alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 12

                      THE CIT GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
               COMPUTATION OF RATIOS OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES
                          (Dollar Amounts In Millions)

                                                             Three Months Ended
                                                                 March 31,
                                                             ------------------
                                                               1999       1998
                                                               ----       ----

Net income                                                   $  91.9   $  81.7

Provision for income taxes                                      49.2      45.4
                                                              ------    ------

Earnings before provision for income taxes                     141.1     127.1
                                                              ------    ------

Fixed charges:
  Interest and debt expense on indebtedness                    273.3     244.6
  Minority interest in subsidiary trust holding solely
   debentures of the Company                                     4.8       4.8
  Interest factor - one third of rentals on
   real and personal properties                                  2.3       2.3
                                                              ------    ------
  Total fixed charges                                          280.4     251.7
                                                              ------    ------
    Total earnings before provision for income
     taxes and fixed charges                                 $ 421.5   $ 378.8
                                                             =======   =======

Ratios of earnings to fixed charges                            1.50x     1.50x
                                                               =====     =====
#### ROGERS, Respondent, v. GREEN FUEL ECONOMIZER CO. OF MATTEAWAN, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

June 15, 1906.)

Action by Elizabeth Rogers, as administratrix of Andrew Rogers, deceased, against the Green Fuel Economizer Company of Matteawan.

No opinion. Judgment and order unanimously affirmed, with costs,
**Exhibit 32-5** **Certificate    Pursuant to Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of    Title 18 United States Code**     The undersigned officer hereby certifies, as to the quarterly    report on    Form 10-Q    of PECO Energy Company for the quarterly period ended    September 30, 2006, that (i) the report fully complies    with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the    Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and (ii) the information    contained in the report fairly presents, in all material    respects, the financial condition and results of operations of    PECO Energy Company. /s/  John    L. Skolds    John L. Skolds    President    Exelon Energy Delivery     Date: October 27, 2006
EXHIBIT 23.1

                          INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

To the Board of Directors and Stockholders
of Vermont Pure Holdings, Ltd.
Randolph, Vermont

We consent to the  incorporation  by reference  in  Registration  Statement  No.
33-95908 on Form S-8 of Vermont Pure Holdings, Ltd. of our report, dated January
5, 2001,  appearing in the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Vermont Pure  Holdings,
Ltd. for the year ended October 31, 2000.

FELDMAN SHERB HOROWITZ & CO. P.C


New York, New York
January 5, 2001
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1116 

To prohibit individuals charged with human trafficking or drug trafficking 

offenses committed near the border of the United States from receiving 

Federal benefits. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 21, 2023 

Mrs. CAMMACK (for herself, Mr. CRENSHAW, and Mr. DESJARLAIS) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Oversight and Accountability 

A BILL 

To prohibit individuals charged with human trafficking or 

drug trafficking offenses committed near the border of 

the United States from receiving Federal benefits. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Stop Taxpayer Fund5 ing of Traffickers Act’’. 

6 SECTION 2. PROHIBITION ON FEDERAL BENEFITS FOR 

7 HUMAN TRAFFICKERS AND DRUG TRAF8 FICKERS. 

9 (a) DEFINITIONS.—In this section— 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1116 IH

1 (1) the term ‘‘covered trafficking offense’’ 

2 means a human trafficking offense or a drug traf3 ficking offense for which any portion of the course 

4 of conduct constituting the human trafficking of5 fense or drug trafficking offense occurred at an 

6 international border of the United States or within 

7 the territorial waters of the United States; 

8 (2) the term ‘‘drug trafficking offense’’ means 

9 any Federal offense that includes as an element of 

10 the offense the distribution of a controlled substance 

11 (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Sub12 stances Act (21 U.S.C. 802)); 

13 (3) the term ‘‘Federal benefit’’— 

14 (A) means the issuance of any grant, con15 tract, loan, professional license, or commercial 

16 license provided by an agency of the United 

17 States or by appropriated funds of the United 

18 States; and 

19 (B) includes any retirement, welfare, So20 cial Security, health, disability, veterans, public 

21 housing, or other similar benefit; and 

22 (4) the term ‘‘human trafficking offense’’ 

23 means an offense under— 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 1116 IH

1 (A) section 1581, 1583, 1584, 1589, 1590, 

2 1591, 2251A, 2421, 2422, or 2423 of title 18, 

3 United States Code; or 

4 (B) section 274(a) of the Immigration and 

5 Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1324(a)). 

6 (b) PROHIBITION ON BENEFITS.—An individual who 

7 is indicted for or charged in an information with a covered 

8 trafficking offense shall be ineligible for any Federal ben9 efit. 

