alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### [§2307. Repealed. Pub. L. 115–282, title IV, §402(d), Dec. 4, 2018, 132 Stat. 4264]

Section, added Pub. L. 107–295, title IV, §431(a), Nov. 25, 2002, 116 Stat. 2128; amended Pub. L. 112–213, title III, §302(a), Dec. 20, 2012, 126 Stat. 1562, related to limitation of liability for Coast Guard Vessel Traffic Service pilots and non-Federal vessel traffic service operators.
### §30529. Action by owner for limitation

(a) In General.—The owner of a vessel may bring a civil action in a district court of the United States for limitation of liability under this chapter. The action must be brought within 6 months after a claimant gives the owner written notice of a claim.

(b) Creation of Fund.—When the action is brought, the owner (at the owner's option) shall—

(1) deposit with the court, for the benefit of claimants—

(A) an amount equal to the value of the owner's interest in the vessel and pending freight, or approved security; and

(B) an amount, or approved security, that the court may fix from time to time as necessary to carry out this chapter; or

(2) transfer to a trustee appointed by the court, for the benefit of claimants—

(A) the owner's interest in the vessel and pending freight; and

(B) an amount, or approved security, that the court may fix from time to time as necessary to carry out this chapter.

(c) Cessation of Other Actions.—When an action has been brought under this section and the owner has complied with subsection (b), all claims and proceedings against the owner related to the matter in question shall cease.

(Pub. L. 109–304, §6(c), Oct. 6, 2006, 120 Stat. 1515, §30511; renumbered §30529, Pub. L. 117–263, div. K, title CXV, §11503(a)(3), Dec. 23, 2022, 136 Stat. 4130.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 30511 | 46 App.:185. | R.S. §4285; June 5, 1936, ch. 521, §3, 49 Stat. 1480. |

Section

In subsection (a), the words "bring a civil action . . . in a district court of the United States" are substituted for "petition a district court of the United States" for consistency in the revised title and with other titles of the United States Code. See rule 2 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (28 App. U.S.C.). The words "of competent jurisdiction" are omitted as unnecessary.

In subsection (b), the word "pending" before "freight" is added for consistency in the chapter. The words "to carry out this chapter" are substituted for "to carry out the provisions of section 183 of this Appendix" because of the reorganization of the source provisions.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2022—Pub. L. 117–263 renumbered section 30511 of this title as this section.
§ 574.130 Formula allocations. ( a ) *Data sources.* HUD will allocate funds based on the number of cases of acquired immunodeficiency syndrome reported to and confirmed by the Director of the Centers for Disease Control, and on population data provided by the U.S. Census. The number of cases of acquired immunodeficiency syndrome used for this purpose shall be the number reported as of March 31 of the fiscal year immediately preceding the fiscal year for which the amounts are appropriated and allocated.
( b ) *Distribution of appropriated funds for entitlement awards.* ( 1 ) Seventy-five percent of the funds allocated under the formula is distributed to qualifying cities and eligible States, as described in § 574.100, based on each metropolitan statistical area's or State's proportionate share of the cumulative number of AIDS cases in all eligible metropolitan statistical areas and eligible States.
( 2 ) The remaining twenty-five percent is allocated among qualifying cities, but not States, where the per capita incidence of AIDS for the year, April 1 through March 31, preceding the fiscal year of the appropriation is higher than the average for all metropolitan statistical areas with more than 500,000 population. Each qualifying city's allocation reflects its EMSA's proportionate share of the high incidence factor among EMSA's with higher than average per capita incidence of AIDS. The high incidence factor is computed by multiplying the population of the metropolitan statistical area by the difference between its twelve-month-per-capita-incidence rate and the average rate for all metropolitan statistical areas with more than 500,000 population. The EMSA's proportionate share is determined by dividing its high incidence factor by the sum of the high incidence factors for all EMSA's with higher than average per capita incidence of AIDS.
( c ) *Minimum grant.* No grant awarded under paragraph (b) of this section shall be less than $200,000. Therefore, if the calculations under paragraph (b) of this section would result in any eligible metropolitan statistical area or eligible State receiving less than $200,000, the amount allocated to that entity is increased to $200,000 and allocations to entities in excess of $200,000 are proportionately reduced by the amount of the increase.
#### Hyman S. Rubin, Appellant, v Cryder House, Respondent.

[834 NYS2d 316]—

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Kitzes, J.), dated February 27, 2006, which granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

To impose liability upon a defendant in a slip-and-fall action, there must be evidence that a dangerous or defective condition existed, and that the defendant either created the condition or had actual or constructive notice of it *(see Penn v Fleet Bank,*12 AD3d 584 [2004]; *Christopher v New York City Tr. Auth.,*300 AD2d 336 [2002]; *see also Gordon v American Museum of Natural History,*67 NY2d 836 [1986]). A defendant has constructive notice of a defect when the defect is visible and apparent, and has existed for a sufficient length of time before the accident that it could have been discovered and corrected *(see Gordon v American Museum of Natural History, supra; Larsen v Congregation B’Nai Jeshurun of Staten Is.,*29 AD3d 643 [2006]).

