alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Tamara Feurstein et al., Respondents, v. Joseph McLaughlin et al., Appellants.

Order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, dated

February 18, 1966, modified, on the law and the facts: (1) by striking out the provisions adjudging that the verdict against plaintiff Seymour Feurstein is contrary to and against the weight of the evidence, setting it aside and granting a new trial to him; (2) by providing, in lieu thereof, that the motion to set aside the verdict as to him is denied; and (3) by adding to the provisions setting aside, as inadequate, the verdict as to Tamara Feurstein and remitting the action as to her for a new trial the following condition: “unless defendants stipulate within 20 days to increase the amount of her verdict from $350 to $2000,” in which event the motion to set aside the verdict as to her is denied. As so modified, order affirmed, without costs. Findings of fact contained or implicit in the trial court’s opinion inconsistent herewith are reversed and new findings are made as indicated herein. As to Seymour Feurstein, the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence and the jury’s finding that he was eontributorily negligent is not incorrect as a matter of law. As to Tamara Feurstein, the verdict was inadequate to the extent indicated herein. Ughetta, Acting P. J., Christ, Brennan, Rabin and Hopkins, JJ., concur.
Document headings vary by document type but may contain
                    the following: the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document
the number of the CFR title and the number of each part
                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly
                      related to
the agency docket number / agency internal file number
the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in
                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory
                      Actions See the
                    Document Drafting Handbook
                    for more details.
 Small Business Administration [Disaster Declaration #12377 and #12378]
 AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration.
 ACTION: Notice.
 SUMMARY: This is a notice of an Administrative declaration of a disaster for the State of Texas dated 11/09/2010. *Incident:*
                         Tropical Storm Hermine. *Incident Period:*
                         09/06/2010 through 09/10/2010. *Effective Date:*
                         11/09/2010. *Physical Loan Application Deadline Date:*
                         01/10/2011. *Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan Application Deadline Date:*
                         08/09/2011.
 ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.
 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW., Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416.


SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that as a result of the Administrator's disaster declaration, applications for disaster loans may be filed at the address listed above or other locally announced locations. The following areas have been determined to be adversely affected by the disaster: *Primary Counties:*
                     Bell, Tarrant, Williamson. *Contiguous Counties:* Texas: Bastrop, Burnet, Coryell, Dallas, Denton, Ellis, Falls, Johnson, Lampasas, Lee, Mclennan, Milam, Parker, Travis, Wise. The Interest Rates are: Percent*For Physical Damage:*Homeowners with Credit Available Elsewhere
5.000Homeowners without Credit Available Elsewhere
2.500( print page 70764)Businesses with Credit Available Elsewhere
6.000Businesses without Credit Available Elsewhere
4.000Non-Profit Organizations with Credit Available Elsewhere
3.625Non-Profit Organizations without Credit Available Elsewhere
3.000*For Economic Injury:*Businesses & Small Agricultural Cooperatives without Credit Available Elsewhere
4.000Non-Profit Organizations without Credit Available Elsewhere
3.000
 The number assigned to this disaster for physical damage is 12377 B and for economic injury is 12378 0. The State which received an EIDL Declaration # is Texas. (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 59002 and 59008) Dated: November 9, 2010. Karen G. Mills, Administrator.


[FR Doc. 2010-29135 Filed 11-17-10; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
MISCELLANEOUS DISMISSALS

97- 2005.

#### R.J. Weiss Dev. Co. v. Chagrin Falls Bd. of Zoning Appeals.

Cuyahoga App. No. 70965. This cause is pending before the court as an appeal from the Court of Appeals for Cuyahoga County. Upon consideration of appellants’ application for dismissal,

IT IS ORDERED by the court that the application for dismissal be, and hereby is, granted.

ACCORDINGLY, IT IS FURTHER ORDERED by the court that this cause be, and hereby is, dismissed.
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2291 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.R.2291

                     One Hundred Thirteenth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE SECOND SESSION

           Begun and held at the City of Washington on Friday,
           the third day of January, two thousand and fourteen

                                 An Act

 
To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 
    450 Lexington Avenue in New York, New York, as the ``Vincent R. 
                        Sombrotto Post Office''.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. VINCENT R. SOMBROTTO POST OFFICE.
    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 450 Lexington Avenue in New York, New York, shall be known 
and designated as the ``Vincent R. Sombrotto Post Office''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Vincent R. 
Sombrotto Post Office''.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-6609

KELVIN ALLEN MCNEIL,

Petitioner – Appellant,

v.

