alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### §1503. Federal Crop Insurance Corporation; creation; offices

To carry out the purposes of this subchapter, there is hereby created as an agency of and within the Department a body corporate with the name "Federal Crop Insurance Corporation". The principal office of the Corporation shall be located in the District of Columbia, but there may be established agencies or branch offices elsewhere in the United States under rules and regulations prescribed by the Board.

(Feb. 16, 1938, ch. 30, title V, §503, 52 Stat. 72; Pub. L. 103–354, title I, §102(b)(1), (4)(A), (B), Oct. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 3180, 3181; Pub. L. 110–234, title XII, §12033(c)(2)(B), May 22, 2008, 122 Stat. 1405; Pub. L. 110–246, §4(a), title XII, §12033(c)(2)(B), June 18, 2008, 122 Stat. 1664, 2167.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Pub. L. 110–234 and Pub. L. 110–246 made identical amendments to this section. The amendments by Pub. L. 110–234 were repealed by section 4(a) of Pub. L. 110–246.

#### Amendments

2008—Pub. L. 110–246, §12033(c)(2)(B), substituted "this subchapter" for "this chapter".

1994—Pub. L. 103–354 in first sentence struck out "of Agriculture" after "Department" and "(herein called the Corporation)" before period at end, and in second sentence struck out "of Directors" after "Board".

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

#### Effective Date of 2008 Amendment

Amendment of this section and repeal of Pub. L. 110–234 by Pub. L. 110–246 effective May 22, 2008, the date of enactment of Pub. L. 110–234, see section 4 of Pub. L. 110–246, set out as an Effective Date note under section 8701 of this title.

#### Effective Date of 1994 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 103–354 effective Oct. 13, 1994, and applicable to provision of crop insurance under Federal Crop Insurance Act (7 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.) beginning with 1995 crop year, with such Act, as in effect on the day before Oct. 13, 1994, to continue to apply with respect to 1994 crop year, see section 120 of Pub. L. 103–354, set out as a note under section 1502 of this title.

#### **Executive Documents**

#### Transfer of Functions

Under authority of Ex. Ord. No. 9577, June 29, 1945, Secretary of Agriculture consolidated administration of program of Federal Crop Insurance Corporation in Production and Marketing Administration by Memorandum 1118, Aug. 18, 1945. 1946 Reorg. Plan No. 3, §501, eff. July 16, 1946, 11 F.R. 7877, 60 Stat. 1100, set out in the Appendix to Title 5, Government Organization and Employees, transferred administration of program of Federal Crop Insurance Corporation to Secretary of Agriculture. In his letter to Congress President stated that purpose of this transfer was to permit Secretary of Agriculture to continue consolidation already effected in Production and Marketing Administration.

Federal Crop Insurance Corporation consolidated with other agencies into Agricultural Conservation and Adjustment Administration for duration of war, see Ex. Ord. No. 9069.
#### Sidney A. Leslie *v.*Helen Leslie

*B. William Bohonnon,*in support of the motion.

Submitted December 4

decided December 18, 1974

The plaintiff’s motion for a review of the order of the trial court dated October 24, 1974, in the appeal from the Superior Court in New Haven County is granted and the relief sought therein is denied.
###### Editorial Note on Part 724

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 724 appear at 65 FR 62616, Oct. 19, 2000.

#### § 724.401 Applicants.

As defined in § 724.114.
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 4 (Thursday, January 7, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 1111]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-00184]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM


Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding 
Companies

    The companies listed in this notice have applied to the Board for 
approval, pursuant to the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 
1841 et seq.) (BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR part 225), and all other 
applicable statutes and regulations to become a bank holding company 
and/or to acquire the assets or the ownership of, control of, or the 
power to vote shares of a bank or bank holding company and all of the 
banks and nonbanking companies owned by the bank holding company, 
including the companies listed below.
    The public portions of the applications listed below, as well as 
other related filings required by the Board, if any, are available for 
immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank(s) indicated below and 
at the offices of the Board of Governors. This information may also be 
obtained on an expedited basis, upon request, by contacting the 
appropriate Federal Reserve Bank and from the Board's Freedom of 
Information Office at https://www.federalreserve.gov/foia/request.htm. 
Interested persons may express their views in writing on the standards 
enumerated in the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)).
    Comments regarding each of these applications must be received at 
the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of Governors, 
Ann E. Misback, Secretary of the Board, 20th Street and Constitution 
Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20551-0001, not later than February 8, 2021.
    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago (Colette A. Fried, Assistant 
Vice President) 230 South LaSalle Street, Chicago, Illinois 60690-1414:
    1. Marathon MHC and Marathon Bancorp, Inc., both of Wausau, 
Wisconsin; to become a mutual bank holding company and a mid-tier stock 
bank holding company, respectively, by acquiring the voting shares of 
Marathon Bank, Wausau, Wisconsin, in connection with the conversion of 
Marathon Bank from mutual to stock form and a minority stock issuance 
by Marathon Bancorp, Inc.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, December 18, 
2020.
Ann Misback,
Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 2021-00184 Filed 1-5-21; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE P
#### STRICKLAND v. CAROLINA CLASSICS CATFISH, INC.

No. 576P97

Case below: 127 N.C.App. 615

Petition by plaintiffs for discretionary review pursuant to G.S. 7A-31 denied 5 February 1998.
### §3310. Limitation on indirect costs for agricultural research, education, and extension programs

#### (a) In general

Except as otherwise provided in law, indirect costs charged against any agricultural research, education, or extension grant awarded under this Act or any other Act pursuant to authority delegated to the Under Secretary of Agriculture for Research, Education, and Economics shall not exceed 30 percent of the total Federal funds provided under the grant award, as determined by the Secretary.

#### (b) Exception

Subsections (a) and (c) shall not apply to a grant awarded competitively under section 638 of title 15.

#### (c) Treatment of subgrants

In the case of a grant described in subsection (a), the limitation on indirect costs specified in such subsection shall be applied to both the initial grant award and any subgrant of the Federal funds provided under the initial grant award so that the total of all indirect costs charged against the total of the Federal funds provided under the initial grant award does not exceed such limitation.

(Pub. L. 95–113, title XIV, §1462, as added Pub. L. 105–185, title II, §230(a), June 23, 1998, 112 Stat. 546; amended Pub. L. 107–171, title VII, §7222, May 13, 2002, 116 Stat. 454; Pub. L. 110–234, title VII, §7132(a), May 22, 2008, 122 Stat. 1228; Pub. L. 110–246, §4(a), title VII, §7132(a), June 18, 2008, 122 Stat. 1664, 1989; Pub. L. 115–334, title VII, §7125, Dec. 20, 2018, 132 Stat. 4794.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Pub. L. 110–234 and Pub. L. 110–246 made identical amendments to this section. The amendments by Pub. L. 110–234 were repealed by section 4(a) of Pub. L. 110–246.

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 1462 of Pub. L. 95–113 was classified to section 3304 of this title, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 99–198.

#### Amendments

2018—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 115–334, §7125(1), substituted "30 percent" for "22 percent".

Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 115–334, §7125(2), substituted "Subsections (a) and (c)" for "Subsection (a)".

Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 115–334, §7125(3), added subsec. (c).

2008—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 110–246, §7132(a), substituted "any agricultural" for "a competitive agricultural" and "22 percent" for "19 percent".

2002—Pub. L. 107–171 designated existing provisions as subsec. (a), inserted heading, and added subsec. (b).

