program Planning
     Update on the Sex Trafficking: A Gender-Based Violation of 
Civil Rights briefing
     Update on the Federal Civil Rights Engagement with Arab & 
Muslim Communities Post 9/11 briefing
     Update on the Assessing the Impact of Criminal Background 
Checks and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's Conviction 
Records Policy on the Employment of Black and Hispanic Workers briefing
     Update on the Regulatory and Other Barriers to 
Entrepreneurship that Impede Business Start-Ups Briefing
     Update on the Reconciling Non-Discrimination Principles 
with Civil Liberties briefing
     Update on the Adequate Protection of the Civil Rights of 
Veterans and Service Members Briefing
IV. Management and Operations
     Consideration of Changes to Business Meeting Calendar for 
August and September 2013
     Discussion re: the Chief of RPCU position
     Discussion re: delegation of authority to the Chief of the 
RPCU to approve SAC project proposals
     Update on Budget and Personnel issues from the Office of 
Management & Budget
V. Approval of State Advisory Committee Appointment Slates
     Illinois
     Mississippi
     New Jersey
     South Dakota
     Utah
VI. Adjourn Meeting

CONTACT PERSON FOR FURTHER INFORMATION: Lenore Ostrowsky, Acting Chief, 
Public Affairs Unit (202) 376-8591.
    Hearing-impaired persons who will attend the meeting and require 
the services of a sign language interpreter should contact Pamela 
Dunston at (202) 376-8105 or at signlanguage@usccr.gov at least seven 
business days before the scheduled date of the meeting.

    Dated: April 8, 2013.
TinaLouise Martin,
Director of Management/Human Resources.
[FR Doc. 2013-08533 Filed 4-8-13; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 6335-01-P
```
Skip to Content

        -   Log in            -  Log inEmailPassword Show Password	            Remember meAlready have an account? Log in!No account? Sign up!Forgot your password?Didn't receive confirmation instructions? 
        -            -  Forgot your password?Email Already have an account? Log in!No account? Sign up!Forgot your password?Didn't receive confirmation instructions? 
        -            -  Resend confirmation instructionsEmail Already have an account? Log in!No account? Sign up!Forgot your password?Didn't receive confirmation instructions? 
        -   Sign Up            -  Sign upEmail Password Passwords must be at least 6 characters and contain at least one lower-case letter, one upper-case letter, one number, and one punctuation mark or symbolPassword confirmation  Show Password            Already have an account? Log in!No account? Sign up!Forgot your password?Didn't receive confirmation instructions? 

# Search Publications

- Home

#           Agricultural Chemical Usage - Fruit and Vegetable Agricultural Practices            NASS

----

Frequency of Release:Not Specified

----

Category:Crops and Crop Products:FruitsAgriculture Economics and Management:Production PracticesCrops and Crop Products:Vegetables and Pulses

Keywords:agricultural structures and facilitiesagrochemicalsfarm laborfertilizersgrowers

----

## Releases

| Jun 13, 2001 | PDFTXTZIP | Jun 13, 2001: Agricultural Chemical Usage - Fruit and Vegetable Agricultural Practices detailsx                Jun 13, 2001: Agricultural Chemical Usage - Fruit and Vegetable Agricultural PracticesRelease datetime:Jun 13, 2001Close |
|--------------|-----------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

Contact office name:National Agricultural Statistics Service

Contact email:nass@nass.usda.gov

##         Agency Announcements        
Do you also want to subscribe to all agency announcements from ?
NoYesFooter content with page navigation, site information, and copyright.-  Home 
-  Release Calendar 
×Release CalendarClose
-  About
-  Help 
-  Contact 
-  API 

The USDA Economics, Statistics and Market Information System (ESMIS) contains over 2,100 publications from five agencies of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). These materials cover U.S. and international agriculture and related      topics. Mann Library at Cornell University developed and maintains this site.

© 2024 USDA Economics, Statistics and Market Information System
USDA ESMIS partners list with links to their websites.Partners:- Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS)
- Economic Research Service (ERS)
- Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS)
- National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS)
- World Agricultural Outlook Board (WAOB)
- 
- Albert R. Mann Library, Cornell University
- United States Department of Agriculture
Cornell development contact information.Developed & supported by:
**Albert R. Mann Library**Cornell UniversityIthaca, NY 14853-4301 Phone: (607) 255-3296 Email: usda-help@cornell.edu
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

# AGENCY:

Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, HHS is hereby giving notice that the National Advisory Council on Nurse Education and Practice (NACNEP) has been rechartered. The effective date of the recharter is November 30, 2020.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Camillus Ezeike, Ph.D., JD, LLM, RN, PMP, Designated Federal Officer, Bureau of Health Workforce, Division of Nursing and Public Health, HRSA, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, Maryland 20857; 301-443-2866; or                         *BHWNACNEP@hrsa.gov*.                    

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

NACNEP provides advice and recommendations to the Secretary of HHS (“Secretary”) and Congress on policy matters and the preparation of general regulations concerning activities under Title VIII of the Public Health Service (PHS) Act, including the range of issues relating to the nurse workforce, education, and practice improvement. NACNEP also prepares and submits an annual report to the Secretary and Congress describing its activities, including NACNEP's findings and recommendations concerning activities under Title VIII, as required by the PHS Act.

The recharter of NACNEP was approved on November 30, 2020, which will also stand as the filing date. The recharter of NACNEP gives authorization for the Council to operate until November 30, 2022.

                    A copy of the NACNEP charter is available on the NACNEP website at                     *https://www.hrsa.gov/​advisory-committees/​nursing/​about.html.*                     A copy of the charter can also be obtained by accessing the FACA database that is maintained by the Committee Management Secretariat under the General Services Administration. The website address for the FACA database is                     *http://www.facadatabase.gov/​.*

Maria G. Button,

Director, Executive Secretariat.

[FR Doc. 2020-26247 Filed 11-27-20; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4165-15-P
#### Israel Feldstein, as Guardian ad Litem of Steven Feldstein, an Infant, et al., Appellants, v. Greater New York Councils, Boy Scouts of America, Respondent.

Judgment dismissing the complaint for failure to proceed with the trial of a personal injury action, unanimously reversed, on the law, the facts and in the exercise of discretion, without costs, and a new trial ordered. The court in its discretion may order a separate trial of one or more issues in a ease prior to any trial of other issues (Civ. Prac. Act, § 443). If the complaint consisted only of the first cause of action, the dismissal would have been a proper exercise of discretion. However, the nature and extent of plaintiff’s injuries as alleged in the second cause of action, which complained of a failure to provide prompt medical treatment, have an important bearing on the question of liability. In our view plaintiff might well be prejudiced by a severance (cf. *Berman*v. *H.*J. *Enterprises,*13 A D 2d 199). Additionally, some of the court feel that the remarks of the Trial Justice after the jury had been sworn could have been so misnnderstool by the jury as to have unfairly misled them to plaintiff’s detriment. Concur — Breitel, J. P., Valente, McNally, Stevens and Steuer, JJ.
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

KEY SOURCE INTERNATIONAL INC.,

a California corporation,

Plaintiff,

 v.

APEX MARITIME SHIPPING

COMPANY, HARTFORD FIRE

INSURANCE COMPANY, and DOES 1

to 100, inclusive,

Defendants. /

No. C 09-02389 WHA

ORDER DISMISSING CASE

Based on the notice of settlement of entire action filed by counsel (Dkt. 62), the Court

hereby DISMISSES the complaint and the Clerk shall CLOSE the file. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 22, 2010. WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:09-cv-02389-WHA Document 63 Filed 02/22/10 Page 1 of 1