KEITH WHITENER,

Respondent – Appellee,

and

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA,

Respondent.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, Senior

District Judge. (5:11-hc-02058-F)

Submitted: July 24, 2012 Decided: September 6, 2012

Before GREGORY and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Kelvin Allen McNeil, Appellant Pro Se. Mary Carla Hollis, 

Assistant Attorney General, Raleigh, North Carolina, for 

Appellee.
2

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
3

PER CURIAM:

Kelvin Allen McNeil seeks to appeal from his pending 

28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition.* This court may exercise 

jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2006), 

and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. 

§ 1292 (2006); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. 

Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 545-46 (1949). Neither a final order 

nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order has been 

entered in McNeil’s case. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal 

for lack of jurisdiction. 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

 * To the extent McNeil seeks to appeal his North Carolina 

state court conviction to this court, we lack jurisdiction to 

review state court orders. See District of Columbia Court of 

Appeals v. Feldman, 460 U.S. 462, 482 (1983).
| **Back to CPC Books**
**Go to Contents****The War Next Time:****Countering Rogue States and Terrorists  Armed with Chemical and Biological Weapons**Dr. Barry R. SchneiderColonel (Dr.) Jim A. DavisEditors
April 2004(2nd Edition)**USAF Counterproliferation Center**Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 224 (Monday, November 22, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 71187-71188]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-29258]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of Thrift Supervision

[AC-55: OTS Nos. 02620 and H4753]


Wolverine Bank, MI; Approval of Conversion Application

    Notice is hereby given that on November 12, 2010, the Office of 
Thrift Supervision approved the application of Wolverine Bank, Midland, 
Michigan, to convert to the stock form of organization. Copies of the 
application are available for inspection by appointment (phone number: 
(202) 906-5922 or e-mail <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#530326313f3a307d1a3d353c131c07007d07213632207d343c25"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="79290c1b15101a5730171f1639362d2a572d0b1c180a571e160f">[email protected]</span></a>) at the Public 
Reading Room, 1700 G Street, NW., Washington, DC 20552, and the OTS 
Central Regional Office, 1 South Wacker Drive, Suite 2000, Chicago, 
Illinois 60606.

    Dated: November 16, 2010.


[[Page 71188]]


    By the Office of Thrift Supervision.
Sandra E. Evans,
Federal Register Liaison.
[FR Doc. 2010-29258 Filed 11-19-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6720-01-M


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
* Pursuant to Local Rule 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 Local Rule 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

__________________ No. 96-40449 Summary Calendar

__________________
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus FELIX MEDINA, Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. L-96-CV-28

- - - - - - - - - - July 29, 1996 Before HIGGINBOTHAM, SMITH and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Felix Medina, #54420-079, appeals from the district court's dismissal of his motion to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Medina has filed with this court a request to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) on appeal. Medina argues that the civil forfeiture of his property and his subsequent sentence of incarceration constituted multipleNo. 96-40449 -2- punishments for the same offense in violation of the Double Jeopardy Clause. We have reviewed the record and conclude that Medina has not demonstrated that he will present a nonfrivolous issue on appeal. Accordingly, Medina's motion to proceed IFP on appeal is DENIED and the appeal is DISMISSED. See Carson v. Polley , 689 F.2d 562, 586 (5th Cir. 1982); 5th Cir. R. 42.2.
(86 Misc. Rep. 19)

#### JAMES C. McGUIRE & CO. v. H. G. VOGEL CO.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department.

June 11, 1914.)

1. Coubts (§ 487*)—Municipal Courts—Change of Venue—Time of Application.

A demurrer being a pleading under the express terms of Municipal Court Act (Laws 1902, c. 580) § 145, defendant’s application for a transfer to another district under section 25, authorizing such transfers on demand upon or before a Joinder of issue, should have been made before it demurred and amended its demurrer.

[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Courts, Cent. Dig. §§ 703, 1307-1315; Dec. Dig. § 487.*]

2. Courts (§ 190*)—Municipal Courts—Appeal—Order Granting or Refusing Transfer of Case.

Error in granting or refusing a transfer from one district of a Municipal Court to another can only be reviewed upon appeal from the final judgment.

[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Courts, Dec. Dig. § 190;* Appeal and Error, Cent. Dig. § 103.]

Appeal from Municipal Court, Borough of Manhattan, Third District.