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

#### Effective Date of 2008 Amendment

Amendment of this section and repeal of Pub. L. 110–234 by Pub. L. 110–246 effective May 22, 2008, the date of enactment of Pub. L. 110–234, see section 4 of Pub. L. 110–246, set out as an Effective Date note under section 8701 of this title.
§ 752.4 Affirmative claims. ( a ) *Settlement authority.* The Navy has the same authority to settle affirmative admiralty claims as it does claims against the Navy. The statute conferring this authorization is codified in 10 U.S.C. 7623, and is the reciprocal of 10 U.S.C. 7622 referred to in § 752.3.
( b ) *Scope.* 10 U.S.C. 7623 is a tort claims-settlement statute. It is not limited to affirmative claims arising out of collision, but embraces all instances of damage caused by a vessel or floating object to property of the United States under the jurisdiction of the Department of the Navy or for which the Department of the Navy has assumed an obligation to respond. Perhaps the most frequent instance is where a privately owned vessel damages a Navy pier or shore structure. To eliminate any issue of whether the damaging instrumentality was a vessel, the words “or floating object” were included.
( c ) *Statute of limitation.* The United States is subject to a three-year statute of limitation when it asserts an affirmative claim for money damages grounded in tort. This limitation is subject to the usual exclusions, such as inability to prosecute due to war, unavailability of the “res” or defendant, and certain exemptions from legal process (28 U.S.C. 2415, 2416).
( d ) *Litigation.* 10 U.S.C. 7623 does not apply to any claim where suit is filed. If the Admiralty and Maritime Law Division is unable to effect settlement, the matter is referred to the Department of Justice for the filing of a complaint against the offending party. Thereafter, as in the case of adverse litigated claims, the Navy has no further authority to effect settlement.
[39 FR 9962, Mar. 15, 1974, as amended at 55 FR 12174, Apr. 2, 1990; 65 FR 60861, Oct. 13, 2000; 69 FR 20542, Apr. 16, 2004; 72 FR 56268, Oct. 3, 2007]
#### The People of the State of New York ex rel. Hyman Post, Also Known as Hyman Posalsky, Respondent, v. Charles Samuels, Appellant.

Order, entered on February 21, 1962, unanimously affirmed, with $20 costs and disbursements to the respondent. No opinion. Concur — Botein, P. J., Stevens, Eager, Steuer and Bergan, JJ.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

Consent to Exercise of Jurisdiction

By a United States Magistrate Judge

Case Title Case Number:

Assigned Judge:

V.

Designated

Magistrate Judge:

In accordance with the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C.§636(c), the undersigned party

or parties to the above-captioned civil matter hereby voluntarily consent to have a United

States Magistrate Judge conduct any and all further proceedings in this case, including trial,

and order the entry of a final judgment. Should this case be reassigned to a magistrate judge

other than the magistrate judge designated pursuant to Local Rule 72, the undersigned may

object within 30 days of such reassignment. If an objection is filed by any party, the case

will be reassigned to the district judge before whom it was last pending.

____________ By:______________________ ______________________________

Date Signature Name of Party or Parties

____________ By:______________________ ______________________________

Date Signature Name of Party or Parties

____________ By:______________________ ______________________________

Date Signature Name of Party or Parties

____________ By:______________________ ______________________________

Date Signature Name of Party or Parties

Note: File this consent only if all parties have consented on this form to the exercise of

jurisdiction by a United States magistrate judge.

Martin

Dun & Bradstreet, Inc. and Convergys Customer

Management Group Inc.

1:12-cv-00215

Der-Yeghiayan

Denlow

1-27-2012 /s/ Alexander H. Burke Plaintiff Nicholas Martin

1-27-2012 /s/ Albert E. Hartmann Defendant Convergys

1-27-2012 /s/ Bart T. Murphy Defendant Dun & Bradstreet, Inc.

Case: 1:12-cv-00215 Document #: 12 Filed: 01/27/12 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:37
#### In the Matter of the Estate of Philip H. Paris, Deceased. Joseph A. Bochenek on Behalf of Jack Natowitz, Respondent; Benjamin Paris, as Administrator of the Estate of Philip H. Paris, Deceased, Appellant.

