alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### FITCH et al., Appellants, v. FRASER, Respondent.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department.

January 14, 1903.)

Action by Augustus S. Fitch and others against Tina B. Fraser.

No opinion. Motion denied, without costs.
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 Homeland Security

###### Federal Emergency Management Agency

          - [Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-3549-EM; Docket ID FEMA-2020-0001]

# AGENCY:

Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

This notice amends the notice of an emergency declaration for the State of Louisiana (FEMA-3549-EM), dated October 27, 2020, and related determinations.

# DATES:

This amendment was issued November 16, 2020.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Dean Webster, Office of Response and Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2833.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Notice is hereby given that the incident period for this emergency is closed effective October 29, 2020.

The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance—Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants—Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

Pete Gaynor,

Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.

[FR Doc. 2020-27168 Filed 12-9-20; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 9111-23-P
### **CHAPTER 1—BUREAU OF INSULAR AFFAIRS**
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellant,

v.

TAMMARA ESTER,

Appellee.

No. 4D18-2648

[February 13, 2019]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, 

Broward County; Marina Garcia Wood, Judge; L.T. Case No. 18-

4182CF10A.

Ashley B. Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Alexandra A. 

Folley, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

George Joseph Reres of Georges Reres Law, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for 

appellee.

KLINGENSMITH, J.

The State appeals an order withholding adjudication of Tammara 

Ester’s guilt. Prior to this, Ester had adjudication withheld for two 

unrelated felony charges. For the reasons stated below, we reverse. 

Ester was charged by information with grand theft of property valued 

at $300 or more but less than $5,000, a third-degree felony. She entered 

an open, no-contest plea to the charge. During sentencing, the State 

objected to withholding adjudication of Ester’s guilt because she had two 

previous felony withholds of adjudication, neither of which arose from the 

grand theft charge before the trial court. Ultimately, the trial court 

sentenced Ester to six months of community control followed by thirty-six 

months of probation and withheld adjudication of guilt, over the State’s 

objection. This appeal followed. 

Section 775.08435(1)(d), Florida Statutes (2018), states:

“Notwithstanding any provision of this section, no adjudication of guilt 

shall be withheld for a third degree felony offense if the defendant has two 
2

or more prior withholdings of adjudication for a felony that did not arise 

from the same transaction as the current felony offense.” (emphasis 

added).

Under the language of section 775.08435(1)(d), the trial judge in this 

case was prohibited from withholding adjudication. See State v. Jean, 114 

So. 3d 451, 452 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013). Accordingly, we reverse the sentence 

and remand for the trial court to re-sentence the defendant in accordance 

with section 775.08435. See id. 

Reversed and remanded. 

CONNER and KUNTZ, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
#### Leonora Johnson v. Lloyd Yates.

Motion to dismiss appeal granted unless the appellant procures the record on appeal and appellant’s points to he served and filed on or before August 14, 1962, with notice of argument for the September 1962 Term of this court, said appeal to be argued or submitted when reached, and upon the further condition that the appellant posts an additional bond in the sum of $500 on or before June 15, 1962. If the appellant fails to comply with either condition imposed, the respondent may enter an order dismissing the appeal without notice to the appellant. Concur — Rabin, J. P., Valente, McNally, Stevens and Eager, JJ.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                          275771
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   162898
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               5126808
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 5126808
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           588476
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   5126808
<SALES>                                         237044
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 61730
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                237044
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (27377)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (27377)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (27377)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
#### Kidder, Peabody & Co., Appellant, v. Leonard Loewe et al., Respondents, et al., Defendant.

Order, entered on December 27, 1960, granting a motion for reargument with respect to an order entered December 2, 1960, granting plaintiff’s motion to add certain defendants, unanimously modified, on the law, on the facts, and in the exercise of discretion, to deny the cross motion of defendant Levine for a severance and the order is otherwise affirmed, with $20 costs and disbursements to plaintiff-appellant. Sufficient prejudice to defendant Levine is not established to merit a severance, especially as compared with the convenience to plaintiff and the court in disposing of all the issues. ¿Plaintiff has demonstrated for the purposes of this motion prima facie that the alleged liability of all the defendants arose out of the same transaction or transactions carried out pursuant to a single motivation or plan. Appeal from order entered on December 27, 1960 denying plaintiff’s motion to vacate the decision granting reargument to defendant Morton Levine, unanimously dismissed. No opinion. Concur — Botein, P. J., Breitel, Rabin, Eager and Bastow, JJ.
#### In the Matter of the Estate of Wilhelmina P. Meier, Deceased. Julia Stratton, Appellant; Ludwig Meier et al., Respondents.

Motion for leave to reargue motion of September 6, 1960, granted and, upon reargument, the original decision is adhered to. Motion to dismiss appeal granted, with $10 costs, unless the appellant procures the record on appeal and appellant’s points to be served and filed on or before December 5, 1960, with notice of argument for the January 1961 Term of this court, said appeal to be argued or submitted when reached. Motion for an order striking and avoiding all proceedings herein which have been taken subsequent to the filing of the notice of appeal denied, with $10 costs. Concur — Botein, P. J., Rabin, Stevens and Eager, JJ.
PUBLIC LAW 114–250—DEC. 8, 2016 130 STAT. 1001 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.R. 4902 (S. 2970): 

HOUSE REPORTS: No. 114–600 (Comm. on Oversight and Government Reform). 