10 (c) TERMINATION OF PROHIBITION.—If, for each 

11 covered trafficking offense with which an individual is 

12 charged, the charge is dismissed or the individual is found 

13 not guilty of the covered trafficking offense— 

14 (1) the ineligibility of the individual for any 

15 Federal benefit under subsection (b) shall terminate; 

16 and 

17 (2) the Federal Government shall pay to the in18 dividual any pecuniary Federal benefit that was not 

19 paid to the individual because the individual was in20 eligible for the Federal benefit under subsection (b). 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
#### § 1030.5 Distributing plant.

See § 1000.5.
§ 1.634 What is the law governing ex parte communications? ( a ) Ex parte communications with the ALJ or his or her staff are prohibited in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 554(d).
( b ) This section does not prohibit ex parte inquiries concerning case status or procedural requirements, unless the inquiry involves an area of controversy in the hearing process.
§ 1.161 Definitions. As used in this part, words in the single form shall be deemed to import the plural, and vice versa, as the case may require. The following terms shall be construed, respectively, to mean: *Act* means the Capper-Volstead Act, approved February 18, 1922, 42 Stat. 388, 7 U.S.C. 291, 292.
*Association* means a cooperative association, a federation of cooperatives, or other association of agricultural producers, as defined in section 1 of the Act.
Complainant or Secretary means the Secretary of Agriculture, United States Department of Agriculture, or any officer(s) or employee(s) to whom authority has heretofore been delegated, or whom authority may hereafter be delegated, to act in his or her stead.
*Complaint* means a formal complaint instituted by the Secretary of Agriculture requiring respondent to show cause why an order should not be made directing it to cease and desist from acts of monopolization or restraint of trade, which result in undue price enhancement.
*Decision* means: ( 1 ) the Judge's decision, and includes ( i ) findings and conclusions and the reasons or basis therefor on all material issues of fact, law, or discretion,
( ii ) order, and
( iii ) rulings on proposed findings, conclusions and order submitted by the parties, and
( 2 ) the decision and order by the Judicial Officer upon an appeal of the Judge's decision.
*Hearing* means that part of the proceeding which involves the submission of evidence before the Judge for the record in the proceeding.
*Hearing Clerk* means the Hearing Clerk, United States Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC 20250.
*Judge* means any Administrative Law Judge appointed pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 3105 (the Administrative Procedure Act) and assigned to the proceeding involved.
*Judicial Officer* means an official of the United States Department of Agriculture delegated authority by the Secretary, pursuant to the Act of April 4, 1940 (7 U.S.C. 450c-450g) and Reorganization Plan No. 2 of 1953 (5 U.S.C. App. (1988)), to perform the function involved (§ 2.35(a) of this chapter), or the Secretary if he or she exercises the authority so delegated.
*Respondent* means the cooperative associations, or association, against whom a complaint has been issued.
[45 FR 6587, Jan. 29, 1980, as amended at 60 FR 8457, Feb. 14, 1995]
#### The Board of Commissioners of Cook County *v.*William Harlev.

*Opinion filed October 24, 1898.*

*Trial—order of admission of evidence rests solely ivith trial court.*The order in which evidence shall he received is a matter resting wholly in the discretion of the trial court.

*Board of Commissioners*v. *Harlev,*75 Ill. App. 218, affirmed.

Appeal from the Appellate Court for the First District;—heard in that court on appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. Richard S. Tuthill, Judge, presiding.

Robert S. Iles, County Attorney, and Frank L. Shepard, for appellant.

Wing, Chadbourne & Leach, for appellee.

Mr. Chief Justice Carter

delivered the opinion of the court:

This is an appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Court affirming a judgment of the circuit court of Cook county in favor of appellee. The appellee, William Harlev, brought suit against Cook county for $18,000, which *413amount he claimed was due him for extras furnished by him in the construction of the second ward building of the Cook county insane asylum at Dunning. No evidence was offered by appellant, and the jury returned a verdict for §6402.

All questions of fact have been settled adversely to appellant by the judgment of the Appellate Court, and the only errors we can consider relate to the instructions and the admission of evidence. The only objection to the reception of evidence was to the order of its admission. This is wholly within the discretion of the trial court.

We do not find that appellee’s instructions are open to the criticisms made on them, but think that they stated the law applicable to the case correctly, and were reasonably clear and explicit, and, taken in connection with those given for appellant, could not have misled the jury. Appellant’s refused instructions were fully covered by those given, and the modification of instruction 10 was warranted by the evidence and could not have resulted in any harm to appellant.

Finding no error the judgment is affirmed.

*Judgment affirmed.*
#### Barbara Berberich v. Barbara M. Mathieu.