Action by James C. McGuire & Co. against the H. G. Vogel Company. From an order of the Municipal Court of the City of New York, denying a motion to remove the cause from the Third District to the First District of Manhattan, defendant appeals.

Appeal dismissed.

See, also, 148 N. Y. Supp. 176.

Argued May term, 1914, before GUY, BIJUR, and PENDLETON, JJ.

*179David Bernstein, of New York City, for appellant.

Warren McConihe, of New York City, for respondents.

*

For other cases see same topic & § number in Dec. *&*Am. Digs. 1907 to date, & Rep’r Indexes

GUY, J.

The summons and complaint were served on March 12, 1914. The summons was returnable March 24, 1914. On the return day defendant demurred, and amended its demurrer on April 1, 1914. Final judgment in plaintiffs’ favor for $402 damages, besides costs, was entered on April 8, 1914. On April 3, 1914, defendant filed an affidavit tending to show that the action should be transferred from the Third District to the First District. The order appealed from was entered on April 15th, the same day on which the appeal from the judgment was taken.

[1] Under the present Municipal Court Act a demurrer is a pleading. Municipal Court Act, § 145. The present Municipal Court practice contemplates an application for a transfer to another district being made upon demand upon or before the joinder of issue (Municipal Court Act, § 25), not after the pleadings have been amended upon applicant’s request.

[2] An order denying an application to transfer a cause is not appealable. Pascocello v. Brooklyn Heights R. R. Co., 26 Misc. Rep. 412, 56 N. Y. Supp. 177; Nolte v. Seymour, 127 App. Div. 178, 179, 111 N. Y. Supp. 311; Watson v. Duryea, 133 App. Div. 233, 117 N. Y. Supp. 348. An alleged error in granting or refusing a transfer can only be reviewed upon appeal from the final judgment. People ex rel. McGowan v. Murray, 53 Misc. Rep. 364, 366, 104 N. Y. Supp. 740; Schiller v. Hardenberg, 52 Misc. Rep. 484, 485, 102 N. Y. Supp. 529.

Appeal dismissed, with $10 costs. All concur.
#### George B. Cruickshank *et al. v.*The City of Chicago.

*Opinion filed October 19, 1899.*

This case is controlled by the decision in *Holden v. City of Chicago,*172 Ill. 263.

Writ of Error to the County Court of Cook county; the Hon. Colostin D. Myers, Judge, presiding.

Edgar Bronson Tolman, and Harvey Mitchell Harper, for plaintiffs in error.

Charles S. Thornton, .Corporation Counsel, and John A. May, for defendant in error.

*416Per Curiam:

This is a writ of error to reverse a judgment of the county court of Cook county confirming a special assessment. The ordinance providing for the improvement fails to state the heig'ht of. the curb required to be constructed ou each side of the street, and on account of this 'defect it is claimed that the ordinance is invalid. The ordinance involved, so far as the height of the curb is concerned, is substantially like the ordinance which was held to be invalid in *Holden*v. *City of Chicago,*172 Ill. 263, and the ruling in that case must control here.

As to the property set out and described in thg assignment of errors in the record, the judgment of confirmation is reversed, and the cause is remanded to the county court.

*Reversed and remanded.*
#### § 25.623 Programmatic changes.

Prior approval from USDA is required for all changes to the scope or objectives of an approved strategic plan or benchmark activity. Failure to obtain prior approval of changes to the strategic plan or benchmarks, including changes to the scope of work or a project budget may result in suspension, termination, and recovery of USDA EZ/EC grant funds.
#### Concetta V. Oreste, Appellant, v. Vincent C. Oreste, Respondent.

— Order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated June 14, 1966, reversed insofar as appealed from, in the exercise of discretion, without costs, and the motion and cross motion are remitted to Special Term for (1) a plenary hearing as to the present financial resources and needs of the parties and all other facts relevant to whether any modifications of the alimony and support provisions of the judgment are warranted and (2) a determination *de novo*upon those issues. In our opinion, the conflicting affidavits submitted by the parties are insufficient to support a proper determination and a hearing must *561be held to develop all the relevant facts (cf. *Alpert*V. *Alpert,*20 A D 2d 560; *Peters*v. *Peters,*14 A D 2d 778; *Sloan*v. *Sloan,*286 App. Div. 1102). Beldoek, P. J., Ughetta, Christ, Hill and Benjamin, JJ., concur.
#### The State ex rel. Beal, Appellant, *v.*Industrial Commission of Ohio et al., Appellees.

