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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM CENTEX
CORPORATION'S DECEMBER 31, 1995, FORM 10-Q AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000018532
<NAME> CENTEX CORPORATION
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1995
<CASH>                                          23,256
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  839,590
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                  1,257,902
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                          83,376
<DEPRECIATION>                                  45,600
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,331,726
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                        320,981
<COMMON>                                         7,100
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                     700,842
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,331,726
<SALES>                                      2,277,945
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,299,303
<CGS>                                        2,196,197
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,196,197
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                10,910
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              30,202
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 61,994
<INCOME-TAX>                                    24,414
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             37,580
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    37,580
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.29
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.00
        

</TABLE>
#### MITCHELL v. LODERMAN et al.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Term.

February 27, 1906.)

CoNTEirpi>—Ordeb—Validity.

Where a debtor is convicted of contempt arising out of proceedings supplementary to execution, an order sustaining the regularity of the contempt proceedings, but assessing only a nominal fine, bearing no relation to the injury done the judgment creditor, is irregular and unauthorized.

Appeal from City Court of New York, Trial Term.

In the matter of the proceedings supplementary to execution of Henry W. Mitchell against Gerson Goderman and another. From an order reducing a fine imposed on a judgment debtor, the judgment creditor appeals.

Reversed.

Argued before SCOTT, P. J., and GIEGERICH and GREEN-BAUM, JJ.

Charles Frankel, for appellant.

A. A. Joseph, for respondents.

PER CURIAM.

The order appealed from was irregular and unauthorized. If the judgment debtor was guilty of contempt, and the proceedings to punish him were regularly conducted, he should have suffered more than a nominal fine. If the justice upon re-examination of the case found that there was no contempt, or that the proceedings to punish him were irregular, he should have vacated his order in toto. As it now stands, the debtor is convicted of contempt, the proceedings to punish him are sustained as to their regularity, and yet,he is fined a sum which bears no relation to the injury done to the judgment creditor.

Order reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements.
#### General Insurance Company, appellant, v. American Merchants Fire Insurance Company, appellee.

Gen. No. 30,723.

Action upon policy of fire insurance. Judgment for defendant. Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Arnold Heap, Judge, presiding. Heard in the second division of this court for

the first district at the October term, 1925.

Affirmed.

Opinion filed October 5, 1926.

Ekern & Meyers and L. F. Binkley, for appellant.

Kremer, Branand & Hamer, for appellee.

Mr. Presiding Justice Gridley

delivered the opinion of the court.
# C_2020418EN.01000801.xml

| 3.12.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 418/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.12.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 418/8

---

Public holidays in 2020: EEA/EFTA States and EEA institutions

(2020/C 418/08)

| | Iceland | Liechtenstein | Norway | EFTA Surveillance Authority | EFTA Court |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Wednesday 1 January | X | X | X | X | X |
| Thursday 2 January | | X | | X | X |
| Friday 3 January | | | | X | |
| Monday 6 January | | X | | | |
| Monday 24 February | | | | | X |
| Tuesday 25 February | | X | | | |
| Thursday 19 March | | X | | | |
| Thursday 9 April | X | | X | X | X |
| Friday 10 April | X | X | X | X | X |
| Monday 13 April | X | X | X | X | X |
| Thursday 23 April | X | | | | |
| Friday 1 May | X | X | X | X | X |
| Monday 11 May | | | | | X |
| Thursday 21 May | X | X | X | X | X |
| Friday 22 May | | | | X | X |
| Monday 1 June | X | X | X | X | X |
| Thursday 11 June | | X | | | |
| Wednesday 17 June | X | | | | |
| Tuesday 23 June | | | | | X |
| Monday 3 August | X | | | | |
| Monday 31 August | | | | | X |
| Tuesday 8 September | | X | | | |
| Monday 2 November | | | | X | X |
| Tuesday 8 December | | X | | | |
| Monday 21 December | | | | X | |
| Tuesday 22 December | | | | X | |
| Wednesday 23 December | | | | X | |
| Thursday 24 December | X | X | | X | X |
| Friday 25 December | X | X | X | X | X |
| Monday 28 December | | | | X | X |
| Tuesday 29 December | | | | X | X |
| Wednesday 30 December | | | | X | X |
| Thursday 31 December | X | X | | X | X |
| **Public holidays falling on Saturdays and Sundays are not listed. |