Here, the defendant sustained its initial burden of demonstrating its entitlement to summary judgment by submitting evidence that the rubber mats covering the basement floor of its premises were evenly set down and inspected throughout the day to ensure they remained in a safe smooth condition, and that it had no notice that the mat upon which the plaintiff tripped was in a dangerous condition prior to the accident *(see Larsen v Congregation B’Nai Jeshurun of Staten Is., supra; Penn v Fleet Bank, supra; Christopher v New York City Tr. Auth., supra).*In opposition to the motion, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact as to whether the subject mat was in a dangerous condition prior to his fall, and whether the defendant created any such condition or had actual or constructive notice of it. Although the plaintiff testified at his deposition that after his fall he noticed that the edge of the mat was “up from the *841floor” and not “solid to the ground,” he did not indicate that this condition caused him to trip, and there is no proof that it existed prior to his fall. “It is just as likely under these facts that the mat was caused to flip up as the result of the plaintiffs fall and was not a pre-existing condition” *(Penn v Fleet Bank, supra*at 584). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment *(see Larsen v Congregation B’Nai Jeshurun of Staten Is., supra; Penn v Fleet Bank, supra; Christopher v New York City Tr. Auth., supra; see also Leib v Silo Rest., Inc.,*26 AD3d 359 [2006]). Miller, J.P., Santucci, Florio and Lifson, JJ., concur.
About this capture
National September 11 Memorial Museum
http://www.national911memorial.org
National September 11 Memorial Museum
#### Samuel Atkin et al. v. Hill Darlington & Grimm et al.

Motion for reargument denied. Motion for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals granted to the extent of certifying the following question: “ Was the order of Special Term correct in denying defendants’ renewed motion for summary judgment?” Settle order on notice. Motion for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals granted to the extent of certifying the following question: “ Were the orders of Special Term correct in denying plaintiffs’ motion and renewed motion for summary judgment? ” Settle order on notice. Concur — Botein, P. J., Breitel, Valente, McNally and' Steuer,'JJ.
* 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. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

## FILED June 20, 2007 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-41401 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus KENNY KUYKENDALL, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 4:05-CR-199-3

-------------------- Before JONES, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * The attorney appointed to represent Kenny Kuykendall has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Kuykendall has not filed a response. Our independent review of the record and counsel’s brief discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal. Accordingly, the motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL
IS DISMISSED. See 5 TH C IR . R. 42.2.
### §910. Repealed. Pub. L. 97–35, title XI, §1144(b), Aug. 13, 1981, 95 Stat. 669

Section, Pub. L. 96–101, §11, Nov. 4, 1979, 93 Stat. 742, set forth provisions respecting employment of Milwaukee Railroad employees. See section 797c of this title.

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

#### Effective Date of Repeal

Repeal effective Aug. 13, 1981, see section 1169 of Pub. L. 97–35, set out as an Effective Date note under section 1101 of this title.
Exhibit 31.1—Section 302 Certification
I, Ellen Z. Lamale, certify that:
I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K, and all reports on Form 8-K containingdistribution or servicing reports filed in respect of period included in the year covered bythis annual report, of Principal Life Income Fundings Trust 2004-18;
1.  Based on my knowledge, the information in these reports, taken as a whole, does not containany untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make thestatements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading as of the last day of the period covered by this annual report; 2.  Based on my knowledge, the distribution or servicing information required to be provided tothe depositor by the trustee under the pooling and servicing, or similar agreement, forinclusion in these reports is included in these reports; 3.  I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the depositor and the trusteeunder the pooling and servicing, or similar agreement, and based upon my knowledge and theannual compliance review required under that agreement, and except as disclosed in thereports, the depositor and trustee have each fulfilled its obligations under that agreement;and 4.  The reports disclose all significant deficiencies relating to the compliance by the trusteeand the depositor with the minimum servicing or similar standards based upon the reportprovided by an independent public accountant, after conducting a review in compliance with theUniform Single Attestation Program for Mortgage Bankers or similar procedures, as set forth inthe pooling and servicing, or similar agreements, that is included in these reports.
In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided to me by thefollowing unaffiliated parties: Ernst and Young and Citibank, N.A.     Date: March 29, 2005      By: /s/ Ellen Z. Lamale      Name:
Exhibit 12.2  I, Roy Brown, Chief Financial Officer, certify that:  1. I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 20-F of Zena Capital Corp.;  2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this Annual Report;  3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the company as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;  4. The companys other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the company and have: (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the company, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the companys disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the companys internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the period covered by the annual report that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the companys internal control over financial reporting; and  5. The companys other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the companys auditors and the audit committee of the companys board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the companys ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the companys internal control over financial reporting.   Date: June 28, 2007  Roy Brown______________ Chief Financial Officer
### **CHAPTER 504—COMMITTEES**

Sec.
50401.
United States Committee on the Marine Transportation System.
50402.
Maritime Transportation System National Advisory Committee.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

**2021**—Pub. L. 117–81, div. C, title XXXV, §3512(c)(1), Dec. 27, 2021, 135 Stat. 2239, amended chapter analysis generally, reenacting heading without change and substituting items 50401 "United States Committee on the Marine Transportation System" and 50402 "Maritime Transportation System National Advisory Committee" for former items 55501 "United States Committee on the Marine Transportation System" and 55502 "Maritime Transportation System National Advisory Committee", respectively.