Motion for a stay granted on condition that the defendant procures the record on appeal and appellant’s points to be served and filed on or before August 14, 1962, with notice of argument for the September 1962 Term of this court, said appeal to be argued or submitted when mu-lied. Concur — Botein, P. J., Stevens, Eager, Steuer and Bergan, JJ.
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 10388 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                               H. R. 10388

To amend the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 regarding the application 
 of wage and hour provisions to minor league baseball players, and for 
                            other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           December 12, 2024

 Mr. Deluzio introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                Committee on Education and the Workforce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 regarding the application 
 of wage and hour provisions to minor league baseball players, and for 
                            other purposes.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Fair Ball Act''.

SEC. 2. APPLICATION OF THE FAIR LABOR STANDARDS ACT OF 1938 TO MINOR 
              LEAGUE BASEBALL PLAYERS.

    Section 13(a)(19) of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (29 
U.S.C. 213(a)(19)) is amended by striking ``a contract'' and all that 
follows through the period at the end and inserting ``an unexpired 
collective bargaining agreement.''.
                                 <all>
```
EXHIBIT 21

                         Subsidiaries of the Registrant

All of the Company's subsidiaries are wholly owned by the registrant or a
subsidiary of the registrant:

Vermont Pure Springs, Inc. ("Springs") - incorporated in the State of Delaware.


Crystal Rock Spring Water Company ("Crystal Rock") - incorporated in the State
of Connecticut.

Excelsior Springs Water Company, Inc.  -  incorporated in the State of New York
and wholly owned by the Company's subsidiary, Springs.


Adirondack Coffee Services, Inc.  -  incorporated  in  the  State  of  New York
and wholly owned by the Company's subsidiary, Springs.


Crystal-Waterville, Inc.  -  incorporated in the State of Connecticut and wholly
owned by the Company's subsidiary, Crystal Rock.
Motion Granted; Dismissed and Memor andum Opinion filed September 26 , 2013

.



### In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14

- 12

- 00469

- CR

ANDREW SCOTT PARKE , Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

On Appeal from the 230th District Court

Harris County, T exas Trial Court Cause No. 1202736



### M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

A written request to withdraw the notice of appeal, personally signed by appellant,
has been filed with this court. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.2. Because this court has not delivered an opinion, we grant appellant’s request. Accordingly, we order the ap peal dismissed. We direct the clerk of the court to issue the mandate of the court immediately.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Frost, McCally, and Busby

. Do Not Publish

— Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).
#### W. F. Woodruff, appellee, v. Raymond A. Von Danden, appellant.

Gen. No. 30,672.

Action for rent. Order denying motion to open up judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. John A. Swanson, Judge, presiding. Heard in the second division of this court for the first district at the October term, 1925.

Affirmed.

Opinion filed July 13, 1926.

Rehearing denied July 24, 1926.

William R. Brand, for appellant.

Church, Haft & Robertson, for appellee.

Mr. Justice Barnes

delivered the opinion of the court.
Featured Grant OpportunitySchool Emergency Response to Violence (Project SERV) (Funding Opportunity) 

Featured Grant OpportunityShare with Youth: NOAA Student Opportunities Database

Featured Grant OpportunityShort Courses in Social Determinants of Health for Research Education in Nursing Research (Funding...

Featured Grant OpportunityResearch on Law Enforcement Responses to Opioid Overdoses (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityComprehensive Partnerships to Advance Cancer Health Equity (CPACHE) Program (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityRisk and Protective Factors of Family Health and Family Level Interventions (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityPersonnel Development to Improve Services and Results for Children with Disabilities--Doctoral...

Featured Grant OpportunityStanding Announcement for Tribal Title IV-E Plan Development Grants (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityProviding Research Education Experiences to Enhance Inclusivity for a Diverse Substance Use and...

Featured Grant OpportunityFY 2024 Research on School-Based Hate Crimes (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityChallenge America (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityResearch and Evaluation on Firearm Violence and Mass Shootings (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityNational Juvenile Court Data Archive (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityGraduate Research Fellowship (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityCommunity Programs for Outreach and Intervention with Youth and Young Adults at Clinical High Risk...

Featured Grant OpportunityPrint and Disseminate Child Victims and Witnesses Support Materials (Funding Opportunity)

## Breadcrumb

            -           Sesame Street Resources      

# Sesame Street Resources

Sesame Workshop's initiative — Little Children, Big Challenges: Incarceration — provides much-needed bilingual (English/Spanish) multimedia tools for families with young children (ages 3-8) who have an incarcerated parent. These FREE resources include a resource kit with A Guide for Parents and Caregivers, a Children's Storybook, and a new Sesame Street video; an Incarcerated Parent Tip Sheet; and the Sesame Street: Incarceration mobile app for smart phones and tablets.

http://www.sesamestreet.org/parents/topicsandactivities/toolkits/incarceration