Iceland

Liechtenstein

Norway

EFTA Surveillance Authority

EFTA Court

Wednesday 1 January

X

X

X

X

X

Thursday 2 January

X

X

X

Friday 3 January

X

Monday 6 January

X

Monday 24 February

X

Tuesday 25 February

X

Thursday 19 March

X

Thursday 9 April

X

X

X

X

Friday 10 April

X

X

X

X

X

Monday 13 April

X

X

X

X

X

Thursday 23 April

X

Friday 1 May

X

X

X

X

X

Monday 11 May

X

Thursday 21 May

X

X

X

X

X

Friday 22 May

X

X

Monday 1 June

X

X

X

X

X

Thursday 11 June

X

Wednesday 17 June

X

Tuesday 23 June

X

Monday 3 August

X

Monday 31 August

X

Tuesday 8 September

X

Monday 2 November

X

X

Tuesday 8 December

X

Monday 21 December

X

Tuesday 22 December

X

Wednesday 23 December

X

Thursday 24 December

X

X

X

X

Friday 25 December

X

X

X

X

X

Monday 28 December

X

X

Tuesday 29 December

X

X

Wednesday 30 December

X

X

Thursday 31 December

X

X

X

X

**Public holidays falling on Saturdays and Sundays are not listed.

---
IV 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 86 

Expressing the sense of Congress that a carbon tax would be detrimental 

to the United States economy. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 25, 2024 

Mr. ZINKE (for himself, Mr. SCALISE, Mr. BOST, Mr. CLYDE, Mr. CRENSHAW, 

Mr. PERRY, Mr. OGLES, Mr. JACKSON of Texas, Mrs. MILLER of Illinois, 

Mr. LAMBORN, Mrs. MILLER of West Virginia, Mr. CAREY, Mr. 

LANGWORTHY, and Mr. PFLUGER) submitted the following concurrent 

resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means 

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 

Expressing the sense of Congress that a carbon tax would 

be detrimental to the United States economy. 

Whereas a carbon tax is a Federal tax on carbon released 

from fossil fuels; 

Whereas a carbon tax will increase energy prices, including 

the price of gasoline, electricity, natural gas, and home 

heating oil; 

Whereas a carbon tax will mean that families and consumers 

will pay more for essentials like food, gasoline, and electricity; 

Whereas a carbon tax will fall hardest on the poor, the elderly, and those on fixed incomes; 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
2 

•HCON 86 IH 

Whereas a carbon tax will lead to more jobs and businesses 

moving overseas; 

Whereas a carbon tax will lead to less economic growth; 

Whereas American families will be harmed the most from a 

carbon tax; 

Whereas, according to the Energy Information Administration, the share of energy consumption during 2023 in the 

United States that was derived from fossil fuels was approximately 80 percent; 

Whereas a carbon tax will increase the cost of every good 

manufactured in the United States; 

Whereas a carbon tax will impose disproportionate burdens 

on certain industries, jobs, States, and geographic regions and would further restrict the global competitiveness of the United States; 

Whereas American ingenuity has led to innovations in energy 

exploration and development and has increased production of domestic energy resources on private and Stateowned land which has created significant job growth and 

private capital investment; 

Whereas the energy policy of the United States should encourage continued private sector innovation and development and not increase the existing tax burden on manufacturers; 

Whereas the production of American energy resources increases the ability of the United States to maintain a 

competitive advantage in today’s global economy; 

Whereas a carbon tax would reduce America’s global competitiveness and would encourage development abroad in 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
3 

•HCON 86 IH 

countries that do not impose this exorbitant tax burden; 

and 

Whereas the Congress and the President should focus on progrowth solutions that encourage increased development of 

domestic resources: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 

2 concurring), That it is the sense of Congress that a carbon 

3 tax would be detrimental to American families and busi4 nesses, and is not in the best interest of the United States. 

