alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Consolidated
Capital Properties III 1998 Year-End 10-KSB and is qualified in its entirety by
reference to such 10-KSB filing.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000317331
<NAME> CONSOLIDATED CAPITAL PROPERTIES III
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                           2,883
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0<F1>
<PP&E>                                          14,589
<DEPRECIATION>                                  10,089
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   7,965
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0<F1>
<BONDS>                                          4,200
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                       3,399
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     7,965
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 3,923
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 3,163
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 338
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       760
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     4.60<F2>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<FN>
<F1>Registrant has an unclassified balance sheet.
<F2>Multiplier is 1.
</FN>
        

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

Three judgments of the County Court, Nassau County, two rendered January 30, 1978, and the third rendered February 15, 1978, upon resentence, affirmed. No opinion. This case is remitted to the County Court, Nassau County, for further proceedings pursuant to CPL 460.50 (subd 5). Shapiro, J. P., Cohalan, Margett and O’Connor, JJ., concur.
§ 776.31 Former judge or arbitrator. ( a ) Except as stated in paragraph (c) of this section, a covered USG attorney shall not represent anyone in connection with a matter in which the covered USG attorney participated personally and substantially as a judge or other adjudicative officer, arbitrator, or law clerk to such a person, unless all parties to the proceeding give informed consent, confirmed in writing.
( b ) A covered USG attorney shall not negotiate for employment with any person who is involved as a party or as attorney for a party in a matter in which the covered USG attorney is participating personally and substantially as a judge or other adjudicative officer. A covered USG attorney serving as law clerk to a judge, other adjudicative officer, or arbitrator may negotiate for employment with a party or attorney involved in a matter in which the clerk is participating personally and substantially, but only after the covered USG attorney has notified the judge, other adjudicative officer, or arbitrator, and been disqualified from further involvement in the matter.
( c ) An arbitrator selected as a partisan of a party in a multi-member arbitration panel is not prohibited from subsequently representing that party.
( d ) [Reserved]
§ 776.25 Confidentiality of information. ( a ) A covered attorney shall not reveal information relating to representation of a client unless the client gives informed consent, the disclosure is impliedly authorized in order to carry out the representation, or the disclosure is permitted by paragraph (b) of this section.
( b ) A covered attorney shall reveal information relating to the representation of a client to the extent the covered attorney reasonably believes necessary: ( 1 ) To prevent reasonably certain death or substantial bodily harm; or
( 2 ) To prevent the client from committing a criminal act that the covered attorney reasonably believes is likely to result in the significant impairment of national security or the readiness or capability of a military unit, vessel, aircraft, or weapon system.
( c ) A covered attorney may reveal such information to the extent the covered attorney reasonably believes necessary: ( 1 ) To secure legal advice about the covered attorney's compliance with subpart B of this part;
( 2 ) To establish a claim or defense on behalf of the covered attorney in a controversy between the covered attorney and the client, to establish a defense to a criminal charge or civil claim against the covered attorney based upon conduct in which the client was involved, or to respond to allegations in any proceeding concerning the attorney's representation of the client; and/or
( 3 ) To comply with other law or a court order.
( d ) Examples of conduct likely to result in the significant impairment of national security or the readiness or capability of a military unit, vessel, aircraft, or weapon system include: Divulging the classified location of a special operations unit such that the lives of members of the unit are placed in immediate danger; sabotaging a vessel or aircraft to the extent that the vessel or aircraft could not conduct an assigned mission, or that the vessel or aircraft and crew could be lost; and compromising the security of a weapons site such that the weapons are likely to be stolen or detonated. Paragraph (b) of this section is not intended to and does not mandate the disclosure of conduct that may have a slight impact on the readiness or capability of a unit, vessel, aircraft, or weapon system. Examples of such conduct are: Absence without authority from a peacetime training exercise; intentional damage to an individually assigned weapon; and intentional minor damage to military property.
#### In the Matter of the Claim of Sophie Ettlinger, Respondent, against State Insurance Fund, Appellant, and Office Temporaries, Inc. et al., Respondents. Workmen’s Compensation Board, Respondent.

Motion-*868to dismiss appeal granted, without costs, unless appellant perfects appeal, files note of issue, and files and serves record and brief on or before August 15, I960, and .is ready for argument at the' September Term of this court in which event the motion is denied. Present — Bergan, P. J., Coon, Gibson, Herlihy and Reynolds, JJ. • -
### §2206a. Conveyance of excess Federal personal property

Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Secretary of Agriculture may—

(1) convey title to excess Federal personal property owned by the Department of Agriculture, with or without monetary compensation and for such purposes as are determined by the Secretary, to—

(A) any of the 1994 Institutions (as defined in section 532 of the Equity in Educational Land-Grant Status Act of 1994 (Public Law 103–382; 7 U.S.C. 301 note));

(B) any Hispanic-serving institution (as defined in section 1101a(a)(5) of title 20); and

(C) any college or university eligible to receive funds under the Act of August 30, 1890 (7 U.S.C. 321 et seq.), including Tuskegee University; and

(2) acquire from, exchange with, or dispose of personal property to other Federal departments and agencies without monetary compensation in furtherance of the purposes of this section.

