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

            -           Share with Youth: Changing the Rules: A Guide for Youth and Young Adults with Mental Health Conditions Who Want to Change Policy      

# Share with Youth: Changing the Rules: A Guide for Youth and Young Adults with Mental Health Conditions Who Want to Change Policy

This policy guide, developed by Pathways RTC (Research and Training Center), is written for youth- and young adult-led groups and organizations that want to make changes in policies related to mental health and other human services that affect them and other transition-age youth. The guide is intended for use by youth and young adults working together within a group or organization to make specific change, usually in partnership with other agencies, groups, or organizations. 

http://www.pathwaysrtc.pdx.edu/changing-the-rules?utm_source=Youth.gov&utm_medium=federal-links&utm_campaign=Share-with-Youth
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT 

No. 09-6456

JAMES EARL GIBSON, 

 Petitioner - Appellant, 

 v. 

DOUGLAS M. VAUGHAN, Warden, 

 Respondent - Appellee. 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior 

District Judge. (3:08-cv-00181-RLW) 

Submitted: July 30, 2009 Decided: August 5, 2009 

Before MOTZ, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. 

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. 

James Earl Gibson, Appellant Pro Se. Eugene Paul Murphy, OFFICE 

OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for 

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 
2 

PER CURIAM: 

James Earl Gibson seeks to appeal the district court’s 

order dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) 

petition. 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). A 

prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that 

reasonable jurists would find that any assessment of the 

constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or 

wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district 

court is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 

322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); 

Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have 

independently reviewed the record and conclude that Gibson 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 

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the 

court and argument would not aid the decisional process. 

 

DISMISSED
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2018 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2018

To amend title 38, United States Code, to identify the persons who are 
eligible to request headstones or markers furnished by the Secretary of 
                Veterans Affairs, and or other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 16, 2013

 Mr. Stivers (for himself, Mr. Tiberi, and Mrs. Beatty) introduced the 
   following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Veterans' 
                                Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend title 38, United States Code, to identify the persons who are 
eligible to request headstones or markers furnished by the Secretary of 
                Veterans Affairs, and or 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 ``Honor Those Who Served Act of 
2013''.

SEC. 2. PERSONS ELIGIBLE TO REQUEST HEADSTONES OR MARKERS FURNISHED BY 
              THE SECRETARY OF VETERANS AFFAIRS.

    (a) In General.--Section 2306 of title 38, United States Code, is 
amended by adding at the end the following new subsections:
    ``(h) A person may request a headstone or marker to commemorate a 
decedent under this section if the person is--
            ``(1) the decedent's next of kin;
            ``(2) a person authorized in writing by the decedent's next 
        of kin to make such request;
            ``(3) a personal representative authorized in writing by 
        the decedent to make such request;
            ``(4) in the case of a decedent for whom no person 
        described in paragraphs (1), (2), or (3) may be identified, a 
        State veterans service agency, a military researcher, a local 
        historian, or a genealogist or other person familiar with the 
        research sources and methods necessary to prove the identity of 
        the decedent; or
            ``(5) in the case of a decedent who is a veteran who served 
        on active duty in the Armed Forces at least 62 years before the 
        date on which the headstone or marker is requested, any person.
    ``(i) In the case of a request for a headstone or marker under this 
section for a decedent for whom insufficient information exists 
regarding the religious beliefs of the individual to select an 
appropriate emblem of belief for the headstone or marker of the 
decedent, the person requesting the headstone or marker may request a 
headstone or marker without an emblem of belief.''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) shall 
apply with respect to a request for a headstone or marker submitted 
after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
Editorial Note on Part 1944
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 1944 appear at 80 FR 9885, Feb. 24, 2015.

§ 1944.548 Counseling consent by Rural Development single family housing borrowers. ( a ) Subsequent to execution of the TSA grant agreement, the County Supervisor(s) serving the TSA project area will contact the delinquent Rural Development single family housing borrowers who appear to be in need of supervisory assistance as defined in § 1944.506(h)(1). Such contact will indicate the availability of the counseling services of the grantee and solicit the borrower's participation in the program. Exhibit E should be used in contacting and/or discussing counseling with the borrowers.
( b ) Upon indication of the borrower's willingness to participate in the program by his or her signature on exhibit E or similar letter or statement, the County Supervisor will make available to the grantee (at no cost) the borrower's Rural Development loan history including the following information: ( 1 ) Name, address, and telephone number;
( 2 ) Status of the account including the amount of the loan, the repayment schedule, and the amount of the delinquency; and
( 3 ) Other information needed for counseling purposes which may be provided in accordance with RD Instruction 2018-F.
**EXHIBIT 31.2****Certification**I, Richard N. Burger, certify that:1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-Q of Coleman Cable, Inc.;2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact oromit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstancesunder which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisreport;3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operationsand cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: a. designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;  b. evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controlsand procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and  c. disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): a. all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting, which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information;and  b. any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.       Date: November 14, 2005 **/s/ Richard N. Burger**             **Chief Financial Officer,Executive Vice President,**      **Secretary and Treasurer**  
37
#### Daniel Tepper, Respondent, v Pericles Constantinou, Appellant.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County, entered February 22, 1979, in favor of plaintiff for $29,794, is unanimously reversed, on the law, and order, Supreme Court, New York County, entered January 9, 1979, granting plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment against defendant in the sum of $22,000, with interest and costs, is vacated and the motion denied, with costs on appeal to defendant-appellant. Defendant’s separate appeal from the order entered January 9, 1979, is dismissed, without costs, as subsumed in and reviewed on the appeal from the judgment. There is an issue of fact at least as to whether there has been partial or total payment of the debt by delivery of stock by defendant to plaintiff after the filing of the petition in bankruptcy. Concur — Birns, J. P., Fein, Lane, Markewich and Silverman, JJ.
EXHIBIT 31.1
 Certification
      a.
    
    designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and
procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information
relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by
others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being
prepared;b.
    
    designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control
over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable
assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial
statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting
principles;c.
    
    evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and
presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls
and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation;
andd.
    
    disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial
reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter that has
materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal
control over financial reporting; and
  a.
    
    all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of
internal control over financial reporting, which are reasonably likely to adversely affect
the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; andb.
    
    any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have
a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.
 Date: November 5, 2009
    /s/ G. Gary YetmanChief Executive Officer and President
**Exhibit 31.02****CERTIFICATION FOR FORM 10-Q**I, Seth Halio, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Diamond Foods, Inc., certifyas follows: 1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended October 31, 2005 of Diamond Foods, Inc.;  2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material factnecessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstancesunder which such statements were made, not misleading with respect tothe period covered by this report;  3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all materialrespects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flowsof the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport;  4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (asdefined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for theregistrant and have: (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known tous by others within those entities, particularly during the period inwhich this report is being prepared;  (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controlsand procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about theeffectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the endof the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and  (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’smost recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter inthe case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting; and 5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed,based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financialreporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of theregistrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions): (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which arereasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability torecord, process, summarize and report financial information; and  (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting.     By: /s/ Seth Halio   Name: Seth Halio  Title: EVP and Chief Financial Officer  Date: December  6 , 2005  
21
**CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER**I, David E. Wallace, certify that:     1) I have reviewed this report on Form 10-Q of Superior Well Services, Inc.;     2) Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;     3) Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;     4) The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: a. Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, ismade known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period inwhich this report is being prepared;  b. Intentionally omitted pursuant to SEC Release No. 34-47986;  c. Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this reportbased on such evaluation; and  d. Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter(the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and     5) The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions); a. All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operationof internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and  b. Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employeeswho have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.         By:                                                /s/ David E. Wallace    David E. Wallace         Chief Executive Officer and Chairman
#### § 1773.49 OMB Control Number.

The information collection requirements in this part are approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and assigned the OMB Control Number 0572-0095.
117 So.2d 824

#### S. F. TALBERT v. J. E. (Scooter) TYLER et al.

No. 43720.

Feb. 15, 1960.

*3Gahagan & Gahagan, Natchitoches, for plaintiff-appellant.

Gravel, Humphries, Sheffield & Führer, Alexandria, Watson, Williams & Brittain, Natchitoches, for defendants-appellees.

HAWTHORNE, Justice.

Plaintiff instituted this suit to recover from the defendants in solido $5,000 as damages caused by a grass fire in January, 1956, which the record discloses burned over 57 acres of hill pasture land owned by the plaintiff in De Soto Parish. Plaintiff alleged that the fire was caused by the negligence of an employee of one of the defendants. After trial on the merits the suit was dismissed, and plaintiff has appealed.

In the fall of 1954 plaintiff planted on 179 acres of pasture land owned by him crimson clover seed and singletary peas at a cost, including fertilizer and labor, computed to be $28.18 an acre. He argues in this court that he is entitled to recover as damages $1,606.26 for destruction of grasses and seed planted in 1954 on the 57 acres over which the fire spread. He also contends in this court that damage to timber amounted to $500. The total of the damages now claimed is $2,106.26.

After considering the record we are of the opinion that this court is without appellate jurisdiction, and that this case should be transferred to the Court of Appeal.

 It has been held many times that allegations of damages claimed in the petition which are grossly exaggerated will be disregarded by this court in passing upon the question of jurisdiction. It is likewise well settled that a plaintiff’s allegations as to the amount in dispute will not control in determining the appellate jurisdiction of this court where the nature of the case as disclosed by the record is such that an award in plaintiff’s favor could not exceed our minimum jurisdictional amount. Trahan v. Breaux, 212 La. 459, 32 So.2d 845; Nash v. Curette, 218 La. 789, 51 So.2d 71; Mitchell v. Shreveport Laundries, 221 La. 686, 60 So.2d 86; Tennessee Gas Transmission Co. v. Williams, 222 La. 593, 63 So.2d 9; Salvaggio v. Palmisano, 235 La. 202, 103 So.2d 90.

Although the trial judge rejected plaintiff’s demands, in the course of his *5reasons for judgment he said: “In view of the above, I do not see that it is necessary to discuss the question of the damages that might have been done, although I consider them very small, and I think that the plaintiff’s suit and his testimony with reference to the damages he suffered were grossly exaggerated.” Our study of the record convinces us that the trial judge was correct in this conclusion.

It is therefore ordered that this appeal be transferred to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, provided that the record is filed in that court within 30 days from the finality of this decree; otherwise the appeal shall be dismissed. Costs incurred in this court are to be paid by appellant.
###### Editorial Note on Part 1955

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 1955 appear at 80 FR 9895, Feb. 24, 2015.

#### § 1955.132 Pilot projects.

Rural Development may conduct pilot projects to test policies and procedures for the management and disposition of inventory property which deviate from the provisions of this subpart, but are not inconsistent with the provisions of the authorizing statute or other applicable Acts. A pilot project may be conducted by Rural Development employees or by contract with individuals, organizations or other entities. Prior to initiation of a pilot project, Rural Development will publish notice in the Federal Register of its nature, scope, and duration.

[55 FR 3943, Feb. 6, 1990]
###### Editorial Note on Part 1940

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 1940 appear at 80 FR 9876, Feb. 24, 2015.

#### §§ 1940.586-1940.587 [Reserved]