alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
- All
            - Title
            - Author
            - Subject
            - Date
            - Full-Text

            -                              Explore                            ******                - Educational Resources
              - Archival Collections
              -                                      Themes                                    ******                  - Economic Data
                - Federal Reserve
                - View all 
              - Timelines 
            -                              Browse                            ******                - Titles
              - Authors
              - Subjects
              - Dates 
            -                              About                            ******                - About FRASER
              - FAQ
              - Contact Us
              -                                      FRASER API                                    ******                  - REST API
                - OAI-PMH 
            - Inside FRASER Blog

            - **

Home                 > Browse by Title > Nomination of Paul A. Volcker

              																	United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, 1970-					 and 	Ninety-Sixth Congress, 1979-1981. 						*Nomination of Paul A. Volcker : Hearing Before the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, United States Senate, Ninety-Sixth Congress, First Session, July 30, 1979*,												Washington: 								U.S. Government Printing Office, 										July 30, 1979,									https://fraser.stlouisfed.org/title/272,			accessed on September 5, 2024.						    

        - **FRASER**
        - About
        - FAQ
        - Legal and Privacy
        - FRASER API

          -                              @FedFRASER 
          - ** Contact Us
          -  **  What's New  
          -  **  Inside FRASER
#### Lois Schallenkamp *v.*Lawrence DelPonte, Commissioner of Motor Vehicles

The Supreme Court docket number is SC 14678.

*Francis S. Holbrook,*in support of the petition.

*Kathryn Mobley,*assistant attorney general, in opposition.

Decided January 21, 1993

The plaintiff’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 29 Conn. App. 576 (AC 10697), is granted, limited to the following issue:

“Did the Appellate Court properly conclude that there was substantial evidence in the record to support the finding that the arresting officer was certified to administer the breathalyzer tests?”
EXHIBIT 4.3.19A


                                BOARD RESOLUTION


         RESOLVED, that the Board of Directors of General Communication, Inc.
("Company") hereby approves increasing the allocation of additional shares to
the Company's Qualified Employee Stock Purchase Plan ("Plan") as follows ("Plan
Stock"): Class A - 4,000,000 shares;

         RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Board approves filing a registration
statement pursuant to the federal Securities Act of 1933, as amended
("Securities Act") and, in particular, in the format of Form S-8, where such
registration statement will pertain specifically to the registration of the
offer of the Plan Stock and such Plan Stock will be offered or acquired through
the Plan; and

         RESOLVED FURTHER, that the president and other officers of the Company
are directed to take such steps as are necessary to register the offer of the
Plan Stock and otherwise to be in compliance with the Securities Act and other
securities laws.
### §3056h. Eligibility for workforce investment activities

Eligible individuals under this subchapter may be considered by local workforce development boards and one-stop operators established under title I of the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act [29 U.S.C. 3111 et seq.] to satisfy the requirements for receiving services under such title that are applicable to adults.

(Pub. L. 89–73, title V, §510, as added Pub. L. 109–365, title V, §501, Oct. 17, 2006, 120 Stat. 2580; amended Pub. L. 113–128, title V, §512(w)(6), July 22, 2014, 128 Stat. 1715.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

The Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act, referred to in text, is Pub. L. 113–128, July 22, 2014, 128 Stat. 1425. Title I of the Act is classified generally to subchapter I (§3111 et seq.) of chapter 32 of Title 29, Labor. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 3101 of Title 29 and Tables.

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 3056h, Pub. L. 89–73, title V, §510, as added Pub. L. 106–501, title V, §501, Nov. 13, 2000, 114 Stat. 2280, related to eligibility for workforce investment activities, prior to the general amendment of this subchapter by Pub. L. 109–365.

Another prior section 3056h, Pub. L. 89–73, title V, §510, as added Pub. L. 102–375, title V, §506, Sept. 30, 1992, 106 Stat. 1269; amended Pub. L. 103–171, §2(20), Dec. 2, 1993, 107 Stat. 1989; Pub. L. 105–277, div. A, §101(f) [title VIII, §405(d)(33)(D), (f)(25)(D)], Oct. 21, 1998, 112 Stat. 2681–337, 2681–426, 2681–433, related to dual eligibility, prior to the general amendment of this subchapter by Pub. L. 106–501.

#### Amendments

2014—Pub. L. 113–128 substituted "by local workforce development boards and one-stop operators established under title I of the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act" for "by local workforce investment boards and one-stop operators established under title I of the Workforce Investment Act of 1998 (29 U.S.C. 2801 et seq.)" and "such title" for "such title I".