(Pub. L. 104–127, title IX, §923, Apr. 4, 1996, 110 Stat. 1195; Pub. L. 110–234, title XIV, §14223, May 22, 2008, 122 Stat. 1484; Pub. L. 110–246, §4(a), title XIV, §14223, June 18, 2008, 122 Stat. 1664, 2246.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

Act of August 30, 1890 (7 U.S.C. 321 et seq.), referred to in par. (1)(C), is act Aug. 30, 1890, ch. 841, 26 Stat. 417, popularly known as the Agricultural College Act of 1890 and also as the Second Morrill Act, which is classified generally to subchapter II (§321 et seq.) of chapter 13 of this title. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 321 of this title and Tables.

#### 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—Par. (1)(B). Pub. L. 110–246, §14223, substituted "section 1101a(a)(5) of title 20" for "section 1059c(b) of title 20".

#### **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.
11.501 Policy. ( a ) The contracting officer must consider the potential impact on pricing, competition, and contract administration before using a liquidated damages clause. Use liquidated damages clauses only when— ( 1 ) The time of delivery or timely performance is so important that the Government may reasonably expect to suffer damage if the delivery or performance is delinquent; and
( 2 ) The extent or amount of such damage would be difficult or impossible to estimate accurately or prove.
( b ) Liquidated damages are not punitive and are not negative performance incentives (see 16.402-2). Liquidated damages are used to compensate the Government for probable damages. Therefore, the liquidated damages rate must be a reasonable forecast of just compensation for the harm that is caused by late delivery or untimely performance of the particular contract. Use a maximum amount or a maximum period for assessing liquidated damages if these limits reflect the maximum probable damage to the Government. Also, the contracting officer may use more than one liquidated damages rate when the contracting officer expects the probable damage to the Government to change over the contract period of performance.
( c ) The contracting officer must take all reasonable steps to mitigate liquidated damages. If the contract contains a liquidated damages clause and the contracting officer is considering terminating the contract for default, the contracting officer should seek expeditiously to obtain performance by the contractor or terminate the contract and repurchase (see subpart 49.4). Prompt contracting officer action will prevent excessive loss to defaulting contractors and protect the interests of the Government.
( d ) The head of the agency may reduce or waive the amount of liquidated damages assessed under a contract, if the Commissioner, Financial Management Service, or designee approves (see Treasury Order 145-10).
EXHIBIT 31.1

     CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
           PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

     I, Peter Porath, certify that:

     1.   I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Federal
Mortgage Corporation of Puerto Rico, Inc.

     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 officers and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and have:

          a)  designed such disclosure controls and procedures 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 as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date
of this quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

          c)  presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our
evaluation as of the Evaluation Date.

     5.   The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed,
based on our most recent evaluation, 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 in the design or operation of
internal controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to
record, process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for
the registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and

          b)  any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or
other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal
controls; and

    6.   The registrant's other certifying officers and I have indicated in
this quarterly report whether there were significant changes in internal
controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls
subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective
actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.



Date:  February 9, 2005

 /s/ Peter Porath
Peter Porath
President, Chief Executive Officer
#### Philip D. Cavalire, Appellant, v. Lily J. Palermo, Also Known as Lily J. Cavalire, Respondent.

In an action to declare that the parties are not husband and wife and that a decree obtained in Mexico by the plaintiff, divorcing him from the defendant, is valid, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by his brief: (1) from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated January 27, 1964, which denied his motion to consolidate the action with a support proceeding pending in the Family Court of said county, and to remove the proceeding to the Supreme Court; and (2) from so much of an order of said Supreme Court, dated February 5, 1964, as granted the defendant’s motion for counsel fees. Orders, insofar as appealed from, affirmed, with one bill of $10 costs and disbursements. The action was not instituted until after the trial in the Family Court had begun, and the motion to consolidate was made returnable more than a week prior to the service of the answer containing a counterclaim to declare invalid the Mexican decree. In our opinion, under the circumstances here, Special Term did not commit error in denying the motion for consolidation (CPLR 602; Family Court Act, §§ 411, 115, 114; *People*v. *Keller,*37 Misc 2d 122; *Matter of Carter*v. *Carter,*19 A D 2d 513); nor in granting the motion for counsel fees (Domestic Relations Law, § 237). Beldock, P. J., Kleinfeld, Christ, Brennan and Hopkins, JJ., concur.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

RICKY TEJADA,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 45 MM 2023

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 2 nd day of August , 2023, the Petition for Leave to File Petition for

Allowance of Appeal Nunc Pro Tunc is DENIED.
### §3403. Issuance of orders

#### (a) Notice and hearing

Whenever the Secretary has reason to believe that the issuance of an order will tend to effectuate the declared policy of this chapter, the Secretary shall give due notice and opportunity for hearing upon a proposed order. Such hearing may be requested and proposal for an order submitted by an organization certified pursuant to section 3413 of this title, or by any interested person affected by the provisions of this chapter, including the Secretary.