Æ 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
Consent of Independent Auditors

We consent to the use of our report  dated  January  28,  2000,  included in the
Annual Report on Form 10-K of Commerce  Bancorp,  Inc. and  Subsidiaries for the
year  ended  December  31,  1999,  with  respect to the  consolidated  financial
statements,  and to the use of our report dated June 19,  2000,  with respect to
the financial  statements and  supplemental  schedule of the Commerce  Bancorp,
Inc. 401(k) Retirement Plan, included in this Form 10-K/A.


/s/ Ernst & Young LLP
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
June 28, 2000
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE

F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER

Appellate case name: Humberto Lopez, Jr. and Olga Lopez v. Mayra Rivas and Linda Lopez

Appellate case number: 01

- 14

- 00592

- CV

Trial court case number: 2011

- 32028

Trial court: 190th Di strict Court of Harris County

On September 2, 2014, appellees timely filed an objection to our order of August 25,

2014 referring the parties to mediation. Having considered the basis for the objection, we

VACATE our mediation order of August 25, 2014.

I t is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Rebeca Huddle

 Ac ting individually  Acting for the Court

Date: December 23, 2014
45.602-1 Inventory disposal schedules. ( a ) Plant clearance officers should review and accept, or return for correction, inventory disposal schedules within 10 days following receipt from a contractor. Schedules that are completed in accordance with the instructions for Standard Form 1428 should be accepted.
( b ) Plant clearance officers shall— ( 1 ) Use Standard Form 1423 to verify, in accordance with agency procedures, accepted schedules within 20 days following acceptance;
( 2 ) Require the contractor to correct any discrepancies found during verification;
( 3 ) Require the contractor to correct any failure to complete predisposal requirements of the contract; and
( 4 ) Provide the contractor disposition instructions for property identified on an acceptable inventory disposal schedule within 120 days. A failure to provide timely disposition instructions may entitle the contractor to an equitable adjustment.
( c ) The contractor may request the plant clearance officer's approval to remove the Government property from an inventory schedule. ( 1 ) Plant clearance officers should approve removal of Government property from an inventory schedule when— ( i ) The contractor wishes to purchase a contractor-acquired or contractor-produced item at unit acquisition cost and credit the contract;
( ii ) The contractor is able to return unused property to the supplier at fair market value and credit the contract (less, if applicable, a reasonable restocking fee that is consistent with the supplier's customary practices);
( iii ) The Government has authorized the contractor to use the property on another Government contract; or
( iv ) The contractor has requested continued use of the Government property, and the contracting officer has authorized its retention and further use.
( 2 ) If the screening process (*see* 45.602-3) has not begun, the plant clearance officer shall adjust the schedule or return the schedule to the contractor for correction. If screening has begun, the plant clearance officer shall promptly notify the activity performing the screening that the items should be removed from the screening process.
[69 FR 17745, Apr. 4, 2004, as amended at 77 FR 12943, Mar. 2, 2012]
#### The People of the State of New York ex rel. Simeon Simpkins, Appellant, v. Director of Pilgrim State Hospital, Respondent.

In a habeas corpus proceeding, relator appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated January 10, 1964, which dismissed the writ after a hearing and remanded him to the custody of respondent. Order affirmed, without costs. There is no constitutional right to representation by counsel in habeas corpus proceedings *(Dillon*v. *United States,*307 F. 2d 445, 446; *United States ex rel. Wissenfeld*v. *Wilkins,*281 F. 2d 707, 715). (For prior appeals by this relator, see 13 A D 2d 991; 16 A D 2d 982.) Beldock, P. J., Ughetta, Kleinfeld, Brennan and Rabin, JJ., concur.
# C_2021064EN.01000301.xml

| 24.2.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 64/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.2.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 64/3

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

23 February 2021

(2021/C 64/03)

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,2143 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 127,98 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4366 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,86308 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 10,0747 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,0946 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | 155,20 |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 10,3190 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 25,906 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 359,14 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,5066 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,8760 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 8,5681 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,5378 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,5319 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 9,4153 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,6585 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,6048 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 351,72 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 17,8599 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 7,8506 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,5770 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 17 129,52 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,9100 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 59,021 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 89,9219 |
| THB | Thai baht | 36,453 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 6,6062 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 25,1611 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 88,0575 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,2143

