alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Samuel B. Raymond, as Assignee, etc., Respondent, *v.*Henry E. Richmond, as Sheriff, etc., et al., Appellants.

(Argued March 20, 1882;

decided April 11, 1882.)

This action was brought by plaintiff, as assignee for the benefit of creditors of one Jones, to recover for the alleged conversion of a stock of goods, which were taken from his possession by defendant Bichmond by virtue of an execution against one Mrs. Hinman, who was the former owner, but who, plaintiff claimed, sold and transferred'the goods to Jones.

Upon a former appeal in this case (78 N. Y. 351) it was held that a judgment in his favor in an action brought' by plaintiff, as assignee, against Jones and Mrs. Hinman to determine the title to the goods was conclusive as against them, but that a judgment creditor of Mrs. Hinman could assail the transfer by her to Jones as fraudulent. Upon the second trial the question as to the fraud was submitted to the jmy upon evidence which the court here deemed sufficient, and was decided adversely to defendants. The charge of the court on trial was not excepted to. Defendants’ counsel asked for additional directions which were merely restatements in different language of the points of law already laid down, or requests to separate the propositions. *Held,*that a refusal to do. this was not error.

*672Mrs. Hinman executed to Jones a bill of sale of the goods absolute on its face. No fraud or mistake was alleged as to its form or execution. On the trial Mrs. Hinman, as a witness for defendant, was asked “was there any intentional sale made by you of the stock and business to Edward Jones at any time, an intentional and absolute sale made by you at any time ? ” This was objected to and excluded. *Held*no error.

*Geo. H. Bipsom*for appellant.

*Theodore Bacon*for respondent.

Opinion by

Danforts, J.

All concur, except Andrews, Oh. J., not present at argument.

Judgment affirmed.
### §304109. Budget submission

(a) Time and Manner of Submission.—The Council shall submit its budget annually as a related agency of the Department of the Interior.

(b) Transmittal of Copies to Congressional Committees.—Whenever the Council submits any budget estimate or request to the President or the Office of Management and Budget, it shall concurrently transmit copies of that estimate or request to the Committee on Natural Resources and Committee on Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources and Committee on Appropriations of the Senate.

(Pub. L. 113–287, §3, Dec. 19, 2014, 128 Stat. 3214.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 304109(a) | 16 U.S.C. 470t(a) (1st sentence). | Pub. L. 89–665, title II, §212(a) (1st sentence), (b), as added Pub. L. 94–422, title II, §201(9), Sept. 28, 1976, 90 Stat. 1323; Pub. L. 96–205, title VI, §608(a)(3), Mar. 12, 1980, 94 Stat. 92; Pub. L. 96–515, title III, §302(b), Dec. 12, 1980, 94 Stat. 3000; Pub. L. 103–437, §6(d)(29), Nov. 2, 1994, 108 Stat. 4584. |
| 304109(b) | 16 U.S.C. 470t(b). | |

Section
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          NOV-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               NOV-30-1998
<CASH>                                         685,133
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                      26,200,187
<DEPRECIATION>                              11,507,294
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              15,725,099
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          477,636
<BONDS>                                      6,072,451
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   9,174,992
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                15,725,099
<SALES>                                      3,970,095
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             4,007,989
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             3,285,274
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             475,024
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                247,691
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            247,691
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   247,691
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     4.08
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     4.08
        

</TABLE>
Editorial Note on Part 774
Editorial Note: At 82 FR 54944, Nov. 17, 2017, as required by the Congressional Review Act and Public Law 115-5, the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement removed all amendments to part 774 made effective on Jan. 19, 2017, at 81 FR 93325-93326, Dec. 20, 2016.

§ 774.12 Post-permit issuance information requirements for permittees. ( a ) Within 30 days after the issuance of a cessation order under § 843.11 of this chapter, or its State regulatory program equivalent, you, the permittee, must provide or update all the information required under § 778.11 of this subchapter.
( b ) You do not have to submit information under paragraph (a) of this section if a court of competent jurisdiction grants a stay of the cessation order and the stay remains in effect.
( c ) Within 60 days of any addition, departure, or change in position of any person identified in § 778.11(c) of this subchapter, you must provide— ( 1 ) The information required under § 778.11(d) of this subchapter; and
( 2 ) The date of any departure.
[65 FR 79667, Dec. 19, 2000, as amended at 72 FR 68030, Dec. 3, 2007]
#### Dorothy E. C. Woodworth, Appellant, v. Timothy D. Clark et al., Respondents. In the Matter of the Accounting of Edward T. Beckwith et al., as Trustees of the Estate of Melville Clark, Deceased.