In a proceeding for the appointment of an administrator of the estate of Philip H. Paris, deceased, in which limited. letters were issued on March 14, 1963 to Benjamin Paris as administrator, empowering him to commence an action on behalf of the estate, the said administrator appeals from an order of the Surrogate’s Court, Kings County, entered September 17, 1963, which granted the petition of respondent, Joseph A. Bochenek: (a) to enlarge such limited letters by also empowering the administrator to defend an action against the decedent, then pending in the Supreme Court, Kings County; and (b) to resettle accordingly, *nunc pro tuno*as of. March 14, 1963, the prior decree of the Surrogate’s Court granting limited letters. Such petitioner Bochenek is an attorney associated with counsel for the plaintiffs in said action. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. No opinion. [For companion appeal, see *Sugar*v. *Miller,*21 A D 2d 796.] Ughetta, Acting P. J., Kleinfeld, Brennan, Hill and Rabin, JJ., concur.
IV 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 158 

Of inquiry requesting the President and directing the Secretary of Defense 

and Secretary of State to transmit, respectively, certain documents to 

the House of Representatives relating to congressionally appropriated 

funds to the nation of Ukraine from January 20, 2021 to February 

24, 2023. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 24, 2023 

Ms. GREENE of Georgia (for herself, Mr. ROSENDALE, Mr. MASSIE, Mr. HIGGINS of Louisiana, Mr. GAETZ, Mr. ROY, Mr. BURCHETT, Mr. GOSAR, 

and Mrs. MILLER of Illinois) submitted the following resolution; which 

was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs 

RESOLUTION 

Of inquiry requesting the President and directing the Secretary of Defense and Secretary of State to transmit, 

respectively, certain documents to the House of Representatives relating to congressionally appropriated 

funds to the nation of Ukraine from January 20, 2021 

to February 24, 2023. 

1 Resolved, That the President is requested, and the 

2 Secretary of Defense and Secretary of State are directed, 

3 to transmit, respectively, to the House of Representatives, 

4 not later than 14 days after the date of the adoption of 

5 this resolution, copies of all documents, charts, or tables, 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HRES 158 IH 

1 including notes from meetings, audio recordings, records 

2 (including telephone and email records), correspondence, 

3 and other communications, and any financial statements 

4 detailing purchases, recipients, and government expendi5 tures to the extent that any such one or more items are 

6 within the possession of the President or Secretaries afore7 mentioned, respectively, and refer or relate to congression8 ally appropriated funds directed to the nation of 

9 Ukraine—whether in regard to military, civilian, or finan10 cial aid—between January 20, 2021 to February 24, 

11 2023. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
No. 236.

#### James P. Parsons *v.*William H. Moor et al.

Error to the Supreme Court of the State of Ohio.

Argued March 12, 1920.

Decided March 15, 1920.

*Mr. Charles F. Carusi*and *Mr. C. A. Thacker,*for plaintiff-in error, submitted.

*Mr. Herbert P. Whitney*for defendants in error.

*Per Curiam.*

Dismissed for want of jurisdiction upon the authority of § 237 of the Judicial Code, as amended by the Act of September 6, 1916, c. 448, § 2, 39 Stat. 726.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Gary Michael De Rigo, Appellant.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Broome County, rendered February 9, 1978, upon a verdict convicting defendant of the crime of bail jumping in the first degree. Convicted after trial of the crime of bail jumping in the first degree (Penal Law, § 215.57), defendant maintains on this appeal that the trial court erred in refusing to allow testimony which related to his state of mind when he failed to appear in court. The record discloses that defendant was awaiting sentence upon his plea of guilty to the crime of burglary in the third degree and had been advised that the date set therefor was August 4, 1975. He failed to appear on that date, and was ultimately apprehended in December of 1977. It is defendant’s contention that he failed to appear because he did not believe that he would be treated fairly by the court. However, the crime of which he stands convicted does not require that any specific culpable mental state be shown, so that proof of defendant’s state of mind was irrelevant and properly rejected by the trial court *(People v Manitaras,*55 AD2d 629; *People v Harris,*54 AD2d 739). We have examined defendant’s other arguments and find them to be without merit. Judgment affirmed. Kane, J. P., Main, Larkin, Mikoll and Herlihy, JJ., concur.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE Northern District of Illinois − CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 6,1

Eastern Division

The State of Illinois, et al.