#### (b) Effectuation of Congressional policy

After notice and opportunity for hearing as provided in subsection (a) of this section, the Secretary shall issue an order if the Secretary finds, and sets forth in such order, upon the evidence introduced at such hearing that the issuance of such order and all the terms and conditions thereof will tend to effectuate the declared policy of this chapter.

(Pub. L. 95–113, title XVII, §1704, Sept. 29, 1977, 91 Stat. 1033.)

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

#### Effective Date

Section effective Oct. 1, 1977, see section 1901 of Pub. L. 95–113, set out as an Effective Date of 1977 Amendment note under section 1307 of this title.
### §7981. Milk price support program

#### (a) Support activities

During the period beginning on June 1, 2002, and ending on December 31, 2007, the Secretary of Agriculture shall support the price of milk produced in the 48 contiguous States through the purchase of cheese, butter, and nonfat dry milk produced from the milk.

#### (b) Rate

During the period specified in subsection (a), the price of milk shall be supported at a rate equal to $9.90 per hundredweight for milk containing 3.67 percent butterfat.

#### (c) Purchase prices

#### (1) Uniform prices

The support purchase prices under this section for each of the products of milk (butter, cheese, and nonfat dry milk) announced by the Secretary shall be the same for all of that product sold by persons offering to sell the product to the Secretary.

#### (2) Sufficient prices

The purchase prices shall be sufficient to enable plants of average efficiency to pay producers, on average, a price that is not less than the rate of price support for milk in effect under subsection (b).

#### (d) Special rule for butter and nonfat dry milk purchase prices

#### (1) Allocation of purchase prices

The Secretary may allocate the rate of price support between the purchase prices for nonfat dry milk and butter in a manner that will result in the lowest level of expenditures by the Commodity Credit Corporation or achieve such other objectives as the Secretary considers appropriate. Not later than 10 days after making or changing an allocation, the Secretary shall notify the Committee on Agriculture of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry of the Senate of the allocation. Section 553 of title 5 shall not apply with respect to the implementation of this section.

#### (2) Timing of purchase price adjustments

The Secretary may make any such adjustments in the purchase prices for nonfat dry milk and butter the Secretary considers to be necessary not more than twice in each calendar year.

#### (e) Commodity Credit Corporation

The Secretary shall carry out the program authorized by this section through the Commodity Credit Corporation.

(Pub. L. 107–171, title I, §1501, May 13, 2002, 116 Stat. 205.)
### §7813. Authorization of appropriations

#### (a) In general

There are authorized to be appropriated for each fiscal year such sums as are necessary to carry out this chapter.

#### (b) Administrative expenses

Funds appropriated under subsection (a) may not be used for the payment of the expenses or expenditures of the Board in administering a provision of an order.

(Pub. L. 106–387, §1(a) [title XII, §1214], Oct. 28, 2000, 114 Stat. 1549, 1549A–97.)
**MEMORANDUM**

DATE: July

7, 2014 TO: Carbon Power Plan for Existing Power Plants; Docket Id: OAR

–2013
- 0602 FROM: EPA Region 1 SUBJECT: June 26, 2014 , Meeting with Connecticut State Staff Regarding Proposed Carbon

Power Plan for Existing Power Plants
**SUMMARY** A meeting was held between EPA and the attendees listed below on June 26, 2014 to discuss the proposed Carbon Power Plan for Existing Power Plants

. Discussion covered Connecticut’s state goal calculations , including data sources and assumptions

. **ATTENDEES (all by phone)**  Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection: Anne Gobin Wendy Jacobs Jaimeson Sinclair EPA: Brian Fisher Jenny Noonan Michael Cohen Denise Mulholland Cy nthia Greene Shutsu Wong Dave Conro y Bob McConnell
#### The People of the State of New York ex rel. Dorothy W. Flagg, Respondent, v. Erwin Lengyel, as Director of Louden Hall, Appellant.

In a habeas corpus proceeding to obtain the relator’s release from Louden Hall (a hospital), the director of that institution appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated January 25, 1963, and made after a non jury trial, which sustained the writ and discharged the relator from the appellant’s custody “ upon the ground that the [relator] * * * is mentally competent and capable of taking care of herself, her property and her affairs ”. Order affirmed, without costs. We do not regard the court’s stated reasons for sustaining the writ as in any way constituting an adjudication of competency within the meaning of article 81 of the Civil Practice Act (the provisions of which, are now to be found in art. 5-A [§ 100 *et seq.~\*of the Mental Hygiene Law). The order in no sense purports to discharge the committee, or to direct the restoration of the relator’s property to her, or otherwise to interfere with the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, New York County, in the incompetency proceeding there pending. The court in that proceeding has exclusive jurisdiction of the estate, to be exercised in accordance with well-established principles *{Matter of Antdrews,*192 N. Y. 514; *Matter of Ireland,*246 App. Div. 113; *Matter of Barnes,*185 Mise. 215). Ughetta, Acting P. J., Christ, Brennan, Hill and Rabin, JJ., concur.