JPY

Japanese yen

127,98

DKK

Danish krone

7,4366

GBP

Pound sterling

0,86308

SEK

Swedish krona

10,0747

CHF

Swiss franc

1,0946

ISK

Iceland króna

155,20

NOK

Norwegian krone

10,3190

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

25,906

HUF

Hungarian forint

359,14

PLN

Polish zloty

4,5066

RON

Romanian leu

4,8760

TRY

Turkish lira

8,5681

AUD

Australian dollar

1,5378

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,5319

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

9,4153

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,6585

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,6048

KRW

South Korean won

1 351,72

ZAR

South African rand

17,8599

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

7,8506

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,5770

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

17 129,52

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,9100

PHP

Philippine peso

59,021

RUB

Russian rouble

89,9219

THB

Thai baht

36,453

BRL

Brazilian real

6,6062

MXN

Mexican peso

25,1611

INR

Indian rupee

88,0575

---

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

---
# C_2020087EN.01000101.xml

| 16.3.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 87/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.3.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 87/1

---

Last publications of the Court of Justice of the European Union in the Official Journal of the European Union

(2020/C 87/01)

Last publication

OJ C 77, 9.3.2020

Past publications

OJ C 68, 2.3.2020

OJ C 61, 24.2.2020

OJ C 54, 17.2.2020

OJ C 45, 10.2.2020

OJ C 36, 3.2.2020

OJ C 27, 27.1.2020

These texts are available on:

EUR-Lex: http://eur-lex.europa.eu

---
FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS

### WHO HAVE FILED AGREEMENTSTO BEAPPROVED AS A DEPOSITORY OF TRUST ACCOUNTS 

### AND TO PROVIDE DISHONORED CHECK REPORTS IN ACCORDANCE 

### WITH RULE 

### 221, Pa.R.D.E. 

### New Name Change 

### Platinum Leader Change 

### Correction Removal No 

### changes since last 

### quarterly submission January, 2020.



### Submitted: 

### 04/29/2020
No. 03-13-00025-CV

In the Third Court of Appeals 

Austin, Texas

Jerry Scarbrough, et al

Appellant

v.

Helen Purser, et al.

Appellee

On Appeal from the 146th Judicial District Court of

Bell County, Cause No. 236,117-B

SUGGESTION OF DEATH for MELISSA DEATON,

TO THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS:

COMES NOW, Counsel for Melissa Deaton, and informs this Court 

that Appellant Melissa Deaton, age 50, passed away on December 15, 

2015. No estate has yet been opened, but it is presumed that Ms. Deaton 

would want this appeal continued by her estate to clear her name.

ACCEPTED

03-13-00025-CV

8314371

THIRD COURT OF APPEALS

AUSTIN, TEXAS

12/21/2015 1:16:01 AM

JEFFREY D. KYLE

CLERK

 FILED IN 3rd COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS 12/21/2015 1:16:01 AM JEFFREY D. KYLE Clerk
Respectfully submitted,

____/s/ MB CHIMENE__________

THE CHIMENE LAW FIRM

Michele Barber Chimene

TBN 04207500

2827 Linkwood Dr.

Houston, TX. 77025

PH 713 474-5538

No fax available

michelec@airmail.net

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

By my electronic signature, the undersigned certifies that she has served a 

copy of this Motion on Daryl L. Moore, daryl@heightslaw.com, and JoAnn 

Storey, storeyj@heightslaw.com. via ECF and/or email on this the 21th of 

December, 2015.

_______/s/ MB CHIMENE________
3053.204-70 Administrative matters. The following forms are prescribed for use in the closeout of applicable contracts, as specified in (HSAR) 48 CFR 3004.804-570: ( a ) DHS Form 700-1, Cumulative Claim and Reconciliation Statement. (See (HSAR) 48 CFR 3004.804-570(a)(3).)
( b ) DHS Form 700-2, Contractor's Assignment of Refunds, Rebates, Credits and Other Amounts. (See (HSAR) 48 CFR 3004.804-570(a)(2).)
( c ) DHS Form 700-3, Contractor Release. (See (HSAR) 48 CFR 3004.804-570(a)(1).)
[68 FR 67871, Dec. 4, 2003, as amended at 77 FR 50637, Aug. 22, 2012]
III 

115TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. RES. 415 

Designating March 2, 2018, as ‘‘National Speech and Debate Education 

Day’’. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

FEBRUARY 27, 2018 

Mr. GRASSLEY (for himself, Mr. COONS, Ms. WARREN, Mr. DURBIN, and Ms. 

