alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
April 5, 2013 

Docket Operations M-30 

West Building Ground Floor W 12-140, 

1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, 

Washington DC 20590;3 

United States of America 

Department of Transportation 

Office of Secretary 

Washington DC 

RE. Docket DOS-OST-1997-2605 

SLt 

It would not be in the best interest of the 7 communities being served by Silver 

Airways in Montana to suspend service to Miles City and Lewistown Montana at 

this time. 

If this were to happen we feel the whole system of service could be in jeopardy 

for the rest of the communities being served by Silver Airways. 

We as the Airport Authority feel this service must be continued at least into the 

next two year period to give these two communities ample time to make 

adjustments and form a new plan for increasing ridership. We understand that 

the law was changed and Lewistown and Mile City have not had ample time to 

address the impeding loss of their air carrier. We are sure you can understand 

the impact to both communities if this service is terminated. Once it is gone it 

may never return. Montana is a large state and distances are very large in the 

scope of being able to move people to a destination hub. Certainly there needs to 

be some latitude for the two communities to work toward a solution to their 

existing lack of boarding's and cost of the subsidy per passenger. 
At our task force meeting in Billings on the 4th of this month some interesting 

information was presented to demonstrate when Denver was the hub their 

boarding's were far greater than having Billings as their hub. This should be 

investigated and a determination needs to be made based on the prior ridership 

from both communities. We are recommending that before you rush to 

judgment that you look at all the facts that may impact these and the other 

communities that will be impacted by eliminating them from the EAS service now 

being provided. The dynamics of Montana are changing and the purpose of the 

EAS program was and we hope will continue to be to provide this service to the 

seven communities in Montana that the system was designed for. 

Thank you for your prompt attention to this state wide problem and our hope is 

that you will not enforce this Order of Show Cause at this time and give the task 

force time to address this problem. At this time we are confident there is a 

solution that needs to be worked out by the communities in Montana and not a 

Washington solution that is far removed from the real problems in Montana. 

Thank you for consideration and addressing the problem pertinent to Montana. 

Sincerely 

Sidney Richland Airport Authority 

Sidney, Montana
<PAGE>

Exhibit 99.1


The Board of Directors
Unionamerica Holdings plc

We have audited the consolidated statement of operations, shareholders'
equity and cash flow of Unionamerica Holdings plc and subsidiaries for the
year ended 31 December 1996. In connection with our audit of the consolidated
statement of operations, shareholders' equity and cash flow, we have also
audited the financial statement schedules IV and VI, (none of which
aforementioned consolidated statement of operations, shareholders' equity and
cash flow and financial statement schedules are separately presented herein).
These consolidated statement of operations, shareholders' equity and cash
flow and financial statement schedules are the responsibility of the
Company's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these
consolidated statement of operations, shareholders' equity and cash flow and
financial statement schedules based on our audit.

We conducted our audit in accordance with generally accepted auditing
standards in the United States of America. Those standards require that we
plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the
financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes
examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures
in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting
principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as
evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our
audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.

In our opinion, the consolidated statement of operations, shareholders'
equity and cash flow referred to above present fairly, in all material
respects, the results of Unionamerica Holdings Plc and subsidiaries
operations and their cash flows for the year ended 31 December 1996, in
conformity with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States
of America. Also in our opinion, the related financial statement schedules,
when considered in relation to the basic consolidated statement of
operations, shareholders' equity and cash flow taken as a whole, present
fairly, in all material respects, the information set forth therein.

KPMG Audit Plc
Chartered Accountants
Registered Auditor
London, England

11 March 1997
[No. 9569.

Department One.

August 23, 1911.]

#### J. H. Smith *et al., Appellants,*v. Flathead River Coal Company, *Respondent.**1*

Corporations—Stock—Contracts—Specific Performance. There can be no specific performance of a contract made by a stockholder for the issuance of corporate stock to him in exchange for property where the corporation had no unissued stock and was not authorized to issue any more.

Appeal from a judgment of the superior court for Spokane county, Sullivan, J., entered October 29, 1910, upon granting a nonsuit in an action for specific performance.

Affirmed.

• *John M. Gleeson*and *Joseph F. Morton,*for appellants.

*Shuse <Sf Morrill,*for respondent.