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

#### Effective Date of 2014 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 113–128 effective on the first day of the first full program year after July 22, 2014 (July 1, 2015), see section 506 of Pub. L. 113–128, set out as an Effective Date note under section 3101 of Title 29, Labor.
**Exhibit 21.1**

 

**SUBSIDIARIES OF MAI SYSTEMS CORPORATION**

** **

**(12/31/04)**

** **

The following is a listshowing MAI Systems Corporation and each of its subsidiaries, as of December 31,2004, indicating each jurisdiction under the laws of which it was organized:

 

| **NAME:**                                     | ** ** | **JURISDICTION OF INCORPORATION** | ** ** |
|-----------------------------------------------|------------|-----------------------------------|------------|
|                                          |       |                              |       |
| MAI  SYSTEMS CORPORATION                      |       | Delaware                          |       |
|                                          |       |                              |       |
| CLS  Software International, Inc.        |       | California                        |       |
|                                          |       |                              |       |
| Hotel  Information Systems Ltd.               |       | Hong  Kong                        |       |
|                                          |       |                              |       |
| Hotel  Information Systems Asia, Pte. Limited |       | Singapore                         |       |
|                                          |       |                              |       |
| Hotel  Information Solutions Limited          |       | United  Kingdom                   |       |
|                                          |       |                              |       |
| Boss  Solutions Limited                       |       | Hong  Kong                        |       |
|                                          |       |                              |       |
| Hospitality  Services and Solutions           |       | Malaysia                          |       |

 

----
#### § 560.200 What is the purpose of this subpart?

This subpart establishes the bidding systems that we may use to offer and sell Federal leases for the exploration, development, and production of oil and gas resources located on the OCS.

[76 FR 64623, Oct. 18, 2011. Redesignated at 81 FR 18175, Mar. 30, 2016]
<PAGE>   1
 
EXHIBIT 11. EARNINGS PER SHARE
 
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                     YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31,
                                                                   ----------------------------
                                                                    1996       1995       1994
                                                                   ------     ------     ------
                                                                      (DOLLARS IN THOUSANDS,
                                                                      EXCEPT PER SHARE DATA)
<S>                                                                <C>        <C>        <C>
PRIMARY NET INCOME PER SHARE:
Net income.......................................................  $6,883     $6,292     $4,972
Stock and stock equivalents (average shares):
  Common shares outstanding......................................   4,980      4,835      4,717
  Stock options (a)..............................................     157         87         77
                                                                   ------     ------     ------
Total stock and stock equivalents................................   5,137      4,922      4,794
                                                                   ------     ------     ------
PRIMARY NET INCOME PER SHARE.....................................  $ 1.34     $ 1.28     $ 1.04
                                                                   ======     ======     ======
FULLY DILUTED NET INCOME PER SHARE:
Net income.......................................................  $6,883     $6,292     $4,972
Stock and stock equivalents (average shares):
  Common shares outstanding......................................   4,980      4,835      4,717
  Stock options (b)..............................................     185        161         77
                                                                   ------     ------     ------
Total stock and stock equivalents................................   5,165      4,996      4,794
                                                                   ------     ------     ------
FULLY DILUTED NET INCOME PER SHARE...............................  $ 1.33     $ 1.26     $ 1.04
                                                                   ======     ======     ======
</TABLE>
 
---------------
 
(a) Shares were assumed to be repurchased at the average closing stock prices
    for the years ended December 31, 1996, 1995, and 1994.
 
(b) Shares were assumed to be repurchased at the December 31, 1996, 1995, and
    1994 closing prices, respectively.
### §620. Relay services for deaf-blind individuals

#### (a) In general

Within 6 months after October 8, 2010, the Commission shall establish rules that define as eligible for relay service support those programs that are approved by the Commission for the distribution of specialized customer premises equipment designed to make telecommunications service, Internet access service, and advanced communications, including interexchange services and advanced telecommunications and information services, accessible by low-income individuals who are deaf-blind.

#### (b) Individuals who are deaf-blind defined

For purposes of this subsection,1 the term "individuals who are deaf-blind" has the same meaning given such term in the Helen Keller National Center Act, as amended by the Rehabilitation Act Amendments of 1992 (29 U.S.C. 1905(2)).

#### (c) Annual amount

The total amount of support the Commission may provide from its interstate relay fund for any fiscal year may not exceed $10,000,000.

