alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

July 31, 2006 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice 130724 & (21) Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, Justices

v SC: 130724 COA: 264726 Kalamazoo CC: 99-000707-FH ANDREW JOHN MCCORMACK, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application fo r leave to appeal th e February 3, 2006 order of the Court of Appeals and the motion to add issue ar e considered. The motion to add issue is GRANTED. The application for leave to app eal is DENIED because the defendant has failed to meet the burden of establishing en titlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D).

s0724 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

July 31, 2006

Clerk
#### 436.601 Policy.
#### ALLEN, Respondent, v. NEW YORK SAVNGS BANK, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, ppellate Division, Second Department.

March 1906.)

Action by William B. Allen against e New York Savings Bank.

No opinion, ldgment of the Municipal Court affirmed, ith'costs.
# C_2019248EN.01000201.xml

| 24.7.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 248/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.7.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 248/2

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

23 July 2019

(2019/C 248/02)

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,1173 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 120,82 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4659 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,89830 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 10,5695 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,0985 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | 139,90 |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 9,6810 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 25,549 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 325,50 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,2497 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,7207 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 6,3534 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,5898 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,4691 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 8,7266 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,6605 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,5238 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 317,02 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 15,4992 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 7,6856 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,3863 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 15 598,63 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,6016 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 57,128 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 70,5611 |
| THB | Thai baht | 34,519 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 4,1878 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 21,3081 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 77,0150 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,1173

JPY

Japanese yen

120,82

DKK

Danish krone

7,4659

GBP

Pound sterling

0,89830

SEK

Swedish krona

10,5695

CHF

Swiss franc

1,0985

ISK

Iceland króna

139,90

NOK

Norwegian krone

9,6810

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

25,549

HUF

Hungarian forint

325,50

PLN

Polish zloty

4,2497

RON

Romanian leu

4,7207

TRY

Turkish lira

6,3534

AUD

Australian dollar

1,5898

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,4691

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

8,7266

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,6605

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,5238

KRW

South Korean won

1 317,02

ZAR

South African rand

15,4992

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

7,6856

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,3863

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

15 598,63

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,6016

PHP

Philippine peso

57,128

RUB

Russian rouble

70,5611

THB

Thai baht

34,519

BRL

Brazilian real

4,1878

MXN

Mexican peso

21,3081

INR

Indian rupee

77,0150

---

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

---
Exhibit 32.4

SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION
OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER OFUNION ELECTRIC COMPANY(required by Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)

In connection with the report on Form
10-Q for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2003 of Union Electric Company (the
Company) as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the Form 10-Q), I, Warner L. Baxter, chief financial officer of
the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to
§906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1)    The Form
10-Q fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of           the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and

(2)    The
information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material
          respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Dated: November 14, 2003

| |  | /s/ Warner L. Baxter
Warner L. BaxterExecutive Vice President andChief Financial Officer(Principal Financial Officer)
| |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-7190

GARY ROBERT MOORE,

Petitioner – Appellant,

v.

GREGORY KNOWLIN, Warden, 

Respondent – Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

South Carolina, at Florence. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., District 

Judge. (4:09-cv-01258-JFA)

Submitted: January 13, 2011 Decided: January 19, 2011

Before MOTZ, KING, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Gary Robert Moore, Appellant Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Gary Robert Moore seeks to appeal the district court’s 

order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge to 

deny relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition, and denying 

a certificate of appealability. The order is not appealable 

unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of 

appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2006). A certificate of 

appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of 

the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) 

(2006). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a 

prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that 

reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s 

assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. 

Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller-El v. 

Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003). When the district court 

denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must 

demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is 

debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of the 

denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 529 U.S. at 484-85. 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that 

Moore has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny 

a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We 

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal 
3

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the 

court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
H. Con. Res. 57 Agreed to July 25, 2023

One Hundred Eighteenth Congress 

of the 

United States of America 

AT THE FIRST SESSION 

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday, 

the third day of January, two thousand and twenty-three 

Concurrent Resolution 

Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That it is the sense of Congress that— 

(1) the State of Israel is not a racist or apartheid state; 

(2) Congress rejects all forms of antisemitism and xenophobia; and 

(3) the United States will always be a staunch partner 

and supporter of Israel. 