#### In the Matter of John A. Slater, Appellant, v Village of Herkimer, Respondent.

— Order unanimously reversed, without costs, and motion granted. Memorandum: Plaintiff appeals from an order denying him permission to file a late notice of claim which arose from an alleged collision between a vehicle driven by plaintiff and one of defendant’s police vehicles. In determining this question, the court should inquire whether the defendant acquired actual knowledge of the facts constituting the claim within the 90-day statutory period or a reasonable time thereafter (General Municipal Law, § 50-e, subd 5). Plaintiff relies upon documentary evidence presented in his brief, but not contained in the record, to prove that defendant had such knowledge. We may not consider such evidence *(Charlotte Lake Riv. Assoc. v American Ins. Co.,*68 AD2d 151; *Mulligan v Lackey,*33 AD2d 991). We nonetheless find, under the circumstances here, that defendant did have actual knowledge of the facts constituting the claim (see *Matter of Wade v City of New York,*65 AD2d 534; *Matter of Wemett v County of Onondaga,*64 AD2d 1025). It was, therefore, an abuse of discretion to deny permission to file a late notice of claim. (Appeal from order of Otsego Supreme Court — notice of claim.) Present — Cardamone, J. P., Hancock, Jr., Doerr, Witmer and Moule, JJ.
#### LISCHINSKY, Appellant, v. HELLINGER, Respondent.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

March 9, 1906.)

Appeal from Special Term, New York County. Application of Louis Lischinsky against Samuel Hellinger. From an order denying a motion to compel defendant, as attorney, to pay over certain, moneys, applicant appeals.

Modified and affirmed.

Max Schleimer, for appellant.

Thomas J. O’Neill, for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

To obviate any question as to the order herein being pleaded as a bar, it should be modified by adding a provision thereto that it is without prejudice to such further action by petitioner as he may be advised; and, as so modified, it should be affirmed, without costs.
Featured Grant OpportunitySchool Emergency Response to Violence (Project SERV) (Funding Opportunity) 

Featured Grant OpportunityShare with Youth: NOAA Student Opportunities Database

Featured Grant OpportunityShort Courses in Social Determinants of Health for Research Education in Nursing Research (Funding...

Featured Grant OpportunityResearch on Law Enforcement Responses to Opioid Overdoses (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityComprehensive Partnerships to Advance Cancer Health Equity (CPACHE) Program (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityRisk and Protective Factors of Family Health and Family Level Interventions (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityPersonnel Development to Improve Services and Results for Children with Disabilities--Doctoral...

Featured Grant OpportunityStanding Announcement for Tribal Title IV-E Plan Development Grants (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityProviding Research Education Experiences to Enhance Inclusivity for a Diverse Substance Use and...

Featured Grant OpportunityFY 2024 Research on School-Based Hate Crimes (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityChallenge America (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityResearch and Evaluation on Firearm Violence and Mass Shootings (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityNational Juvenile Court Data Archive (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityGraduate Research Fellowship (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityCommunity Programs for Outreach and Intervention with Youth and Young Adults at Clinical High Risk...

Featured Grant OpportunityPrint and Disseminate Child Victims and Witnesses Support Materials (Funding Opportunity)

## Breadcrumb

            -  Announcements 
            -           Resource: Youth-Led Health Center Assessment Tool      

# Resource: Youth-Led Health Center Assessment Tool

This tool (PDF, 4 pages), developed by the Adolescent Health Initiative (AHI), engages youth in evaluating health centers and encourages them to reflect on a health center’s environment and services. The accompanying facilitator guide (PDF, 6 pages) can help adults support youth in using this tool to evaluate a health center. It includes a video developed by AHI’s youth advisory council that prompts youth to consider what is important to them when accessing health care. **Learn more** (PDF, 4 pages).
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_______________

m 99-60142

_______________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

VERSUS

ROY DIXON AND ROBERT WILLIAMS,

Defendants-Appellants.

_________________________

Appeals from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Mississippi

(3:98-CR-89)

_________________________

April 4, 2000

Before REAVLEY, SMITH, and

EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Roy Dixon and Robert Williams appeal

their Hobbs Act convictions. Their main issue

is sufficiency of the evidence. They claim the

relevant employees of Time Warner had no

reason to fear them and that Time Warner had

no fear of present loss. Our review of the

record reveals more than sufficient evidence

from which the jury could have found such

reasonable fear from defendants’ actions.

 

*

 Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has

determined that this opinion should not be published

and is not precedent except under the limited

circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
2

The indictment is not fatally defective.

Defendants cannot show prejudice from the

designation of the victim corporation in the

indictment.

The convictions are constitutional under

United States v. Lopez. Moreover, no

aggregation is required under the statute in

question, even if defendants properly raised

this issue in the district court. There is no

reversible error in allowing Tommy Harris to

testify as he did. The denial of the bill of

particulars was proper. There is no reversible

error regarding juror misconduct, which

defendants knew about long before they called

it to the court’s attention. The instructions to

the jury were proper.

AFFIRMED.