Plaintiff,

v. Case No.: 1:11−cv−08980

Honorable Robert M. Dow Jr.

Omnicare, Inc.

Defendant.

NOTIFICATION OF DOCKET ENTRY

This docket entry was made by the Clerk on Monday, August 4, 2014:

 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Robert M. Dow, Jr: Civil case terminated.

Mailed notice(tbk, )

ATTENTION: This notice is being sent pursuant to Rule 77(d) of the Federal Rules of

Civil Procedure or Rule 49(c) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. It was

generated by CM/ECF, the automated docketing system used to maintain the civil and

criminal dockets of this District. If a minute order or other document is enclosed, please

refer to it for additional information.

For scheduled events, motion practices, recent opinions and other information, visit our

web site at www.ilnd.uscourts.gov.

Case: 1:11-cv-08980 Document #: 53 Filed: 08/04/14 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:674
### §7413. Issuance of orders

#### (a) Issuance authorized

#### (1) In general

To effectuate the purpose of this subchapter, the Secretary may issue, and amend from time to time, orders applicable to—

(A) the producers of an agricultural commodity;

(B) the first handlers of the agricultural commodity and other persons in the marketing chain as appropriate; and

(C) the importers of the agricultural commodity, if imports of the agricultural commodity are subject to assessment under section 7415(f) of this title.

#### (2) National scope

Each order issued under this section shall be national in scope.

#### (b) Procedure for issuance

#### (1) Development or receipt of proposed order

A proposed order with respect to an agricultural commodity may be—

(A) prepared by the Secretary at any time; or

(B) submitted to the Secretary by—

(i) an association of producers of the agricultural commodity; or

(ii) any other person that may be affected by the issuance of an order with respect to the agricultural commodity.

#### (2) Consideration of proposed order

If the Secretary determines that a proposed order is consistent with and will effectuate the purpose of this subchapter, the Secretary shall publish the proposed order in the Federal Register and give due notice and opportunity for public comment on the proposed order.

#### (3) Existence of other orders

In deciding whether a proposal for an order is consistent with and will effectuate the purpose of this subchapter, the Secretary may consider the existence of other Federal promotion, research, and information programs or orders issued or developed pursuant to any other law.

#### (4) Preparation of final order

After notice and opportunity for public comment under paragraph (2) regarding a proposed order, the Secretary shall take into consideration the comments received in preparing a final order. The Secretary shall ensure that the final order is in conformity with the terms, conditions, and requirements of this subchapter.

#### (c) Issuance and effective date

If the Secretary determines that the final order developed with respect to an agricultural commodity is consistent with and will effectuate the purpose of this subchapter, the Secretary shall issue the final order. Except in the case of an order for which an initial referendum is conducted under section 7417(a) of this title, the final order shall be issued and become effective not later than 270 days after the date of publication of the proposed order that was the basis for the final order.

#### (d) Amendments

From time to time the Secretary may amend any order, consistent with the requirements of section 7422 of this title.

(Pub. L. 104–127, title V, §514, Apr. 4, 1996, 110 Stat. 1035.)
122 STAT. 2488 PUBLIC LAW 110–270—JULY 15, 2008 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.R. 5479: 

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 154 (2008): 

Apr. 23, considered and passed House. 

June 27, considered and passed Senate. 

Æ 

Public Law 110–270 

110th Congress 

An Act 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 117 North 

Kidd Street in Ionia, Michigan, as the ‘‘Alonzo Woodruff Post Office Building’’. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. ALONZO WOODRUFF POST OFFICE BUILDING. 

(a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States Postal 

Service located at 117 North Kidd Street in Ionia, Michigan, shall 

be known and designated as the ‘‘Alonzo Woodruff Post Office 

Building’’. 

(b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, regulation, 

document, paper, or other record of the United States to the facility 

referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference 

to the ‘‘Alonzo Woodruff Post Office Building’’. 

Approved July 15, 2008. 

July 15, 2008 

[H.R. 5479] 


kgrant on POHRRP4G1 with PUBLAW