1

Reported in 117 Pac. 475.

Mount, J.

action was brought to enforce specific performance of a contract. When the plaintiffs had introduced their evidence, the court dismissed their action. Plaintiffs have appealed.

It appears that the plaintiff J. H. Smith and the defendant company entered into the following contract:

> “This agreement, made this the 7th day of April, 1908, by and between J. H. Smith, party of the first part, and the Flathead River Coal Company, party of the second part, witnesseth: That the party of the first part agrees to have surveyed and obtain a lease on one certain coal and petroleum claim situated in the southeast Kootenay, B. C., covered by Mining License No. 229, and its renewal in the name of Hattie L. Smith, and assign the said lease unto the Flathead River Coal Company, and accept therefor such number of shares of the capital stock in payment as shall have been issued to the original stockholders of said company in proportion to the number of acres involved. And the said party of the second part herein agrees that they will issue the above *643mentioned number of shares of the capital stock of said company in payment of such assignment when it shall have been made.”

Thereafter the plaintiffs procured the lease mentioned, and tendered the same to defendant, and demanded the ¡stock— about 44,000 shares-—which defendant refused to issue. It also appeared that the plaintiffs with others had organized the defendant corporation some time before the date of the contract, and were stockholders therein and knew that all the stock of the corporation had been subscribed and issued by the corporation to its stockholders except seven- shares thereof, and that at the time the contract was entered into and at all times since, the corporation had no stock and was not authorized to issue any more. The trial court properly denied the relief sought, for the corporation could not legally issue the stock. Cook, Corporations, 426. The court was, therefore, powerless to enforce specific performance or to award damages. *Morgan v. Bell,*3 Wash. 554, 28 Pac. 925, 16 L. R. A. 614; *Peters v. Van Horn,*37 Wash. 550, 79 Pac. 1110.

Judgment affirmed.

Dunbau, C. J., Fullerton, and Cose, JJ., concur.
**EXHIBIT 21.1**

 

SUBSIDIARIES OF MICHAEL FOODS,INC.

 
| **NAME**                                         |   | **STATE OF INCORPORATION** |
|--------------------------------------------------|--------|----------------------------|
| Crystal  Farms Refrigerated Distribution Company |   | Minnesota                  |
| Northern  Star Co.                               |   | Minnesota                  |
| Kohler Mix  Specialties, Inc.                    |   | Minnesota                  |
| Kohler Mix  Specialties of Connecticut, Inc.     |   | Connecticut                |
| M. G.  Waldbaum Company                          |   | Nebraska                   |
| Papetti  Electroheating Corporation              |   | New Jersey                 |
| Papetti’s  Hygrade Egg Products, Inc.       |   | Minnesota                  |
| Casa  Trucking, Inc.                             |   | Minnesota                  |
| Wisco Farm  Cooperative                          |   | Wisconsin                  |
| WFC, Inc.                                        |   | Wisconsin                  |
| Farm Fresh  Foods, Inc.                          |   | Nevada                     |
| Michael  Foods of Delaware, Inc.                 |   | Delaware                   |
| Midwest Mix,  Inc.                               |   | Minnesota                  |
| Minnesota  Products, Inc.                        |   | Minnesota                  |
| MFI Food  Canada, Ltd.                           |   | Ontario                    |
| MIKLFS  Corporation                              |   | Virgin Islands             |
| M-Foods  Dairy, LLC*                             |   | Delaware                   |
| M-Foods  Dairy TXCT, LLC*                        |   | Delaware                   |

 

----

* not wholly-owned

 

----
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access topublications in the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging andlocator services, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications(CGP).  Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event thatpublications are no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title:****Northeastern Area state andprivate forestry news notes [electronic resource].**
 
2008-2009
2010
080930_newsnotes.pdf
090128_newsnotes.pdf
090220_newsnotes.pdf
090331_newsnotes.pdf
090428_newsnotes.pdf
090529_newsnotes.pdf
090626_newsnotes.pdf
090731_newsnotes.pdf
090831_newsnotes.pdf
091019_newsnotes.pdf
091031_newsnotes.pdf
091112_newsnotes.pdf

1001_newsnotes.pdf
1002_newsnotes.pdf
1003_newsnotes.pdf
1004_newsnotes.pdf
1005_newsnotes.pdf
1006_newsnotes.pdf
1007_newsnotes.pdf
1009_newsnotes.pdf
1010_newsnotes.pdf

 
 
SuDoc Number:A 13.165:
Item Number:0084-O (online)
CGP systemNumber:000754475
 
August 27, 2019
#### In the Matter of Frank Egitto, Appellant, against Paul D. McGinnis, as Commissioner of the Department of Correction of the State of New York, et al., Respondents.