Attest: 

Clerk of the House of Representatives. 

Attest: 

Secretary of the Senate.
# C_2019292EN.01000201.xml

| 30.8.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 292/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.8.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 292/2

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

29 August 2019

(2019/C 292/02)

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,1072 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 117,68 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4570 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,90531 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 10,7790 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,0880 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | 138,10 |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 10,0365 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 25,853 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 330,26 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,3809 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,7271 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 6,4594 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,6402 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,4699 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 8,6876 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,7457 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,5354 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 340,01 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 16,8950 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 7,9081 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,4035 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 15 718,92 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,6696 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 57,793 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 73,6750 |
| THB | Thai baht | 33,886 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 4,5908 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 22,2046 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 79,3415 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,1072

JPY

Japanese yen

117,68

DKK

Danish krone

7,4570

GBP

Pound sterling

0,90531

SEK

Swedish krona

10,7790

CHF

Swiss franc

1,0880

ISK

Iceland króna

138,10

NOK

Norwegian krone

10,0365

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

25,853

HUF

Hungarian forint

330,26

PLN

Polish zloty

4,3809

RON

Romanian leu

4,7271

TRY

Turkish lira

6,4594

AUD

Australian dollar

1,6402

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,4699

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

8,6876

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,7457

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,5354

KRW

South Korean won

1 340,01

ZAR

South African rand

16,8950

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

7,9081

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,4035

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

15 718,92

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,6696

PHP

Philippine peso

57,793

RUB

Russian rouble

73,6750

THB

Thai baht

33,886

BRL

Brazilian real

4,5908

MXN

Mexican peso

22,2046

INR

Indian rupee

79,3415

---

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

---
Exhibit 99.2


                              COMMUNITY BANKS, INC.


                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


In connection with the Annual Report of Community Banks, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-K for the period ending  December 31, 2002 as filed with the  Securities
and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I, Donald F. Holt,
Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350,
as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

          (1)  The Report 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 Report fairly presents, in all
               material respects, the financial condition and results of
               operations of the Company.



/s/  Donald F. Holt
-----------------------------------
Chief Financial Officer
March 28, 2003
IA 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. J. RES. 20 

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

the number of consecutive terms that a Member of Congress may serve. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 12, 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 limit the number of consecutive terms that 

a Member of Congress may serve. 

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 

8 States within seven years after the date of its submission 

9 for ratification: 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HJ 20 IH 

1 ‘‘ARTICLE— 

2 ‘‘SECTION 1. No person who has been a Senator for 

3 two consecutive terms shall again be eligible to serve as 

4 a Senator until the second Congress that begins after the 

5 end of such second consecutive term. Notwithstanding the 

6 previous sentence, a person who is a Senator during the 

7 period beginning with the One Hundred Eighteenth Con8 gress may serve as a Senator for an unlimited number 

9 of consecutive terms, but shall not again be eligible to 

10 serve as a Senator until the second Congress that begins 

11 after the end of the person’s final consecutive term of that 

12 period. 

13 ‘‘SECTION 2. No person who has been a Representa14 tive for six consecutive terms shall again be eligible to 

15 serve as a Representative until the second Congress that 

16 begins after the end of the sixth consecutive term. Not17 withstanding the previous sentence, a person who is a 

18 Representative during the period beginning with the One 

19 Hundred Eighteenth Congress may serve as a Representa20 tive for an unlimited number of consecutive terms, but 

21 shall not again be eligible to serve as a Representative 

22 until the second Congress that begins after the end of the 

23 person’s final consecutive term of that period. 

24 ‘‘SECTION 3. For purposes of this article, any term 

25 a person serves as a Senator or Representative to fill a 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
3 

•HJ 20 IH 

1 vacancy shall not be included in determining the number 

2 of consecutive terms that the person has been a Senator 

3 or Representative unless the period of time for which the 

4 person fills the vacancy is greater than three years in the 

5 case of a Senator or greater than one year in the case 

6 of a Representative.’’. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

OFFICE OF ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION

September 14, 2016

Renee Rider

NYS Education Department

89 Washington Avenue

Albany, NY 12234-1000 

Dear Renee Rider: 

On June 23, 2016, a team from the U.S. Department of Education (ED) (the Department) conducted a desk

monitoring of the New York State Education Department‘s (NYSED) implementation of its approved Preschool 

Development Grant (PDG). This monitoring aims to continue the collaborative relationship that began at the grant 

award and development of the scope of work. It provides the Department with a deeper understanding of each 

State’s overall performance; the successes, challenges, and strategies for the implementation of its plans for its 

PDG Development grant; and the fiscal management of the grant funds. It also helps us tailor technical assistance 

to each State’s specific needs.

The desk monitoring included presentations and discussions related to all projects in the approved scope of work, 

including grants management, high-quality preschool programs (including both new programs and programs 

enhanced with PDG funds), early learning standards, comprehensive services, workforce development, and 

sustainability. During the desk monitoring, ED project officers discussed PDG implementation in New York’s 

five subgrantees. 

Enclosed is a summary report based upon this review. The report includes highlights of New York’s 

implementation of PDG and a snapshot of New York’s progress under each PDG key area. This report will be 

posted on the PDG website. The report includes “next steps” to ensure that New York implements PDG 

consistent with its approved application, scope of work, and timelines identified in its project plans.

We want to thank you and your staff for your cooperation during the desk monitoring, and for your efforts in 

providing high quality preschool opportunities through the Preschool Development Grant. We hope you will 

continue to communicate any needs or concerns to your ED project officer(s). 

We look forward to continuing our work with you and supporting New York’s technical assistance needs to 

ensure successful implementation of PDG. Thank you for your commitment to New York’s youngest children.

Sincerely,

/s/

Libby Doggett

Deputy Assistant Secretary 

Office of Early Learning

Office of Elementary and Secondary Education 

U.S. Department of Education

Enclosure
* Pursuant to LocalRule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be

published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstancesset forth in LocalRule 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT 

 

No. 95-41029

Summary Calendar

 

Larry Fisher,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

J.B. Smith; Judy Taylor; 

East Texas Medical Center;

Louis Roach,

Defendants-Appellees.

 

 Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Texas

(6:94-CV-463)

 

July 19, 1996

Before WISDOM, DAVIS, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The plaintiff-appellant, Larry Fisher, appeals the dismissal of his civil rights action. Fisher’s

suit contendsthat the defendants-appellees violated his constitutionalrights by denying himadequate

medical care while he was a pretrial detainee in Smith County, Texas. The magistrate judge assigned

to this case found that Fisher received adequate medical care, and that his complaint was frivolous

because: 1) the defendant East Texas Medical Center is not a person for purposes of 28 U.S.C.
1 Thomkins v. Belt, 828 F.2d 298, 304 (5th Cir. 1987) (a supervisor can be held liable

under § 1983 only if he or she was personally involved in the constitutional violation or if their is a

causal connection between the supervisor’s conduct and the violation).

2 Hare v. City of Corinth, MS, 74 F.3d 633, 645 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc).

3 We review the §1915(d) dismissal of a civil rights suit only for abuse of discretion.

Boyd v. Biggers, 31 F.3d 279, 282 (5th Cir. 1994).