KLOBUCHAR) submitted the following resolution; which was considered 

and agreed to 

RESOLUTION 

Designating March 2, 2018, as ‘‘National Speech and Debate 

Education Day’’. 

Whereas it is essential for youth to learn and practice the art 

of communicating with and without technology; 

Whereas speech and debate education offers students myriad 

forms of public speaking through which students may develop talent and exercise unique voice and character; 

Whereas speech and debate education gives students the 

21st-century skills of communication, critical thinking, 

creativity, and collaboration; 

Whereas critical analysis and effective communication allow 

important ideas, texts, and philosophies the opportunity 

to flourish; 


dlhill on DSK3GLQ082PROD with BILLS
2 

•SRES 415 ATS 

Whereas personal, professional, and civic interactions are enhanced by the ability of the participants in those interactions to listen, concur, question, and dissent with reason and compassion; 

Whereas students who participate in speech and debate have 

chosen a challenging activity that requires regular practice, dedication, and hard work; 

Whereas teachers and coaches of speech and debate devote 

in-school, afterschool, and weekend hours to equip students with life-changing skills and opportunities; 

Whereas National Speech and Debate Education Day emphasizes the lifelong impact of providing people of the United 

States with the confidence and preparation to both discern and share views; 

Whereas National Speech and Debate Education Day acknowledges that most achievements, celebrations, commemorations, and pivotal moments in modern history 

begin, end, or are crystallized with public address; 

Whereas National Speech and Debate Education Day recognizes that learning to research, construct, and present an 

argument is integral to personal advocacy, social movements, and the making of public policy; 

Whereas the National Speech & Debate Association, in conjunction with national and local partners, honors and 

celebrates the importance of speech and debate through 

National Speech and Debate Education Day; and 

Whereas National Speech and Debate Education Day emphasizes the importance of speech and debate education and 

the integration of speech and debate education across 

grade levels and disciplines: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the Senate— 


dlhill on DSK3GLQ082PROD with BILLS
3 

•SRES 415 ATS 

1 (1) designates March 2, 2018, as ‘‘National 

2 Speech and Debate Education Day’’; 

3 (2) strongly affirms the purposes of National 

4 Speech and Debate Education Day; and 

5 (3) encourages educational institutions, busi6 nesses, community and civic associations, and all 

7 people of the United States to celebrate and promote 

8 National Speech and Debate Education Day. 

Æ 


dlhill on DSK3GLQ082PROD with BILLS
32.304-5 Assignment of claims under contracts. ( a ) The agency shall generally require a contractor that is provided a guaranteed loan to execute an assignment of claims under defense production contracts (including any contracts entered into during the term of the guaranteed loan that are eligible for financing under the loan); however, the agency need not require assignment if any of the following conditions are present: ( 1 ) The contractor's financial condition is so strong that the protection to the Government provided by an assignment of claims is unnecessary.
( 2 ) In connection with the assignment of claims under a major contract, the increased protection of the loan that would be provided by the assignments under additional, relatively smaller contracts is not considered necessary by the agency.
( 3 ) The assignment of claims would create an administrative burden disproportionate to the protection required; e.g., if the contractor has a large number of contracts with individually small dollar amounts.
( b ) The contractor shall also execute an assignment of claims if requested to do so by the guarantor or the financing institution.
( c ) A subcontract or purchase order issued to a subcontractor shall not be considered eligible for financing under guaranteed loans when the issuer of the subcontract or purchase order reserves ( 1 ) the privilege of making payments directly to the assignor or to the assignor and assignee jointly, after notice of the assignment, or
( 2 ) the right to reduce or set off assigned proceeds under defense production contracts by reason of claims against the borrower arising after notice of assignment and independently of defense production contracts under which the borrower is the seller.