Motion for leave to prosecute appeal as a poor person, granted. The appeal may be perfected upon one typewritten copy of the record and five typewritten copies of the brief. Motion in all other respects denied. Present — Bergan, P. J., Coon, Gibson, Herlihy and Reynolds, JJ.
### §748a. Prioritization of facilities

Not later than 180 days after October 5, 2018, the Administrator shall provide guidance and training on an annual basis to State, local, and Indian tribal governments, first responders, and utility companies on—

(1) the need to prioritize assistance to hospitals, nursing homes, and other long-term care facilities to ensure that such health care facilities remain functioning or return to functioning as soon as practicable during power outages caused by natural hazards, including severe weather events;

(2) how hospitals, nursing homes and other long-term care facilities should adequately prepare for power outages during a major disaster or emergency, as those terms are defined in section 5122 of title 42; and

(3) how State, local, and Indian tribal governments, first responders, utility companies, hospitals, nursing homes, and other long-term care facilities should develop a strategy to coordinate emergency response plans, including the activation of emergency response plans, in anticipation of a major disaster, including severe weather events.

(Pub. L. 115–254, div. D, §1208, Oct. 5, 2018, 132 Stat. 3441.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section was enacted as part of the Disaster Recovery Reform Act of 2018 and also as part of the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018, and not as part of the Post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act of 2006 which comprises this chapter.

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

#### Definitions

For definitions of "Administrator" and "State" as used in this section, see section 1203 of Pub. L. 115–254, set out as a note under section 5122 of Title 42, The Public Health and Welfare.
#### § 2400.44 Custodians.

Custodians of classified material shall be responsible for providing protection and accountability for such material at all times and particularly for locking classified material in approved security equipment whenever it is not in use or under direct supervision of authorized persons. Custodians shall follow procedures which insure that unauthorized persons do not gain access to classified information or material by sight or sound, and classified information shall not be discussed with or in the presence of unauthorized persons.
#### BROWN v. PARKER

No. 5P98

Case below: 127 N.C.App. 560

Petition by plaintiff for writ of certiorari to review the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 5 February 1998.
Exhibit 32.1





CERTIFICATION OF PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER








18 U.S.C. 1350 Certification of Richard E. Wilson


President and Chief Executive Officer


of


Duckwall-ALCO Stores, Inc.





In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Duckwall-ALCO Stores, Inc., a Kansas corporation (the “Company”), for the quarter ended May 2, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned officer of the Company certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to his knowledge:




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




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





A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Duckwall-ALCO Stores, Inc. and will be retained by Duckwall-ALCO Stores, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.





Date:  June 10, 2010




By:       /s/ Richard E. Wilson


President and Chief Executive Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998             DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998             SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                         819,830                 379,736
<SECURITIES>                                 2,252,846               2,369,876
<RECEIVABLES>                                  134,261                 408,844
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (15,000)                (27,993)
<INVENTORY>                                          0                       0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0                       0
<PP&E>                                          45,235                  78,195
<DEPRECIATION>                                  27,000                 (43,885)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,210,172               3,164,773
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            7,762                  60,402
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                     43,566                  49,939
<COMMON>                                       128,307                 128,307
<OTHER-SE>                                   3,030,537               2,926,125
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,210,172               3,164,773
<SALES>                                        133,033                 143,588
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               139,031                 223,073
<CGS>                                           94,803                 115,681
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   94,803                 115,681
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0                       0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0                       0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 44,228                 107,392
<INCOME-TAX>                                     6,500                  33,950
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             37,728                  73,442
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                    37,728                  73,442
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .00                     .02
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0                       0
        