[Cite as *State ex rel Beal v. Indus. Comm.*(1998), 83 Ohio St.3d 116.]

(No. 97-75

July 15, 1998

Decided September 16, 1998.)

*Gloria P. Castrodale,*for appellant.

*Betty D. Montgomery,*Attorney General, and *William J. McDonald,*Assistant Attorney General, for appellee Industrial Commission.

*Hanlon, Duff, Paleudis & Estadt Co., L.P.A.,*and *John G. Paleudis,*for appellee Consolidation Coal Co.

*117The judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed consistent with the opinion of the court of appeals.

Moyer, C.J., Pfeifer, Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.

Douglas and Resnick, JJ., dissent.

F.E. Sweeney, J., dissents.

Alice Robie Resnick, J.,

dissenting. I would reverse the judgment of the court of appeals and order relief consistent with *State ex rel. Gay v. Mihm*(1994), 68 Ohio St.3d 315, 626 N.E.2d 666.

Douglas, J., concurs in the foregoing dissenting opinion.
#### § 27.3 Requirements of subsection 15b(f) of the Act.

The inspection, sampling, classification, and Micronaire determination of cotton pursuant to subsection 15b(f) of the Act shall be performed as prescribed in this subpart. All tenders of cotton and settlements therefor under basis grade contracts shall be made subject to the regulations in this subpart. No contract shall for the purposes of this subpart be deemed to comply with subsection 15b(f) of the Act if it contain or incorporate therein, by reference or otherwise, any provision or any bylaw, rule, or custom of an exchange which is inconsistent or in conflict with any requirement of said subsection 15b(f), nor if the parties enter into any collateral or additional agreement or understanding, either verbal or written, respecting the subject matter of such contract which is inconsistent or in conflict with any requirement of said subsection 15b(f).

[42 FR 40677, Aug. 11, 1977]
<PAGE>   1
                                                                 EXHIBIT (23.1)



               CONSENT OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP, INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement
(Form S-3 No. 33-00000) of Jones Medical Industries, Inc. and in the related
Prospectus of our report dated February 12, 1996 (except for Note 16, as to
which the date is February 26, 1996), with respect to the consolidated
financial statements and schedule of Jones Medical Industries, Inc. included in
this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 1995.

We also consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement
(Form S-8 No. 33-40184) pertaining to the 1982 Incentive Stock Option Plan and
the 1989 Incentive Stock Option Plan of Jones Medical Industries, Inc. of our 
report dated February 12, 1996 (except for Note 16, as to which the date is 
February 26, 1996), with respect to the consolidated financial statements and 
schedule of Jones Medical Industries, Inc. in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) 
for the year ended December 31, 1995.


                                                ERNST & YOUNG LLP

St. Louis, Missouri
February 28, 1996
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                5
       
<S>                                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                          YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>        DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>             DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                                   428,615
<SECURITIES>                                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                             16,153
<ALLOWANCES>                                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                         455,057
<PP&E>                                                 5,765,821
<DEPRECIATION>                                         1,665,567
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                         4,786,990
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                    185,696
<BONDS>                                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                          0
<PREFERRED>                                                    0
<COMMON>                                                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                             4,601,294
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                           4,786,990
<SALES>                                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                       1,727,243
<CGS>                                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                          1,084,110
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                          643,133
<INCOME-TAX>                                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                      643,133
<DISCONTINUED>                                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                0
<CHANGES>                                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                             643,133
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                  0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                  0
        

</TABLE>
Editorial Note on Subchapter C of Chapter II
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to subchapter C appear by Amdt. 381, 65 FR 64586, Oct. 30, 2000.

§ 285.4 Audits. ( a ) The Commonwealth of Puerto Rico shall provide an audit of expenditures in compliance with the requirements in part 3015 of this title at least once every two years. The findings of such audit shall be reported to FNS no later than 120 days from the end of each fiscal year in which the audit is made.
( b ) Within 120 days of the end of each fiscal year, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico shall provide FNS with a statement of: ( 1 ) Whether the grant funds received for that fiscal year exceeded the valid obligations made that year for which payment is authorized, and if so, by how much, and
( 2 ) such additional related information as FNS may require.
[Amdt. 209, 47 FR 32409, July 27, 1982. Redesignated by Amdt. 371, 61 FR 60013, Nov. 26, 1996]