alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. JERRY WAYNE INMAN

No. 391A97

(Filed 6 March 1998)

Appeal by defendant pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 7A-30(2) from an unpublished decision of a divided panel of the Court of Appeals, 127 N.C. App. 210, 490 S.E.2d 253 (1997), ordering a new trial after a jury trial in which judgment was entered by Hyatt, J., on 14 March 1996 in Superior Court, Swain County, sentencing defendant to a term of sixty days’ imprisonment, suspended, with one year unsupervised probation. Heard in the Supreme Court 9 February 1998.

*Michael F. Easley, Attorney General, by Reuben F. Young, Assistant Attorney General, for the State.*

*Mark R. Melrose for defendant-appellant.*

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.
### §1447. Price support levels for other nonbasic agricultural commodities

The Secretary is authorized to make available through loans, purchases, or other operations price support to producers for any nonbasic agricultural commodity not designated in sections 1446, 1446a, and 1446d 1 of this title at a level not in excess of 90 per centum of the parity price for the commodity.

(Oct. 31, 1949, ch. 792, title III, §301, 63 Stat. 1053; Pub. L. 95–113, title X, §1003(a), Sept. 29, 1977, 91 Stat. 950.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

Section 1446d of this title, referred to in text, was omitted from the Code.

#### Amendments

1977—Pub. L. 95–113 temporarily inserted provisions authorizing Secretary to make price support available for the 1978 through 1981 crops of flaxseed, dry edible beans, gum naval stores, and, in the case of the 1979 through 1981 crops, sugar beets and sugar cane, and for other nonbasic undesignated commodities. See Effective and Termination Dates of 1977 Amendment note below.

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

#### Effective and Termination Dates of 1977 Amendment

Pub. L. 95–113, title X, §1003(a), Sept. 29, 1977, 91 Stat. 950, provided that the amendment made by section 1003(a) is effective only with respect to the 1978 through 1981 crops.

#### Inapplicability of Section

Section inapplicable to 2014 through 2018 crops of covered commodities, cotton, and sugar and inapplicable to milk during period beginning Feb. 7, 2014, through Dec. 31, 2018, see section 9092(b)(9) of this title.

Section inapplicable to 2008 through 2012 crops of covered commodities, peanuts, and sugar and inapplicable to milk during period beginning June 18, 2008, through Dec. 31, 2012, see section 8782(b)(9) of this title.

Section inapplicable to 2002 through 2007 crops of covered commodities, peanuts, and sugar and inapplicable to milk during period beginning May 13, 2002, through Dec. 31, 2007, see section 7992(b)(9) of this title.

Section inapplicable to 1996 through 2002 crops of loan commodities, peanuts, and sugar and inapplicable to milk during period beginning Apr. 4, 1996, and ending Dec. 31, 2002, see section 7301(b)(1)(I) of this title.

#### Elimination of Wool and Mohair Programs

Pub. L. 103–130, §3(c), Nov. 1, 1993, 107 Stat. 1369, provided that: "Effective beginning December 31, 1995, the Secretary of Agriculture may not provide loans or payments for wool or mohair by using the funds of the Commodity Credit Corporation or under the authority of any law."

#### Other Price Support Programs in Effect on September 29, 1977

Pub. L. 95–113, title X, §1003(b), Sept. 29, 1977, 91 Stat. 950, provided that: "The amendment made by this section [amending this section] to the Agricultural Act of 1949 shall not be operative in any manner with respect to any price support program in effect on the date of enactment of this Act [Sept. 29, 1977]."

1 See References in Text note below.
### SUBCHAPTER I—COMMODITY POLICY
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
COMPANY'S FINANCIAL STATEMENTS INCLUDED IN THIS QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-Q
AND IS QUALIFIED IN IT'S ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                           3,232
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    8,703
<ALLOWANCES>                                       102
<INVENTORY>                                     14,049
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                56,532
<PP&E>                                          60,466
<DEPRECIATION>                                  34,189
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  84,815
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           14,273
<BONDS>                                         18,932
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           797
<OTHER-SE>                                      49,379
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    84,815
<SALES>                                         63,796
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                63,796
<CGS>                                           55,603
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   55,603
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   322
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     2
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             (1,371)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (4,210)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     (824)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (3,386)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (3,386)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.42)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.42)
        

</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 1626 Engrossed in House (EH)]

<DOC>
H. Res. 1626

                In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

                                                     December 31, 2024.
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives has learned with profound regret 
and sorrow of the death of James Earl Carter, Jr., thirty-ninth President of the 
United States of America.
    Resolved, That the House tenders its deep sympathy to the members of the 
family of the former President in their bereavement.
    Resolved, That the Clerk communicate these resolutions to the Senate and 
transmit a copy of the same to the family of the former President.
    Resolved, That when the House adjourns today, it adjourn as a further mark 
of respect to the memory of the former President.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
#### In the Matter of the Application of Robert H. Frick for Admission to Practice as an Attorney. (From the State of Illinois.)

—-Application granted. Beldoek, P. J., Christ, Brennan, Rabin and Hopkins, JJ., concur.
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 991 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 991

 To prohibit Federal funds from being made available to entities that 
   refuse to provide treatment based on COVID-19 vaccination status.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 14, 2023

Mr. Bishop of North Carolina (for himself, Mr. Buck, Mr. McCormick, Ms. 
      Tenney, Mr. Ogles, Mr. Webster of Florida, Mr. Duncan, Mrs. 
  Harshbarger, Mr. Gosar, Mrs. Miller of Illinois, Mrs. Luna, and Mr. 
    Perry) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
 Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on 
   Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the 
  Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall 
           within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To prohibit Federal funds from being made available to entities that 
   refuse to provide treatment based on COVID-19 vaccination status.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``COVID-19 Vaccination Non-
Discrimination Act''.

SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON FEDERAL FUNDS FOR ENTITIES THAT REFUSE TO 
              PROVIDE TREATMENT BASED ON COVID-19 VACCINATION STATUS.

    Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no funds authorized or 
appropriated by Federal law, and none of the funds in any trust fund to 
which funds are authorized or appropriated by Federal law, including 
funds provided under titles XVIII, XIX, and XXI of the Social Security 
Act (42 U.S.C. 1395 et seq.; 1396 et seq.; and 1397aa et seq., 
respectively) shall be made available to a facility that refuses to 
provide treatment to an individual based on the COVID-19 vaccination 
status of such individual.
                                 <all>
```
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTIONAGENCY - - REGION 4 ATLANTA FEDERAL CENTER 61 FORSYTH STREET ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303-8960 

## SEF 1 7 

### 2003 

## SEP 1 1 

### 2008

Carol A. Couch, Ph.D., Director Georgia Environmental ProtectionDivision Suite 1152, East Tower Two Martin Luther King Jr. Drive Atlanta, Georgia 30334 

# RECEIVED OCT 

### 2 3 2008 

### AIR PROTECTION BRANCH Dear Dr. Couch: Thank you for your August 19,2008, letter and the September 8,2008, email concerning the applicationofthe new Interagency Monitoring ofProtected Visual Environments (IMPROVE) equation. The September 8,2008, emailprovided additional documentation for the enclosures in your letter. You requested approvalto use this new methodologyto estimate visibility impacts from two Georgia facilities to implement the Best AvailableRetrofit Technology requirement of the Regional Haze Rule.
The new methodology uses a spreadsheetdeveloped by the Visibility Improvement - State and Tribal Association of the Southeastto post-process the visibility modeling output from the CALPUFF and CALPOST models. The spreadsheetimplements the new IMPROVE equation for calculating visibility impacts that was adopted by the IMPROVE Steering Committee in December 2005. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4 has previouslyprovided comments indicating that new methodologyis an alternative modeling approach and should meet the requirements in Section 3.2 of Appendix W, Guidelineon Air Quality Models contained in 40 C.F.R. Part 5 1. We have reviewed your demonstration for using the new methodology, which includes a rationale for the need to use the new IMPROVE equation, a discussion of the performance of the equation versus measured values, a submittal ofthe modifiedpost-processing methodology, and documentationto support the development of concentrationsfor the different terms in the equation. Based on ths Oemo~stration provided in your letter, we approve your request.
We appreciate your desire to protect and preserve the environment. Ifwe may be of further assistance, please contactme or have a member of your staff contact Beverly Banister, Director of the Region 4 Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, at (404) 562-9077. Sincerely,



### J. I. Palmer, Jr. 

# d-.

Regional Administrator

Internet Address (URL) http://www.epa.gov Recycled/Recyclable -Printed wilh Vegetable Oil Based Inks on RecycledPaper (Minimum 30% Postconsumer)
COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02-11-00250-CV

BNSF Railway Company

v.

James E. Phillips

§

§

§

§

§

From the 236th District Court

of Tarrant County (236-223592-07)

August 1, 2013

Opinion by Justice Dauphinot

Dissent by Justice Meier

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that 

there was no error in the trial court’s judgment. It is ordered that the judgment of 

the trial court is affirmed.

It is further ordered that Appellant BNSF Railway Company shall pay all of 

the costs of this appeal, for which let execution issue.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS 

By _________________________________

 Justice Lee Ann Dauphinot
###### Editorial Note on Part 75

#### Editorial Note:

The provisions of this part marked [Statutory Provision] appear in Title III of the Federal Coal Mine Health and Safety Act of 1969.

#### § 75.1403-2 Criteria—Hoists transporting materials; brakes.

Hoists and elevators used to transport materials should be equipped with brakes capable of stopping and holding the fully loaded platform, cage, skip, car, or other device at any point in the shaft, slope, or incline.
1 

### Schaffner, Karen S.

From: Bogany, Carolyn [Carolyn.Bogany@tpcgrp.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 09, 2011 2:42 PM To: Schaffner, Karen S.; Textor, Marise L. Cc: Shedd.Steve@epamail.epa.gov Subject: RE: RTR MVL: facility centroid



### Karen, the coordinates were verified and they do fa ll within the plant boundary. If you need any addit ional information,
let us know.

Thanks,



### Carolyn Coates Bogany Senior Environmental Engineer - HNO Carolyn.Bogany@tpcgrp.com TPC Group | www.tpcgrp.com Office: 713.475.7474 | Cell: 832.331.0572 | Fax: 713-475-7463 8600 Park Place Blvd | Houston, Texas 77017

From: Schaffner, Karen S. [mailto:ksschaffner@rti.org] Sent: Wednesday, February 09, 2011 12:47 PM To: Textor, Marise L.; Bogany, Carolyn Cc: Shedd.Steve@epamail.epa.gov Subject: RTR MVL: facility centroid



### Hi Marise: RTI’s GIS person suggested the followin g point as the facility centroid. Fyi. Have also attached the redrawn facility boundary map (still shows the emission poi nt out to the left, but this point will be moved to the facility centroid). Thanks, Karen

Lat: 29.698194 Long: -95.255068
<PAGE>

EDUCATIONAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION


                                                                    Exhibit 31.2

                                  CERTIFICATION


I, W. Curtis Fossett certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Educational Development
Corporation.

2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly
report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this quarterly 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 quarterly report;

4. The registrant's other certifying officer 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 those entities, particularly
during the period in which this quarterly 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 on such evaluation;

c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal
quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially
affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting;

5. The registrant's other certifying officer 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 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 October 14, 2003                       By /s/ W. Curtis Fossett
     -----------------                         ---------------------------------
                                               W. Curtis Fossett
                                               Chief Financial Officer
#### FIRST NAT. BANK OF SARATOGA SPRINGS, Respondent, v. MORRIS, Appellant, et al.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department.

December 3, 1903.)

Action by the First National Bank of Saratoga Springs against John W. Morris, impleaded, etc.

No opinion. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements.
#### Thomas Kearney *et al. v.*The City of Chicago.

*Filed at Ottawa November 9, 1896.*

1. *Notices—certificate of publication of notice must be signed by the publisher or his agent.*A certificate of publication of notice which does not purport to be signed by the publisher or his agent, and which shows on its face that it was not so signed, is of no effect, as it does not comply with the statute. (Rev. Stat. 1874, p. 723.)

2. Special *assessment—sufficient certificate of publication of notice necessary to give court jurisdiction in.*The county court has no jurisdiction to enter a'judgment of confirmation of a special assessment without a sufficient certificate of publication of the notice required, and its error in doing so may be availed of on writ of error by a party who was defaulted at the hearing.

Writ of Error to the County Court of Cook county; the Hon. O. N. Carter, Judge, presiding.

Maher & Gilbert, for plaintiffs in error.

Mr. Justice Wilkin

delivered the opinion of the court.

This is a writ of error to the county court of Cook county, to reverse a judgment confirming a special assessment by the city of Chicago against property of the plaintiffs in error for the improvement of St. Louis avenue. The judgment below was rendered upon default.

*294It will be necessary to notice but one ground of reversal insisted upon. The notice of the application for a confirmation of the assessment purports to have been published in the *Chicago Mail.*The certificate is in the usual form, but shows that Joseph R. Dunlop “was and is the publisher of said newspaper,” and concludes: “In witness whereof, Joseph R. Dunlop, publisher of said *Chicago*Mail, has signed this certificate this 5th day of January, 1893.” The certificate, however, instead of being signed by Dunlop, is signed, “Frank D. Biggs, publisher.”

The statute makes it the duty of the commissioners to file a certificate of publication of the notice “in like manner as is required in other cases of publication of notices.” Section 1 of chapter 100 (2 Starr & Curtis, p. 1674,) provides: “That when any notice shall be required by law * * * to be published in any newspaper, and no other mode of proving the same is provided, the certificate of the publisher, by himself or his authorized agent, with a written or printed copy of such notice annexed, * * * shall be sufficient evidence of the publication therein set forth.” In this case no attempt was made to prove the publication except by the certificate of publication. This certificate does not purport to be signed by the publisher or by his agent. It states, in effect, that the one who signs it as publisher is not, in fact, its publisher. This certificate is of no more force than if it had not been signed at all. Without a proper and sufficient certificate of publication of the required notice the county court was without jurisdiction to enter its judgment of confirmation, and the error in doing so may be properly availed of by the plaintiffs in error, although they were defaulted upon the hearing.

We think, for the reasons stated, the judgment below must be reversed and the cause remanded.

*Reversed and remanded.*
<PAGE>

                                  EXHIBIT 99.2

                   CERTIFICATE OF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                                   OF ELKCORP

         Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C.ss.
1350):

         I, Harold R. Beattie, Jr., Chief Financial Officer of ElkCorp, certify
to my knowledge and belief pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002 (18 U.S.C.ss. 1350) that:

         (1)      The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended March
                  31, 2003, which this statement accompanies, fully complies
                  with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
                  Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

         (2)      The information contained in the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q
                  for the period ended March 31, 2003 fairly presents, in all
                  material respects, the financial condition and results of
                  operations of ElkCorp.

Dated: May 15, 2003
                                                  By /s/ Harold R. Beattie, Jr.
                                                     ---------------------------
                                                         Harold R. Beattie, Jr.
                                                         Chief Financial Officer