</TABLE>
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 23-0105 STATE OF MONTANA, Plaintiff and Appellee, v. JEB EUGENE MARQUIS Defendant and Appellant. GRANT Pursuant

to authority granted under Mont. R. App. P. 26(1), the Appellant

is given anextension

of time until August 14, 2023, to prepare,file, and servethe Appellant's opening brief.07/18/2023Case Number: DA 23-0105
COURT OF APPEALS

	SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	FORT WORTH

					NOS. 2-08-413-CR 

						2-08-414-CR 

						2-08-415-CR 

						2-08-416-CR

THOMAS CRAIG BUCKBEE	APPELLANT

	V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS	STATE

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

	FROM THE 396TH DISTRICT COURT OF TARRANT COUNTY

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

	MEMORANDUM OPINION1

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

	Appellant Thomas Craig Buckbee attempts to appeal from his convictions for robbery, deadly conduct, and unlawful possession of a firearm.  We must dismiss an appeal if the trial court’s certification shows that the appellant has no right of appeal.2  Here, appellant pleaded guilty as part of a plea-bargain agreement, which the trial court followed, and the trial court certified that appellant has no right to appeal. The record supports the trial court’s certification.

	We notified appellant by letter that his appeal was subject to dismissal based on the trial court’s certification unless he filed a response showing grounds for continuing the appeal.  No response has been filed.  Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal.3

								PER CURIAM

PANEL:  CAYCE, C.J.; LIVINGSTON and DAUPHINOT, JJ.

DO NOT PUBLISH

Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)

DELIVERED:  January 22, 2009
#### Rose Factors Co., Respondent, v. Charles H. Schwarz et al., Appellants, et al., Defendants.

In an action to foreclose a mortgage on real property in which the defense of usury has been interposed, the defendants Schwarz appeal: (a) from an order of the County Court, Nassau County, dated June 20, 1961, which granted plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment striking out said defendants’ answer, directed a reference to compute the amount due and directed the subsequent entry of judgment of foreclosure and sale; and (b) from so much of an order of said court, dated the same day, as, upon reargument, adhered to the original decision. Order made on reargument, insofar as appealed from, reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment denied, with $10 costs. Appeal from the original order dismissed, without costs. This order was superseded by the later order made on reargument. In our opinion, the record discloses triable issues of fact as to whether the transactions were, in fact, loans to the said defendants Schwarz in violation of section 370 *et seq.*of the General Business Law, rather than loans to Cassel Custards, Inc., a corporation *(Shapiro*v. *Weissman,*7 A D 2d 752). Hence, it was improper to grant summary judgment; the issues should be determined after trial. Ughetta, Acting P. J., Kleinfeld, Christ, Brennan and Hopkins, JJ., concur.
#### In re KEARFUL.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

February 11, 1903.)

In the matter of the application of Francis J. Kearful for admission to the bar.

No opinion. Application granted.
<Page>

                                                                     EXHIBIT 4.1

                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

         We consent to the reference to our firm under the caption
"Experts-Independent Auditors" and to the use of our report dated December 9,
2002 in the Amendment No. 2 to the Registration Statement (No. 333-100939)
and related Prospectus of Claymore Securities Defined Portfolios, Series 137.

                                                      /s/ GRANT THORNTON LLP
                                                          GRANT THORNTON LLP

Chicago, Illinois
December 9, 2002
QuickLinks
 -- Click here to rapidly navigate through this document

Exhibit 10.a.1  


 
 

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM    
    


        We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-92229) pertaining to the
1993 Stock Option Plan and the 1996 Employee Stock Purchase Plan of Biovail Corporation, of our reports dated March 21, 2006, with respect to the consolidated financial statements of Biovail
Corporation prepared in accordance with Canadian and United States generally accepted accounting principles that are included in the Annual Report (Form 20-F) for the
year ended December 31, 2005 and our report included in the following paragraph with respect to the financial statement schedule of Biovail Corporation included in this Form 20-F. 



        Our
audits also included the financial statement schedule of Biovail Corporation included on Page S-1 of the Form 20-F. This schedule is the
responsibility of Biovail Corporation's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion based on our audits. In our opinion, the financial statement schedule referred to above, when considered
in relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole, presents fairly in all material respects the information set forth therein. 



	Toronto, Canada	 	/s/ ERNST & YOUNG LLP
	March 27, 2006	 	Chartered Accountants













QuickLinks


CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM