alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Robert Ronald Romano, Appellant.

Appeal by defendant, as limited by his motion, from three sentences of the County Court, Suffolk County, each imposed December 8, 1975, upon his conviction of attempted burglary in the third degree, criminal possession of stolen property in the third degree and attempted grand larceny in the third degree, on his plea of guilty, the sentences being prison terms of one year, with the sentences to run concurrently with each other and with a sentence imposed for violation of probation. Sentences modified, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, by reducing the period of incarceration to the time already served. As so modified, sentences affirmed. The sentences were excessive to the extent indicated. Shapiro, J. P., Cohalan, Margett and Martuscello, JJ., concur.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Madan Gautam, Appellant.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County, rendered on May 4, 1978, unanimously affirmed. The case is remitted to the Supreme Court, New York County, for further proceedings pursuant to CPL 460.50 (subd 5). No opinion. Concur—Birns, J. P., Fein, Sandler and Silver-man, JJ.
# C_2020037EN.01000301.xml

| 4.2.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 37/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.2.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 37/3

---

Interest rate applied by the European Central Bank to its main refinancing operations (1):

0,00 % on 1 February 2020

Euro exchange rates (2)

3 February 2020

(2020/C 37/03)

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,1066 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 120,10 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4729 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,84775 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 10,6808 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,0672 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | 137,30 |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 10,2590 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 25,177 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 337,70 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,2968 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,7788 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 6,6221 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,6521 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,4647 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 8,5935 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,7106 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,5138 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 319,12 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 16,4806 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 7,7681 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,4465 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 15 207,45 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,5526 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 56,293 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 70,5988 |
| THB | Thai baht | 34,349 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 4,7170 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 20,8183 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 79,0035 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,1066

JPY

Japanese yen

120,10

DKK

Danish krone

7,4729

GBP

Pound sterling

0,84775

SEK

Swedish krona

10,6808

CHF

Swiss franc

1,0672

ISK

Iceland króna

137,30

NOK

Norwegian krone

10,2590

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

25,177

HUF

Hungarian forint

337,70

PLN

Polish zloty

4,2968

RON

Romanian leu

4,7788

TRY

Turkish lira

6,6221

AUD

Australian dollar

1,6521

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,4647

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

8,5935

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,7106

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,5138

KRW

South Korean won

1 319,12

ZAR

South African rand

16,4806

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

7,7681

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,4465

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

15 207,45

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,5526

PHP

Philippine peso

56,293

RUB

Russian rouble

70,5988

THB

Thai baht

34,349

BRL

Brazilian real

4,7170

MXN

Mexican peso

20,8183

INR

Indian rupee

79,0035

---

(1)  Rate applied to the most recent operation carried out before the indicated day. In the case of a variable rate tender, the interest rate is the marginal rate.

(2)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

---
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Warren E. Christensen, Appellant.

Defendant appeals from a judgment of the former Court of Special Sessions of the City of New York, Borough of Richmond, rendered June 13, 1962 after trial, convicting him of a misdemeanor for an attempt to transfer a license of an official inspection station in violation of *536subdivision (f) of section 306 of the Vehicle and Traffic Law, and suspending sentence. Judgment reversed on the law, and information dismissed. The facts are affirmed. The statute claimed to have been violated is in the nature of *malum prohibitum.*As a penal statute, its provisions must be strictly construed *(People*v. *Bhakun,*251 2ST. T. 107, 113). Hence, the statute must be deemed to apply only to the transferor of the license, and not to the transferee *(Baker*v. *Fifth Ave. Bank of New York,*225 App. Div. 238, 240; *O’Sagan*V. *Kracke,*165 Mise. 4, 13, affd. 253 App. Div. 632, motion for leave to appeal denied 278 "NT. T. 741). Ughetta, Acting P. J., Kleinfeld, Brennan, Rabin and Hopkins, JJ., concur.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

                    Notice is hereby given of a change in the meetings of the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Special Emphasis Panels, April 20, 2021, 8:00 a.m. to April 21, 2021, 6:00 p.m., NIH, and April 22, 2021, 8:00 a.m. to April 22, 2021, 6:00 p.m., NIH, 6710B Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 which was published in the                     **Federal Register**                     on January 15, 2021, 86 FR 4105.                

The dates of the meetings changed to March 9, 2021, 8:00 a.m. to March 10, 2021, 6:00 p.m. and March 11, 2021, 8:00 a.m. to March 11, 2021, 6:00 p.m., respectively.

The meetings are closed to the public.

Dated: January 29, 2021.

Ronald J. Livingston, Jr.,

Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 2021-02293 Filed 2-3-21; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 12.1

                       RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES

                           WYNDHAM INTERNATIONAL, INC.
                                 (in thousands)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                           Year           Year          Year            Year              Year
                                           Ended         Ended          Ended           Ended             Ended
                                         12/31/01      12/31/00       12/31/99        12/31/98          12/31/97
                                         --------      --------       --------        --------          --------
<S>                                       <C>           <C>           <C>               <C>                 <C>
 Earnings:
   Income (loss) before income taxes,
     mi, ea,ac                            (213,116)      (523,014)      (491,335)        (112,508)          $  4,142
   Add back: fixed charges                 312,377        375,025        360,137          272,215             53,093
                                        -----------   ------------  -------------  ---------------  -----------------
                                          $ 99,261      $(147,989)    $ (131,198)       $ 159,707           $ 57,235
                                        ===========   ============  =============  ===============  =================
 Fixed Charges:
   Interest expense, including
     amort of DLC                          308,525        371,855        353,227          260,103           $ 50,531
    Capitalized interest                     3,852          3,170          6,910           12,112              2,562
                                        -----------   ------------  -------------  ---------------  -----------------
                                         $ 312,377      $ 375,025      $ 360,137        $ 272,215           $ 53,093
                                        ===========   ============  =============  ===============  =================
 Ratio:                                       0.32          (0.39)         (0.36)            0.59               1.08
                                        ===========   ============  =============  ===============  =================
Deficiency of earnings to fixed ratio    $ 213,116      $ 523,014      $ 491,335        $ 112,508
                                              1.00           1.00           1.00             1.00
</TABLE>
#### Duke S. ELLIOTT, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. LOUISIANA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 81-3359.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

June 28, 1982.

Gamer & Munoz, New Orleans, La., for plaintiff-appellant.

Monroe & Lemann, Kenneth P. Carter, New Orleans, La., for defendant-appellee.

*431ON PETITION FOR REHEARING

(Opinion March 31, 1982, 5 Cir., 1982, 671 F.2d 865)

Before RUBIN, SAM D. JOHNSON, and GARWOOD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

In its petition for rehearing, Louisiana Power & Light Company (LP&L) refers this Court to the opinions in the case of *Klohn v. Louisiana Power & Light,*406 So.2d 577 (La.1981), 394 So.2d 636 (La.App. 1st Cir. 1980). LP&L argues that *Klohn*establishes a different test for a statutory employer than the one expressed in *Blanchard v. Engine & Gas Compressor Services, Inc.,*613 F.2d 65 (5th Cir. 1980). The *Klohn*approach, according to LP&L, “eliminates the unduly restrictive and inherently fallacious premise of the ‘usual and customary practice’ test that to be part of one’s trade, business or occupation, the activity must regularly recur.”

However, nothing in *Blanchard*or in our prior opinion, 671 F.2d 865 (5th Cir. 1982) (per curiam), requires that the activity regularly recur to be part of the usual or customary practice of the principal or others in the same operational business. While *ordinary*maintenance and repairs are part of an employer’s regular trade, business, or occupation, the usual or customary practice of the principal is not restricted to such maintenance and repairs but embraces every activity that is an integral and necessary part of the principal’s regular business.

The *Klohn*opinions do not address the test for determining whether an activity is part of an employer’s regular trade, business, or occupation. As a result, *Klohn*does not discredit or eliminate the *Blanchard*test. *Klohn*implicitly holds that, because plaintiff’s work in that particular case involved ordinary maintenance and repairs, his activity was an integral and necessary part of the regular trade, business, or occupation of defendant. In the case *sub judice,*however, LP&L has failed to negate the possibility of a fact issue regarding the question of whether Brown & Root’s work, which entailed conversion of the boiler system, went beyond ordinary maintenance or repair and, therefore, was outside LP&L’s usual or customary practice.

Consequently, the district court erred in directing a verdict on the issue of whether LP&L was a statutory employer of plaintiff. *See Boeing Company v. Shipman,*411 F.2d 365, 374 (5th Cir. 1969) (en banc). The petition for rehearing is DENIED.
#### Charles Ortloff and another *vs.*Emil Klitzke.

April 11, 1890.

Statute of Frauds — Sale—Delivery.—The delivery requisite to take a verbal agreement for the sale of goods out of the statute of frauds may be subsequent to such agreement.

Appeal by defendant from an order of the district court for McLeod county, *Edson,*J., presiding, refusing a new trial after verdict for plaintiffs.

*R. H. McClelland,*for appellant.

*W. F. Schoregge,*for respondents.

Gilfillan, C. J.

Replevin for a threshing-machine. The machine originally belonged to the plaintiffs, Ortloff and Schuft, as tenants in common. Defendant claims to have purchased the interest of Schuft, and to have taken possession, and to have been in possession when the action was commenced, under that purchase, and as a tenant in common with Ortloff. The value of the machine was from $400 to $600. On the trial, there was some evidence on the part of the defendant of an oral agreement between him and Schuft for the sale by the latter to him of his interest in the machine, — no part of the purchase price being paid at the time, and there being then no delivery of the machine. There was also evidence that subsequently Schuft told defendant to take the machine, and he accordingly took it. This would tend to show a subsequent delivery and acceptance pursuant *155to the oral contract of sale. The court instructed the jury that if at the time of the alleged sale there was no immediate delivery, and no part of the purchase price paid, and no written contract of sale, they should find for the plaintiffs; and also that there must be some memorandum made, unless there is an immediate delivery at the time the contract was made. This was error, as, if the jury had found — and under the evidence they might have found — that there was a subsequent delivery and acceptance, it would have satisfied the statute. The delivery requisite to take a verbal agreement for the sale of goods out of the statute of frauds, may be subsequent to the agreement. *McCarthy*v. *Nash,*14 Minn. 95, (127;) *Gaslin v. Pinney,*24 Minn. 322. We do not see any other substantial error in the case.

Order reversed.
#### STEINSON v. BOARD OF EDUCATION.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

January 9, 1903.)

Action by George Steinson against the Board of Education.

No opinion. Motion denied,
IA 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. J. RES. 101 

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to prohibit 

Members of Congress from receiving compensation for any period during 

which a Government shutdown is in effect. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

NOVEMBER 13, 2023 

Mr. VAN ORDEN submitted the following joint resolution; which was referred 

to the Committee on the Judiciary 

JOINT RESOLUTION 

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United 

States to prohibit Members of Congress from receiving 

compensation for any period during which a Government 

shutdown is in effect. 

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives 

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled

3 (two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the fol4 lowing article is proposed as an amendment to the Con5 stitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all 

6 intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when 

7 ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HJ 101 IH 

1 States within seven years after the date of its submission 

2 for ratification: 

3 ‘‘ARTICLE— 

4 ‘‘SECTION 1. A Representative or Senator may not 

5 receive compensation with respect to any period during 

6 which a Government shutdown is in effect. For purposes 

7 of this article, a Government shutdown shall be considered 

8 to be in effect if there is a lapse in appropriations for any 

9 Federal agency or department as a result of a failure to 

10 enact a regular appropriations bill or continuing resolu11 tion. 

12 ‘‘SECTION 2. Congress shall have the power to en13 force this article through appropriate legislation.’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
# C_2019427EN.01000101.xml

| 19.12.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 427/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.12.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 427/1

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

18 December 2019

(2019/C 427/01)

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,1115 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 121,81 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4720 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,85055 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 10,4483 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,0913 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | 137,20 |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 10,0353 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 25,490 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 330,77 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,2706 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,7760 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 6,5732 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,6227 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,4624 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 8,6566 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,6920 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,5075 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 296,56 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 15,9700 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 7,7783 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,4486 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 15 558,78 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,5999 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 56,271 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 69,5288 |
| THB | Thai baht | 33,606 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 4,5097 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 21,0900 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 78,8950 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,1115

JPY

Japanese yen

121,81

DKK

Danish krone

7,4720

GBP

Pound sterling

0,85055

SEK

Swedish krona

10,4483

CHF

Swiss franc

1,0913

ISK

Iceland króna

137,20

NOK

Norwegian krone

10,0353

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

25,490

HUF

Hungarian forint

330,77

PLN

Polish zloty

4,2706

RON

Romanian leu

4,7760

TRY

Turkish lira

6,5732

AUD

Australian dollar

1,6227

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,4624

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

8,6566

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,6920

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,5075

KRW

South Korean won

1 296,56

ZAR

South African rand

15,9700

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

7,7783

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,4486

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

15 558,78

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,5999

PHP

Philippine peso

56,271

RUB

Russian rouble

69,5288

THB

Thai baht

33,606

BRL

Brazilian real

4,5097

MXN

Mexican peso

21,0900

INR

Indian rupee

78,8950

---

(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

---
CALENDAR YEAR 2010 AIR 105 GRANT EXPENDITURES

2ND 1/2 SFY2010 1ST 1/2 SFY2011 TOTALS

JAN ‐ JUNE 2010 JUL ‐ DEC 2010 JAN ‐ DEC 2010

TOTAL EXPENDITURES $2,476,894 $2,592,524 $5,069,418LESS FEDERAL SHARE $0* $1,570,435 $1,570,435

LESS NON‐RECURRENT $99,046 $10,137 $109,183

TOTAL ‐ NON FED, NON‐RECURRENT $2,377,848 $1,011,952 $3,389,800

GENERAL FUND (MOE) $2,301,568 $941,045 $3,242,613STATIONARY SRC FEES (MOE) $76,280 $70,907 $147,187

TOTAL MOE $2,377,848 $1,011,952 $3,389,800

*IDEQ DID NOT RECEIVE THE EPA CY2010 GRANT AWARD IN TIME FOR THE AGENCY TO DRAW DOWN

FUNDS THROUGH ASAP BY JUNE 30, 2010. THIS SITUATION IS ALSO REFLECTED IN THE DISPROPORTIONATE

MOE EXPENDITURES IN THE TWO HALVES OF CY2010.
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 22 (Thursday, February 4, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 8186]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-02338]


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

COUNCIL OF THE INSPECTORS GENERAL ON INTEGRITY AND EFFICIENCY


Privacy Act of 1974; System of Records; Correction; Extension of 
Comment Period

AGENCY: Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency 
(CIGIE).

ACTION: Notice; correction; extension of comment period.

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

SUMMARY: CIGIE published a notice in the Federal Register on January 
27, 2021, proposing to establish a system of records that is subject to 
the Privacy Act of 1974 entitled, ``PRAC Data Warehouse System (PDWS)--
CIGIE-5'' (CIGIE-5). In that document, CIGIE erroneously stated that 
comments could be made through the Federal Rulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. This notice corrects that error and extends the 
comment period associated with the notice.

DATES: The system of records, CIGIE-5, appearing in the Federal 
Register of January 27, 2021, in FR Doc. 2021-01429, will become 
effective without further notice on March 8, 2021 unless comments are 
received that would result in a contrary determination.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Virginia Grebasch, Senior Counsel, 
Pandemic Response Accountability Committee, Council of the Inspectors 
General on Integrity and Efficiency, (202) 292-2600 or 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#7f1c1012121a110b0c3f1c1618161a51181009"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="41222e2c2c242f35320122282628246f262e37">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Correction

    In the Federal Register of January 27, 2021, in FR Doc. 2021-01429, 
on page 7280, in the third column, correct the ADDRESSES caption to 
read:

ADDRESSES: Submit comments identified by ``CIGIE-5'' by any of the 
following methods:
    1. Mail: Council of Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency, 
1717 H Street NW, Suite 825, Washington, DC 20006. Attn: Virginia 
Grebasch/CIGIE-5, Notice of New System of Records.
    2. Email: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#95f6faf8f8f0fbe1e6d5f6fcf2fcf0bbf2fae3"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="0d6e6260606863797e4d6e646a6468236a627b">[email protected]</span></a>.

    Dated: February 1, 2021.
Allison C. Lerner,
Chairperson of the Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and 
Efficiency.
[FR Doc. 2021-02338 Filed 2-3-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
#### 3015.603 [Reserved]