Motion to limit time for filing records and briefs to May 15, 1960 denied.
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT
SANTIAGO MARTINEZ and CYNTHIA ) MARTINEZ, ) ) Appellants, ) ) v. ) Case No. 2D17-4817 ) PAT FRANK, as Clerk of the Circuit Court ) for Hillsborough County; MORTGAGE ) ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION ) SYSTEMS, INC.; Q LENDING, INC. f/k/a ) Equity Financial Group, Inc.; and ) RENAISSANCE VILLAS CONDO ASSN. ) INC., ) ) Appellees. ) ) Opinion filed February 13, 2019. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Hillsborough County; Paul L. Huey, Judge. Arthur S. Barksdale, IV and Philip D. Storey of Alvarez, Winthrop, Thompson & Storey, P.A., Orlando, for Appellants. David M. Caldevilla of de la Parte & Gilbert, P.A., Tampa; Dale K. Bohner, General Counsel, Tampa; and Shelby K. Russ, Staff Attorney, Tampa, for Appellee Pat Frank, as Clerk of the Circuit Court for Hillsborough County. No appearance for remaining Appellees.- 2 -

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

MORRIS and BLACK, JJ., and CASE, JAMES R., ASSOCIATE SENIOR JUDGE, Concur.
#### WHITE v. MOSES et al.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

March 10, 1905.)

Action by Henry G. White against Joel M. Moses and another. No opinion. Motion granted, so far as to dismiss appeal, with $10 costs.
#### § 912.785 Requirements for permits for special categories of mining.

Part 785 of this chapter, *Requirements for Permits for Special Categories of Mining,* shall apply to each person who makes application for a permit to conduct certain categories of surface coal mining and reclamation operations as specified therein.
EXHIBIT 32.2




CERTIFICATION




In
connection with the annual report of Energroup Holdings Corporation (the
“Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ending December 31, 2008 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Wang Shu, Chief Financial
Officer (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer) of the Company, hereby
certify as of the date hereof, solely for purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63,
Section 1350 of the United States Code, that to the best of my
knowledge:




(1) The
Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as
applicable, 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 at the dates
and for the periods indicated.




Date:
      March 31, 2010
            By:
            /s/ Wang ShuWang
      ShuChief
      Financial Officer(Principal
      Financial and Accounting Officer)




A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Exhibit 31.1

Certification

Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

(A separate certification is required for each officer)

 

I, Thomas Clyne, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of BNP U.S. Funding L.L.C.;

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 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 registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this****report;

4. The registrant’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 registrant 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 registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within these entities, particularly during the period in which the report is being prepared;

b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’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 upon such evaluation; and

c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’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 registrant’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 registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

Date: November 14, 2005

|   | /s/ Thomas Clyne                            |            |
|--------|---------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------|
|   | Title: Chief Financial Officer and Director |

 

 

 

|   |   |   |
|--------|--------|--------|
H. Res. 1126 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

April 10, 2024. 

Resolved, That the Speaker, in concurrence with the Minority Leader, is authorized to direct the Chief Administrative Officer to record proceedings during a joint meeting of 

Congress on April 11, 2024, to provide a virtual reality experience for educational use by the public. 

Attest: 

Clerk.
### §8320. Offense or violation committed in compliance with orders

When it is established by satisfactory evidence that an individual—

(1) was convicted of an offense named by section 8312 of this title; or

(2) violated section 8314 or 8315 of this title; as a result of proper compliance with orders issued, in a confidential relationship, by an agency or other authority of the Government of the United States or the government of the District of Columbia, the right to receive annuity or retired pay may not be denied.

(Pub. L. 89–554, Sept. 6, 1966, 80 Stat. 564.)

| Derivation | U.S. Code | Revised Statutes and Statutes at Large |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 5 U.S.C. 2285(c). | Sept. 26, 1961, Pub. L. 87–299, §1 "Sec. 6(c)", 75 Stat. 645. |

Statutes at Large

The reference to conviction of an offense which constitutes a violation of former section 2283 (which is carried into this title as sections 8314 and 8315) is omitted as being covered by the words "violated section 8314 or 8315 of this title" which are added on authority of the words "conviction or violation" in former section 2285(c).

Standard changes are made to conform with the definitions applicable and the style of this title as outlined in the preface to the report.
### §8465. Waiver, allotment, and assignment of benefits

(a) An individual entitled to an annuity payable from the Fund may decline to accept all or any part of the amount of the annuity by a waiver signed and filed with the Office. The waiver may be revoked in writing at any time. Payment of the annuity waived may not be made for the period during which the waiver is in effect.

(b) An individual entitled to an annuity payable from the Fund may make allotments or assignments of amounts from the annuity for such purposes as the Office considers appropriate.

(Added Pub. L. 99–335, title I, §101(a), June 6, 1986, 100 Stat. 575.)
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
COMPANY'S SEC FORM 10-Q FOR THE QUARTERLY PERIOD ENDED NOVEMBER 30, 1996 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          AUG-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               NOV-30-1996
<CASH>                                           19257
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  427,287
<ALLOWANCES>                                      5937
<INVENTORY>                                     743071
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               1242493
<PP&E>                                         1238530
<DEPRECIATION>                                  554748
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 2453821
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           594784
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         62322
<OTHER-SE>                                      977221
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   2453821
<SALES>                                         846045
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                846045
<CGS>                                           630808
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   148895
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                7965
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  58377
<INCOME-TAX>                                     20432
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              37945
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     37945
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .61
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .61
        

</TABLE>
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Michael Rizzi, Appellant.