(June 19, 1934, ch. 652, title VII, §719, as added Pub. L. 111–260, title I, §105, Oct. 8, 2010, 124 Stat. 2762; amended Pub. L. 111–265, §2(4), (5), Oct. 8, 2010, 124 Stat. 2795.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

The Helen Keller National Center Act, referred to in subsec. (b), is title II of Pub. L. 98–221, Feb. 22, 1984, 98 Stat. 32, which is classified principally to chapter 21 (§1901 et seq.) of Title 29, Labor. The term "individuals who are deaf-blind" is defined in section 206(2) of the Act, as amended by Pub. L. 102–569, which is classified to section 1905(2) of Title 29. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 1901 of Title 29 and Tables.

#### Amendments

2010—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 111–265, §2(5), inserted "low-income" after "accessible by".

Pub. L. 111–265, §2(4), made technical amendment to reference in original act which appears in text as reference to "October 8, 2010".

1 So in original. Probably should be "section,".
March 26, 2015

JUDGMENT

The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NOE GERARDO MORIN, Appellant

NO. 14-13-00889-CR V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

________________________________

This cause was heard on the transcript of the record of the court below. 

Having considered the record, this Court holds that there was no error in the 

judgment. The Court orders the judgment AFFIRMED.

We further order appellant pay all costs expended in the appeal.

We further order this decision certified below for observance
### §49102. Purpose

(a) General.—The purpose of this chapter is to authorize the transfer of operating responsibility under long-term lease of the 2 Metropolitan Washington Airport properties as a unit, including access highways and other related facilities, to a properly constituted independent airport authority created by Virginia and the District of Columbia, in order to achieve local control, management, operation, and development of these important transportation assets.

(b) Inclusion of Baltimore/Washington International Airport Not Precluded.—This chapter does not prohibit the Airports Authority and Maryland from making an agreement to make Baltimore/Washington International Airport part of a regional airports authority, subject to terms agreed to by the Airports Authority, the Secretary of Transportation, Virginia, the District of Columbia, and Maryland.

(Added Pub. L. 105–102, §2(26), Nov. 20, 1997, 111 Stat. 2207.)

| RevisedSection | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 49102(a) | (uncodified). | Oct. 18, 1986, Pub. L. 99–500, title VI, §6003(a), 100 Stat. 1783–374. |
| | | Oct. 30, 1986, Pub. L. 99–591, title VI, §6003(a), 100 Stat. 3341–377. |
| 49102(b) | (uncodified). | Oct. 18, 1986, Pub. L. 99–500, title VI, §6003(b), 100 Stat. 1783–374. |
| | | Oct. 30, 1986, Pub. L. 99–591, title VI, §6003(b), 100 Stat. 3341–377. |

Section

In subsection (b), the words "and conditions" are omitted as being included in "terms".

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 49102 was renumbered section 50102 of this title.
§ 180.405 Time computations. ( a ) In computing time under this part, the time period begins the day following the act, event, or default and includes the last day of the period, unless the last day is a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday observed by the Federal Government, in which case the time period includes the next business day.
( b ) *Modification of time periods.* Except for time periods required by statute, the ALJ may enlarge or reduce any time period required under this part where necessary to avoid prejudicing the public interest or the rights of the parties. Requests for extension of time should set forth the reasons for the request.
( c ) *Entry of orders.* In computing any time period involving the date of the ALJ's issuance of an order or decision, the date of issuance is the date of service by the Docket Clerk.
( d ) *Computation of time for delivery by mail.* When documents are filed by mail, three days shall be added to the prescribed time period for filing any responsive pleading. Documents are not filed until received by the Docket Clerk.
( e ) *Untimely filing.* The ALJ may refuse to consider any motion or other document that is not filed in a timely fashion.
[61 FR 52218, Oct. 4, 1996, as amended at 74 FR 4636, Jan. 26, 2009]
0.45

0.550.650.750.85

nthly SO2 Emissions (lbs/MMBtu)

Monthly Coal Sulfur (weight %)

White Bluff Unit

1 Average SO2 Emissions and Coal Sulfur

SO2 EAvera

0.150.250.35

Jan‐01

Jul‐01

Feb‐02

Sep‐02

Mar‐03

Oct‐03

Apr‐04

Nov‐04

May‐05

Dec‐05

Jul‐06

Jan‐07

Aug‐07

Feb‐08

Sep‐08

Mar‐09

Oct‐09

May‐10

Average Mon

Average M
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-6157
LARRY JOE STEVENS, Petitioner - Appellant, versus VIRGINIA PAROLE BOARD, Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Chief District Judge. (CA-95-1162-AM) Submitted: May 16, 1996 Decided: June 27, 1996 Before RUSSELL, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Larry Joe Stevens, Appellant Pro Se. Mary Elizabeth Shea, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (1988) petition. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversibleerror. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Stevens v. Virginia Parole Board , No. CA-95-1162-AM (E.D. Va. Dec. 27, 1995).We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
#### Michael McNichols et al., Respondents, v. Lester Weiss, Appellant.