SENATE REPORTS: No. 114–344 (Comm. on Homeland Security and Governmental 

Affairs) accompanying S. 2970. 

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 162 (2016): 

June 21, considered and passed House. 

Nov. 17, considered and passed Senate. 

Æ 

Public Law 114–250 

114th Congress 

An Act 

To amend title 5, United States Code, to expand law enforcement availability 

pay to employees of U.S. Customs and Border Protection’s Air and Marine Operations. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. LAW ENFORCEMENT AVAILABILITY PAY FOR EMPLOYEES 

OF CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION’S AIR AND 

MARINE OPERATIONS. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—Section 5545a(i) of title 5, United States 

Code, is amended— 

(1) by striking ‘‘apply to a pilot employed by the United 

States Customs Service’’ and inserting ‘‘apply to any employee 

of the U.S. Customs and Border Protection’s Air and Marine 

Operations, or any successor organization,’’; and 

(2) by striking ‘‘such pilot’’ and inserting ‘‘such employee’’. 

(b) APPLICABILITY.—The amendments made by subsection (a) 

shall take effect on the first day of the first applicable pay period 

beginning on or after the date that is 14 days after the date 

of enactment of this Act. 

Approved December 8, 2016. 

Effective date. 

5 USC 5545a 

note. 

Dec. 8, 2016 

[H.R. 4902] 


kgrant on DSKB33CYQ1 with PUBLAW
----

|                     |
|---------------------|
|                     |  |
| Media Relations:    | Christine Mathers, +1.713.439.8738, christine.mathers@bakerhughes.com |
| Investor Relations: | Trey Clark, +1.713.439.8039, trey.clark@bakerhughes.com |
|                | Eric Holcomb, +1.713.439.8822, eric.s.holcomb@bakerhughes.com |
§ 402.2 Definitions. ( a ) *Terms defined in part 401.* In this part, the following terms have the meanings given in § 401.2 of this chapter: affiliate, disabled family, elderly family, eligible project, HUD, MAHRA, owner, PAE, Restructuring Plan, and section 8.
( b ) *Terms defined in MAHRA.* In this part, the following terms have the meanings given in section 512 of MAHRA: expiration date, fair market rent, renewal, and tenant-based assistance.
( c ) *Other defined terms.* In this part, the term—
*Comparable market rents* means rents determined in accordance with section 524(a)(5) of MAHRA and HUD's instructions.
*Large family* means a family of five or more persons.
*OCAF* means an operating cost adjustment factor established by HUD, which may not be negative, that is applied to the existing contract rent (less the portion of that rent paid for debt service).
*Portfolio Reengineering demonstration authority* means the authority specified in section 524(e)(2)(B) of MAHRA.
*Project-based assistance* means the types of assistance listed in section 512(2)(B) of MAHRA, or a project-based assistance contract under the Section 8 program renewed under section 524 of MAHRA.
*Project eligible for exception rents* means a project described in section 524(b) of MAHRA.
*SRO contract* and *SRO project* mean, respectively, a project-based assistance contract for single-room occupancy dwellings under section 441 of the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 11401), and a project with units covered by such a contract.
[71 FR 2121, Jan. 12, 2006]
Exhibit 99.2

# Certifications Pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
As Adopted Pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Mariner Energy, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30,
2002, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Michael A. Wichterich, Vice
President of Finance and Administration of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

        1)   The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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

|/s/ Michael A. Wichterich                                                                              
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                                       
|Name: Michael A. Wichterich
Title: Vice President of Finance and Administration
Date: November 19, 2002
### §5715. Transferred

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 5715 was editorially reclassified as section 11273 of Title 34, Crime Control and Law Enforcement.
### [§54102. Renumbered §51706]
###### Editorial Note on Part 250

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 250 appear at 77 FR 50891, Aug. 22, 2012.

#### § 250.1473 How may I appeal the Administrative Law Judge's decision?

If you are adversely affected by the Administrative Law Judge's decision, you may appeal that decision to the Interior Board of Land Appeals under 43 CFR part 4, subpart E.
###### Editorial Note on Part 250

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 250 appear at 77 FR 50891, Aug. 22, 2012.