4 Robertson v. Plano City of Tex., 70 F.3d 21, 23 (5th Cir. 1955).

2

§1983; 2) defendants Smith and Taylor were sued only in their capacities as supervisors, and cannot

be held liable on a theory of respondeat superior;

1

and 3) defendant Dr. Roach was sued only for

alleged negligence, which cannot provide the basisfor a civilrightslawsuit.2 Accordingly, the district

court dismissed Fisher’s suit as frivolous pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d). We have reviewed the

briefs and the record and find no abuse of discretion in the district court’s findings.3 In his

appeal Fisher also raises two new issues not presented to the lower court. Fisher argues that

defendant-appellee, SheriffJ.B. Smith, failed to properly segregate Fisher from convicted prisoners,

and also did not allow Fisher sufficient access to a law library during his detention. We decline to

review these new issues because they involve unresolved issues of fact.4

Accordingly, we AFFIRM the dismissal of Fisher’s complaint.
4.404 Contract clause. ( a ) The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 52.204-2, Security Requirements, in solicitations and contracts when the contract may require access to classified information, unless the conditions specified in paragraph (d) of this section apply.
( b ) If a cost contract (see 16.302) for research and development with an educational institution is contemplated, the contracting officer shall use the clause with its Alternate I.
( c ) If a construction or architect-engineer contract where employee identification is required for security reasons is contemplated, the contracting officer shall use the clause with its Alternate II.
( d ) If the contracting agency is not covered by the NISP and has prescribed a clause and alternates that are substantially the same as those at 52.204-2, the contracting officer shall use the agency-prescribed clause as required by agency procedures.
[48 FR 42113, Sept. 19, 1983, as amended at 61 FR 31617, June 20, 1996; 84 FR 19840, May 6, 2019]
xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?


C\_2019189EN.01004201.xml


| | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 5.6.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 189/42 |

---

New national side of euro coins intended for circulation

(2019/C 189/10)

![Image 1](http://publications.europa.eu/resource/uriserv/OJ.C_.2019.189.01.0042.01.ENG.xhtml.C_2019189EN.01004202.tif.jpg)

National side of the new commemorative 2-euro coin intended for circulation and issued by Monaco

Euro coins intended for circulation have legal tender status throughout the euro area. For the purpose of informing the public and all parties who handle the coins, the Commission publishes a description of the designs of all new coins [(1)](#ntr1-C_2019189EN.01004201-E0001). In accordance with the Council conclusions of 10 February 2009 [(2)](#ntr2-C_2019189EN.01004201-E0002), euro-area Member States and countries that have concluded a monetary agreement with the European Union providing for the issuing of euro coins are allowed to issue commemorative euro coins intended for circulation, provided that certain conditions are met, particularly that only the 2-euro denomination is used. These coins have the same technical characteristics as other 2-euro coins, but their national face features a commemorative design that is highly symbolic in national or European terms.

Issuing country
: Monaco

Subject of commemoration
: The 200th anniversary of the accession to the throne of Prince Honoré V

Description of the design
: The design shows the effigy of Prince Honoré V. At the left is the inscription ‘HONORÉ V’ and at the right the name of the issuing country ‘MONACO’. At the bottom, in semi-circle, is the inscription ‘1819 — Avènement — 2019’.

The coin’s outer ring depicts the 12 stars of the European flag.

Number of coins to be issued
:

15 000

Date of issue
:

1 June 2019

---

[(1)](#ntc1-C_2019189EN.01004201-E0001)  See [OJ C 373, 28.12.2001, p. 1](http://publications.europa.eu/resource/oj/JOC_2001_373_R_TOC) for the national faces of all the coins issued in 2002.

[(2)](#ntc2-C_2019189EN.01004201-E0002)  See the conclusions of the Economic and Financial Affairs Council of 10 February 2009 and the Commission Recommendation of 19 December 2008 on common guidelines for the national sides and the issuance of euro coins intended for circulation ([OJ L 9, 14.1.2009, p. 52](http://publications.europa.eu/resource/oj/JOL_2009_009_R_TOC)).

---
(March 29, 1979)

#### Raymond J. Rice, Doing Business as Raymond J. Rice Engineers, Appellant, v City of New York, Respondent.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County, entered on or about January 11, 1978, unanimously affirmed for the reasons stated by Korn, J., at Special Term, without costs and without disbursements. Concur—Murphy, P. J., Kupferman, Sandler, Lane and Lynch, JJ.