Pub. L. 117–81, div. C, title XXXV, §3512(a)(2), Dec. 27, 2021, 135 Stat. 2239, substituted "COMMITTEES" for "MISCELLANEOUS" in chapter heading.

Pub. L. 117–81, div. C, title XXXV, §3512(a)(1), Dec. 27, 2021, 135 Stat. 2239, which directed that chapter 555 of title 46 be redesignated as chapter 504 and transferred to appear after chapter 503, was executed by transferring the analysis preceding section 55501 of this title to precede section 50401 of this title, to reflect the probable intent of Congress.

Pub. L. 116–283, div. G, title LVXXXIII [LXXXIII], §8332(c), Jan. 1, 2021, 134 Stat. 4704, added item 55502.

**2014**—Pub. L. 113–281, title III, §301(3), Dec. 18, 2014, 128 Stat. 3042, added item 55501 and struck out former items 55501 "Mobile trade fairs" and 55502 "United States Committee on the Marine Transportation System".

**2012**—Pub. L. 112–213, title III, §310(b), Dec. 20, 2012, 126 Stat. 1568, added item 55502.
#### LOUGHLIN, Respondent, v. BRASSIL, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

March 17, 1905.)

-Action by Thomas F. Loughlin, an infant, etc., against Daniel S. Brassil. No opinion. Motion denied.
1

The Honorable Stephen N. Limbaugh, United States District Judge for the

Eastern District of Missouri.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 06-2871

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* Eastern District of Missouri.

Kimberly Williams, *

* [PUBLISHED]

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: April 13, 2007

Filed: April 26, 2007

___________

Before RILEY, MAGILL, and MELLOY, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Kimberly Williams appeals the denial of her motion requesting that the district

court1

 recommend to the Bureau of Prisons that she be allowed to serve the last 6

months of her 18-month prison sentence at a community correction center. We

dismiss the appeal as moot, because Williams was released from custody on March

2, 2007. See Mills v. Green, 159 U.S. 651, 653 (1985) (when event occurs during

pendency of appeal that renders it impossible for court, if it should decide case in

favor of plaintiff, to grant effective relief, court will dismiss appeal as moot).

______________________________
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3338 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3338

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend the credit period 
 to 10 years for certain facilities producing electricity from certain 
                          renewable resources.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 19, 2005

 Mr. Herger (for himself, Mr. Foley, and Mr. Hayworth) introduced the 
 following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend the credit period 
 to 10 years for certain facilities producing electricity from certain 
                          renewable resources.

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

SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF CREDIT PERIOD TO 10 YEARS FOR CERTAIN 
              FACILITIES PRODUCING ELECTRICITY FROM CERTAIN RENEWABLE 
              RESOURCES.

    (a) In General.--Subparagraph (B) of section 45(b)(4) of the 
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to credit period) is amended--
            (1) in clause (i), by inserting ``or clause (iii)'' after 
        ``clause (ii)'', and
            (2) by adding at the end the following new clause:
                            ``(iii) Termination.--Clause (i) shall not 
                        apply to any facility placed in service after 
                        the date of the enactment of this clause.''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply to electricity produced and sold after the date of the enactment 
of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
Editorial Note on Part 1206
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 1206 (formerly part 206) appear at 67 FR 19111, Apr. 18, 2002.

§ 1206.105 How will ONRR determine the value of my oil for royalty purposes? If ONRR decides that we will value your oil for royalty purposes under § 1206.104, or any other provision in this subpart, then we will determine value, for royalty purposes, by considering any information that we deem relevant, which may include, but is not limited to, the following: ( a ) The value of like-quality oil in the same field or nearby fields or areas
( b ) The value of like-quality oil from the refinery or area
( c ) Public sources of price or market information that ONRR deems reliable
( d ) Information available and reported to ONRR, including but not limited to on form ONRR-2014 and the Oil and Gas Operations Report (Form ONRR-4054)
( e ) Costs of transportation or processing if ONRR determines that they are applicable
( f ) Any information that ONRR deems relevant regarding the particular lease operation or the salability of the oil
§ 576.109 Indirect costs. ( a ) *In general.* ESG grant funds may be used to pay indirect costs in accordance with 2 CFR part 200, subpart E.
( b ) *Allocation.* Indirect costs may be allocated to each eligible activity under § 576.101 through § 576.108, so long as that allocation is consistent with 2 CFR part 200, subpart E.
( c ) *Expenditure limits.* The indirect costs charged to an activity subject to an expenditure limit under § 576.100 must be added to the direct costs charged for that activity when determining the total costs subject to the expenditure limit.
[76 FR 75974, Dec. 5, 2011, as amended at 80 FR 75939, Dec. 7, 2015]