Motion by respondent to dismiss appeal denied, on condition that the appeal be perfected for January 13, 1961 and that appellant be ready to argue or submit it on said date. On the court’s own motion, the appellant’s time to perfect the appeal is enlarged accordingly, and the appeal is ordered on the calendar for said date. Beldock, Acting P. J., Ughetta, Kleinfeld, Christ and Pette, JJ., concur.
- 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 > U.S. Working Women: A Chartbook

              																	United States. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 						*U.S. Working Women: A Chartbook : Bulletin of the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, No. 1880*,										1975,									https://fraser.stlouisfed.org/title/263,			accessed on September 21, 2024.						    

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

          -                              @FedFRASER 
          - ** Contact Us
          -  **  What's New  
          -  **  Inside FRASER
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Willie James Fisher, Appellant.

Judgment convicting defendant after jury trial, on three counts of robbery in the first degree and one count of criminally carrying concealed or loaded pistol, unanimously modified on the law and the facts, so as to provide that each of the sentences of 10 to 20 years on each of the robbery counts shall run concurrently, and not consecutively; and as so modified affirmed. In our opinion, under the circumstances here, the imposition of consecutive sentences rather than concurrent sentences was excessive. While we .otherwise affirm, we note that certain of the statements of the District Attorney in summation were improper, including his ill-advised comparison of the ethnic backgrounds of a witness and of the defendant in his discussion of the issue of identification. (See *People*v. *Hearns,*18 A D 2d 922; *People*v. *Burris,*19 A D 2d 557.) However, the improper statements on the issue of identification related only to one of the crimes charged, and, on the record here, the evidence of defendant’s identification as the one who committed the several robberies was clear and convincing. So, we conclude that the prosecutor’s remarks do not preclude affirmance here. (See Code Grim. Pro., § 542.) Concur — Rabin, J. P., Stevens, Eager, Bergan and Bastow, JJ.
#### §§ 1699.171-1699.999 [Reserved]
#### James J. Rosado, Respondent, v Miller Printing Machinery Co., Defendant and Third-Party Plaintiff-Respondent. Pandick Press, Inc., Third-Party Defendant-Appellant.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County, entered on April 21, 1978, unanimously affirmed. Plaintiff-respondent shall recover of appellant $75 costs and disbursements of this appeal. Appeal from order of said court entered on July 26, 1978 is dismissed as nonappealable, without costs and without disbursements. No opinion. Concur—Murphy, P. J., Lupiano, Evans, Markewich and Sullivan, JJ.
Exhibit
32.1








The
following certification accompanies Dynamics Research Corporation’s Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2008 and is not
filed as provided in Item 601(b)(32)(ii) of Regulation S-K of the Securities and
Exchange Commission.





Certification
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 on Form 10-Q of Dynamics Research
Corporation, a Massachusetts corporation (the “Company”), for the quarter ended
June 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned, the Chief Executive Officer, hereby
certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that, to his knowledge:





(1) the
Report of the Company filed today pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act; and





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





Date:  August
      11, 2008
            /s/
      James P. ReganChairman,
      President and Chief Executive
Officer
#### Yolanda Duque de Estrada Gonzalez v. Industrial Bank (of Cuba) et al.

Motion granted to the extent of granting a stay for 10 days after the entry of the judgment on our order to give plaintiff the opportunity to file a notice of appeal to the Court of Appeals and to apply to the Court of Appeals or one of its Judges for a further stay; and otherwise the motion is denied, without costs. Settle order on notice. Motion for leave to intervene and for other relief denied. Concur — Botein, P. J., Breitel, Rabin, Valente and Bergan, JJ.
### §4704. Allocation of funds

Funds appropriated to the Office of Personnel Management for the purpose of this chapter may be allocated by the Office to any agency conducting demonstration projects or assisting the Office in conducting such projects. Funds so allocated shall remain available for such period as may be specified in appropriation Acts. No contract shall be entered into under this chapter unless the contract has been provided for in advance in appropriation Acts.

(Added Pub. L. 95–454, title VI, §601(a), Oct. 13, 1978, 92 Stat. 1188.)

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

#### Effective Date

Section effective 90 days after Oct. 13, 1978, see section 907 of Pub. L. 95–454, set out as an Effective Date of 1978 Amendment note under section 1101 of this title.
#### Irving Kremsdorf, Respondent, v. Robert D. Yanowitz, as Executor of Nathan Yanowitz, Deceased, Appellant.

Order denying defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint, dated April 11, 1960, unanimously affirmed, with $20 costs and disbursements to the respondent. No opinion. Concur — Rabin, J. F., Valente, McNally and Bergan, JJ.