#### § 250.1470 How does BSEE decide what the amount of the penalty should be?

We determine the amount of the penalty by considering the severity of the violations, your history of compliance, and if you are a small business.
# Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas
November 28, 2022
No. 04

- 22

- 00493

- CR
Daniel Antonio Chavez , Appellant

v. The State of Texas, Appellee
From the 25th Judicial District Court , Guadalup e County, Texas

Trial Court No. 22

- 1111

- CR

- C Honorable William D. Old III , Judge Presiding



### O R D E R Appellant’s attorney filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California , 368 U.S. 738 (1967), in which he asserts there are no meritorious issues to raise on appeal. On November 2 , 20 22 , this court issued an order advising appellant of his right to request the appellate record and to file a pro se brief within forty

- five ( 45 ) days. On November 2 8, 2019, appellant filed a motion requesting access to the appellate record. See Kelly v. State , 436 S.W.3d 313. 320

- 21 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014).
A ppellant’s motion to access the record is GRANTED. It is ORDERED that the clerk of this cou rt shall prepare and send a full and complete duplicate copy of the clerk’s record and the reporter’s record for trial court cause number 2 2

- 1111

- CR

- C to appellant at his current address: Torres Unit, TDCJ # 02408583 , 125 Private Road 4303 , Hondo, T exas 788 61

. If, after reviewing the record, appellant desires to file a pro se brief, he must do no later than January 12, 2023 . If the appellant files a pro se brief, the State may file a responsive brief no later than thirty (30) days after the date the appellant’s pro se brief is filed in this court.

_________________________________ Lori I. Valen zuela , JusticeIN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said

court on this 28th day of November, 2022

.

___________________________________ MIC HAEL A. CRUZ , Clerk of Court
p.1 

OAR Box 1828 

Prepped by Ollie Stewart 

Document Number: 

92) ll-K- (B) -80 

Docket Number: 

A-83-27 

Printed 11/12/2008 11:12:51 AM Sheet 92 of 325 
P.2 

l\ P 

II-K-(B)-80 

COMPREHENSIVE COMPARISON OF POLLUTION CONTROL COSTS 

USED BY RADIAN VERSUS THOSE MODELED IN IFCAM. 

Letter from E. Medine, EEA to R. Short, EPArEAB. 

September 14, 1981. 

THIS INFORMATION CAN BE FOUND IN DOCKET A-79-02, ITEM 

II-K-(B)-80
### §602. Repealed. Pub. L. 102–533, §7(c), Oct. 27, 1992, 106 Stat. 3519

Section, Pub. L. 91–518, title VI, §602, Oct. 30, 1970, 84 Stat. 1338; Pub. L. 92–316, §10(a), June 22, 1972, 86 Stat. 231; Pub. L. 93–146, §13, Nov. 3, 1973, 87 Stat. 553; Pub. L. 93–496, §9, Oct. 28, 1974, 88 Stat. 1531; Pub. L. 94–25, §11, May 26, 1975, 89 Stat. 92; Pub. L. 94–555, title I, §102(c), Oct. 19, 1976, 90 Stat. 2614; Pub. L. 95–421, §2(b)(2), Oct. 5, 1978, 92 Stat. 923; Pub. L. 96–73, title I, §122(b)(2), Sept. 29, 1979, 93 Stat. 551; Pub. L. 97–35, title XI, §1186, Aug. 13, 1981, 95 Stat. 698; Pub. L. 99–514, §2, Oct. 22, 1986, 100 Stat. 2095; Pub. L. 100–342, §18(e), June 22, 1988, 102 Stat. 637, related to authority of Secretary of Transportation to guarantee any lender or lessor against loss of principal or interest on loans issued to improve rail passenger service.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                       1,130,086
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                4,786,458
<ALLOWANCES>                                   163,000
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             7,941,061
<PP&E>                                      83,713,814
<DEPRECIATION>                            (39,979,767)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              51,682,896
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        8,294,249
<BONDS>                                        600,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        91,869
<OTHER-SE>                                  42,696,778
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                51,682,896
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             8,493,760
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                7,507,357
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               354,733
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              90,678
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                567,862
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            567,862
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   567,862
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.06
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.06


</TABLE>
#### § 1208.3 Information collection.

The information collection requirements contained in this part have been approved by OMB under 44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq.* The form, filing date, and approved OMB clearance number are identified in 30 CFR 210.10.

[58 FR 64901, Dec. 10, 1993]
### §1734. Territorial government; determination of election procedure

Acting pursuant to legislation enacted in accordance with section 9, article II of the American Samoan Revised Constitution, the territorial government will determine the order of names on the ballot for election of Delegate, the method by which a special election to fill a vacancy in the office of Delegate shall be conducted, the method by which ties between candidates for the office of Delegate shall be resolved, and all other matters of local application pertaining to the election and the office of Delegate not otherwise expressly provided for herein.

(Pub. L. 95–556, §4, Oct. 31, 1978, 92 Stat. 2078.)
##### 



Exhibit 99.4

CERTIFICATION BY PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of IMPSAT Fiber Networks, Inc., as
registrant, and IMPSAT S.A. (the Company), as co-registrant, on Form 10-Q for
the quarter ended September 30, 2002 (the Report) as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Jorge Paternostro,
Chief Accounting Officer of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, to the best of my knowledge, that:

(1)  The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2)  The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company for the dates and periods covered by the Report.

This certificate is being made for the exclusive purpose of compliance by
the principal financial officer of the Company with the requirements of Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and may not be disclosed, distributed or
used by any person or for any reason other than as specifically required by
law.

|                  |  |                                                                
|----------------- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------
|November 14, 2002 |  | /s/ JORGE PATERNOSTROJorge Paternostro
Chief Accounting Officer