. In an action, pending in the Supreme Court, Nassau County, to recover damages for injuries to the person, defendant appeals from an order of said court, dated June 6, 1960, denying his motion: (a) to remove to the Supreme Court an action pending in the District Court of Nassau County, to recover damages for injury to property, brought by the female plaintiff against said defendant; and (b) to consolidate the District Court action with the Supreme Court action. Order reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and motion granted. In our opinion, it was an improvident exercise of discretion to deny consolidation. The personal injuries for which recovery is sought in the Supreme Court action, and the property damage for which recovery is sought in the District Court action, both resulted from the same accident between two automobiles. The female plaintiff, who is the owner of one of the automobiles involved, is the plaintiff who was injured. 'She is seeking to recover damages for injuries to her person and property. Her husband, plaintiff Michael McNichols, seeks to recover damages (in the Supreme Court action) for the loss of her services. By bringing the two separate actions, the plaintiffs are in effect splitting their claims and unnecessarily subjecting the courts and the defendant to separate trials with a possibility of inconsistent awards. Under the circumstances, multiplicity of actions should be avoided and all the claims should be tried in one action in the Supreme Court. Nolan, P. J., Kleinfeld, Christ and Pette, JJ., concur; Brennan, J., not voting.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Joseph Green, Appellant.

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Kings County, rendered December 3, 1959, after a jury trial, convicting him of assault in the second degree, and sentencing him, as a third felony offender, to serve a term of two and one-half to five years. Judgment affirmed. No opinion. Nolan, P. J., Beldock, Ughetta, Kleinfeld and Christ, JJ., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                          22,262
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                             391
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     69,072
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                        408,847
<ALLOWANCE>                                      3,497
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 525,490
<DEPOSITS>                                     411,262
<SHORT-TERM>                                    13,335
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                             26,500
<LONG-TERM>                                     13,115
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         4,531
<OTHER-SE>                                      51,702
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 525,490
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 35,111
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                4,264
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   344
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                39,719
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              15,480
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              17,215
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           22,504
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                      955
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                (13)
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                 18,589
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 10,555
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       7,007
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     7,007
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.55
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.52
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    5.14
<LOANS-NON>                                        538
<LOANS-PAST>                                       300
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                   590
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                    190
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 3,400
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                    1,050
<RECOVERIES>                                       192
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                3,497
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             3,497
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                            399
        

</TABLE>
FILED U.S. COURT OF AP P EALS E LEVEN T HC IRC UIT OCTOB ER 23, 2006 THOMAS K. KAH

N CLERK I N TH E U N I TED STA TES C O U R T O F A PPEA LS F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT

________________________ N o. 05- 13315 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ D . C . D o c k e tN o . 0 5 - 2 0 1 9 9 - C R - C MA U N I T E D S T A T E S O F A M E R I C A , P la in tif f - A p p e lle e , v ersu s J O S E V A L D E Z D O M I N G U E Z , D e f e n d a n t- A p p e lla n t.

________________________ A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f orthe S outhe rn D i s tr i c tof F l or i da

_________________________ ( O c t ob e r 23, 2006) B ef ore D U B IN A , C A RN E S and B A R K E T T , C i rc ui tJudg es P E R C U R I A M: G u s ta v o J . G a r c ia - M o n te s , r e ta in e dc o u n s e l f o rJ o s e V a ld e z D o m in g u e z in thi s di r e c tc r i m i na l appe a l , ha s m ove d t o w i thdr a w f r om f urthe rr e pr e s e nt a t i on of2

the appe l l a nta nd f

i l e d abr i e f

pur s ua ntt o A nde r s v. C a l i f orni a , 386 U . S . 738, 87 S . C t . 13 96 , 18 L . E d. 2d 49 3 (19 67 ). O ur i nd ependentre vi ew of the ent i re re cord r e v e a ls th a t c o u n s e l’s a s s e s s m e n t o f th e r e la tiv e m e r it o f

th e ap p e a l is c o rr e c t. B e c aus e i nde pe nde nte xa m i na t i on of the e nt i r e r e c or d r e ve a l s no a r guabl e i s s ue s of m eri t , co u n sel ’ s m o t i o n t o w i th d raw i s G R A N TED , a nd D om i ngue z ’ s c onvi c t i on and sent ence ar e AF F I RME D.